Literature DB >> 17363122

Oncologists' and specialist cancer nurses' approaches to complementary and alternative medicine and their impact on patient action.

P Tovey1, Alex Broom.   

Abstract

High levels of use of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) have been consistently reported amongst cancer patients over recent years. This is occurring in the context of an apparent increase in sources of information on therapeutic alternatives and a growth in the range of those claiming professional expertise in the field. To date there has been little research on patient experience of discussions about CAM with biomedical cancer specialists in this increasingly complex social environment. This paper addresses three issues: patient experience with cancer specialists; the significance of that experience for patient engagement with CAM; and the nature and significance of inter-professional dynamics. It draws on the results of a qualitative study with cancer patients in the UK. In-depth interviews with 80 purposively sampled patients, incorporating a range of disease types and stages, were conducted. Patients reported three main types of approach by oncologists: explicit or implicit negativity; supportive ambivalence; and, pragmatic acceptance. Crucially, patients' accounts suggest that the type of approach adopted influences (though does not determine) patient action. Specialist cancer nurses emerged as potentially powerful mediators between oncologists and patients. Despite the apparent potential for influence from multiple information sources and 'experts', on the basis of this study we would argue that oncologists remain crucial to patient engagement with CAM. However, this is not to argue that the influence is a simplistic one. Where patient and medical perspectives diverge, strategic alignment with specialist nurses may help patients make choices which conflict with perceived advice.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17363122     DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2007.02.010

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Soc Sci Med        ISSN: 0277-9536            Impact factor:   4.634


  6 in total

1.  A pre-post evaluation of oncology healthcare providers' knowledge, attitudes, and practices following the implementation of a complementary medicine practice guideline.

Authors:  Emilie N Hayward; Cody Z Watling; Lynda G Balneaves
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  2021-06-07       Impact factor: 3.603

2.  Convergent priorities and tensions: a qualitative study of the integration of complementary and alternative therapies with conventional cancer treatment.

Authors:  Jo River; Heather McKenzie; David Levy; Nick Pavlakis; Michael Back; Byeongsang Oh
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  2017-12-16       Impact factor: 3.603

Review 3.  Addressing Complementary and Alternative Medicine Use Among Individuals With Cancer: An Integrative Review and Clinical Practice Guideline.

Authors:  Lynda G Balneaves; Cody Z Watling; Emilie N Hayward; Brenda Ross; Jill Taylor-Brown; Antony Porcino; Tracy L O Truant
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2022-01-11       Impact factor: 13.506

4.  Use of Complementary and Alternative Medicine in the context of cancer; prevalence, reasons for use, disclosure, information received, risks and benefits reported by people with cancer in Norway.

Authors:  Agnete E Kristoffersen; Jorunn V Nilsen; Trine Stub; Johanna Hök Nordberg; Barbara Wider; Dana Mora; Kiwumulo Nakandi; Mona Bjelland
Journal:  BMC Complement Med Ther       Date:  2022-07-29

Review 5.  Mapping the risk perception and communication gap between different professions of healthcare providers in cancer care: a cross-sectional protocol.

Authors:  Trine Stub; Frauke Musial; Sara A Quandt; Thomas A Arcury; Anita Salamonsen; Agnete Kristoffersen; Gro Berntsen
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2015-09-03       Impact factor: 2.692

6.  Referrals to integrative medicine in a tertiary hospital: findings from electronic health record data and qualitative interviews.

Authors:  Kristen H Griffin; Kent C Nate; Rachael L Rivard; Jon B Christianson; Jeffery A Dusek
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2016-07-25       Impact factor: 2.692

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.