Daniela L Stan1, Dietlind L Wahner-Roedler1, Kathleen J Yost2, Thomas Jamie O'Byrne2, Megan E Branda2, Aaron L Leppin2, Jon C Tilburt1,3,4. 1. 1 Division of General Internal Medicine, Mayo Clinic , Rochester, Minnesota. 2. 2 Department of Health Sciences Research, Mayo Clinic , Rochester, Minnesota. 3. 3 Biomedical Ethics Research Program, Mayo Clinic , Rochester, Minnesota. 4. 4 Robert D. and Patricia E. Kern Center for the Science of Health Care Delivery , Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Many patients with cancer use complementary and alternative medicine (CAM), but the quality of CAM documentation in their electronic health records (EHRs) is unknown. The authors aimed to describe (i) the prevalence and types of CAM used after cancer diagnosis and the influence of oncologists on CAM use, as per patients' self-report, and (ii) the prevalence of CAM documentation in the EHR and its consistency with self-reported usage. DESIGN: Patient and provider surveys and chart review. SETTINGS/LOCATION: Medical oncology practices at one institution. SUBJECTS: Patients with cancer at oncologist visits. OUTCOME MEASURES: Patient self-reported rate of 3-month postvisit CAM use; provider EHR documentation of CAM use or discussion and its concordance with patient self-report. RESULTS: Among 327 patients enrolled, 248 responded to the 3-month postvisit survey. Of these, 158 reported CAM use after diagnosis (63.7%). CAM users were younger (p < 0.001) and had a higher percentage of women (p = 0.03) than nonusers. Modalities most commonly used were supplements (62.6%), special diets (38.6%), chiropractor (28.4%), and massage (28.4%). CAM was used to improve well-being (68.7%), manage adverse effects (35.5%), and fight cancer (22.9%). Oncologists suggested CAM in 22.5% of instances of use. CAM use/discussion was documented for 58.2% of self-reported CAM users. Of the documented modalities, EHR and self-report were concordant for only 8.2%. CAM documentation was associated with physician provider (p = 0.03), older patients (p = 0.01), and treatment with radiation (p = 0.03) or surgery (p = 0.001). After adjusting for other factors, patients with breast cancer or "other" tumor category were four times more likely than patients with gastrointestinal cancer to have CAM use documentation (odds ratio [95% confidence interval]: 4.41 [1.48-13.10]; 3.76 [1.42-9.99], respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Most patients with cancer use CAM after diagnosis, yet EHR documentation is complete for very few. Oncologists should inquire about, document, and discuss CAM benefits and harm or refer patients to CAM specialists.
OBJECTIVES: Many patients with cancer use complementary and alternative medicine (CAM), but the quality of CAM documentation in their electronic health records (EHRs) is unknown. The authors aimed to describe (i) the prevalence and types of CAM used after cancer diagnosis and the influence of oncologists on CAM use, as per patients' self-report, and (ii) the prevalence of CAM documentation in the EHR and its consistency with self-reported usage. DESIGN:Patient and provider surveys and chart review. SETTINGS/LOCATION: Medical oncology practices at one institution. SUBJECTS:Patients with cancer at oncologist visits. OUTCOME MEASURES: Patient self-reported rate of 3-month postvisit CAM use; provider EHR documentation of CAM use or discussion and its concordance with patient self-report. RESULTS: Among 327 patients enrolled, 248 responded to the 3-month postvisit survey. Of these, 158 reported CAM use after diagnosis (63.7%). CAM users were younger (p < 0.001) and had a higher percentage of women (p = 0.03) than nonusers. Modalities most commonly used were supplements (62.6%), special diets (38.6%), chiropractor (28.4%), and massage (28.4%). CAM was used to improve well-being (68.7%), manage adverse effects (35.5%), and fight cancer (22.9%). Oncologists suggested CAM in 22.5% of instances of use. CAM use/discussion was documented for 58.2% of self-reported CAM users. Of the documented modalities, EHR and self-report were concordant for only 8.2%. CAM documentation was associated with physician provider (p = 0.03), older patients (p = 0.01), and treatment with radiation (p = 0.03) or surgery (p = 0.001). After adjusting for other factors, patients with breast cancer or "other" tumor category were four times more likely than patients with gastrointestinal cancer to have CAM use documentation (odds ratio [95% confidence interval]: 4.41 [1.48-13.10]; 3.76 [1.42-9.99], respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Most patients with cancer use CAM after diagnosis, yet EHR documentation is complete for very few. Oncologists should inquire about, document, and discuss CAM benefits and harm or refer patients to CAM specialists.
Entities:
Keywords:
CAM; EHR; complementary and alternative medicine; oncology
Authors: Paul A Harris; Robert Taylor; Robert Thielke; Jonathon Payne; Nathaniel Gonzalez; Jose G Conde Journal: J Biomed Inform Date: 2008-09-30 Impact factor: 6.317
Authors: Jutta Huebner; Karsten Muenstedt; Franz J Prott; Christoph Stoll; Oliver Micke; Jens Buentzel; Ralph Muecke; Bianca Senf Journal: Breast Care (Basel) Date: 2014-02 Impact factor: 2.860
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