Background
Communication
Risk
Aim
Methods
Searches
How do health care providers (conventional and complementary) perceive and communicate risk of complementary therapies to patients who combine conventional and complementary therapies in cancer care?
Search methods
Methodological assessment of the included studies
Screening Questions | Responses | ||
---|---|---|---|
1. Was there a clear statement of the aims of the research? | Yes | Can’t tell | No |
2. Is a qualitative methodology appropriate? | Yes | Can’t tell | No |
Detailed questions | |||
3. Was the research design appropriate to address the aims of the research? | Yes | Can’t tell | No |
4. Was the recruitment strategy appropriate to the aims of the research? | Yes | Can’t tell | No |
5. Was the data collected in a way that addressed the research issue? | Yes | Can’t tell | No |
6. Has the relationship between research and participants been adequately considered? | Yes | Can’t tell | No |
7. Have ethical issues been taken into consideration? | Yes | Can’t tell | No |
8. Was the data analysis sufficiently rigorous? | Yes | Cant’ tell | No |
9. Is there a clear statement of findings? | Yes | Cant’ tell | No |
10. How valuable is the research? | Yes | Cant ‘tell | No |
Design
Data analysis
Results
Searches
Main themes
Risk perception based on a risk/benefit comparison
Direct risk situations
Indirect risk situations
Risk communication
Information regarding complementary therapies and conventional medicine
Study ID | Objectives | Participants | Setting | Research design | Methodological assessment (are the results of the study valid? Yes/No/Can’t tell) | Main findings (themes) | Country | Funding |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Barrett B, 2000 [38] | The nature of practice, healing philosophy, choices of therapeutic methods and ideas about the use of therapeutic modalities | 17 CAM and conventional medicine patients and 20 CAM practitioners | Home office, public places in the Madison, Wisconsin area | Semi structured interviews | Yes | Risk communication and perception, indirect risk and knowledge about CAM | USA | Not reported |
Baynham-Fletcher L, 2008 [39] | Standard for credentialing CIMa therapies between-state and between-institutions | Credentialing process | MD Andersen cancer setting | Descriptive study of the credentialing process for CIMa practitioners | Can’t tell | Information, knowledge and indirect risk about CIMa
| USA | Not reported |
Ben-Arye E, 2012 a [34] | Patient-provider communication about complementary approaches and implementation and integration of CMb in health care | 23 articles | Spescial issues of the Journal Patient Education and Counseling | Assessing articles of different qualitative methods, such as literature reviews, empirical descriptive studies and interviews | Can’t tell | Risk communication and indirect risk | International | Not reported |
Ben-Arye E, 2012 b [51] | CAM research in support cancer care | 85 articles in Arabic, Hebrew, French and Turkish | Medline/PubMed, ULAKBIM the Turkish Academic network and Information Centre | Literature review | Yes | Risk communication, direct and indirect risk | Israel, Turkey, Iran, Saudi-Arabia, Palestine, Jordan and Egypt | Not reported |
Ben-Arye E, 2013 [40] | Provide oncologists with models for Integrative CMb within supporting care | Physicians leading six integrative oncology practices | MD Andersen, Penny Brohn, Herdecke Community Hospital, Lin Medical Center, Rambam Health Care Campus, Fundaleu Institute | Descriptive analysis of key elements which facilitates CMb integration | Yes | Indirect risk and communication | USA, UK, Germany, Israel and Argentina | The Israeli Society for Complementary Medicine, the UK College of Medicine, Bnai Zion Medical Center, the Technion-Israel Institute of Technology, Lin Medical center of Clait Health Servises, the Academic Study Group for Israel and the Middle East |
Broom A, 2009 [24] | How oncologists and oncology nurses engage and communicate risks with patients about CAM | 13 oncologists, 12 oncology nurses | Two main hospitals in a state capital city | In-depth interviews | Yes | Risk perception, direct and indirect risk, risk communication, information about CAM and CMe
| Australia | Not reported |
Broom AF, 2013 [30] | Excamine oncology clinicians’ accounts of communication with their cancer patiens | 16 medical specialists, 5 oncology nurses and 1 oncology clinical psycologist | Three hospitals and one palliative care service in Dehli | In-depth interviews | Yes | Direct risk, indirect risk and risk communication, information of CAM and CMe
| India | Australian Research Council (FT100100294) |
Fox P, 2012 [35] | Different perspectives regarding the role of CAM in the cancer setting | 31 women with breast cancer, 13 oncology nurses, 7 oncologists and 20 CAM practitioners | Not reported | Semi structured interviews | Yes | Indirect risk, direct risk and risk communication | Ireland | Not reported |
Fox P, 2013 [36] | Rate and type of CAM used by women with breast cancer, reasons and perceptions of the utility of the CAM terapies used | 20 oncology professionals (13 oncology nurser, 7 oncologists), 20 CAM practitioners | Not reported | Semi structured interviews, survey | Yes | Indirect risk, direct risk, risk communication | Ireland | Irish Cancer Society |
Frenkel M, 2010 [14] | Overview of the literature regarding communication in cancer care related to the use of CAM. Discuss a possible model of effective patient-physician communication | Not reported | Literature overview | Can’t tell | Indirect risk, risk perception, risk communication | International | No financial support | |
Goldstein, 2003 [41] | The role of CAM in oncology | Theoretical paper | Can’t tell | Indirect risk | USA | Not reported | ||
Jason SL, 2009 [46] | Examine CAM discussion of oncologists, patients and companions on first time consultation visits at comprehensive outpatient clinic for CAM discussions | 93 video tape consultation interactions of 13 oncologists, 93 patients and 82 visit companions | National Cancer Institute-designated cancer senter and teaching hospital outpatient clinic in a large urban Midwestern city | Qualitative observational study | Yes | Risk communication, information about CAM and CMe
| USA | Not reported |
Klimenko E, 2007 [31] | Investigate definition of health, disease and healing | 4 medical physicians, 2 psychiatrists, 1 psychologist and 7 CAM practitioners | Delhi process | Yes | Risk perception, indirect risk, risk communication, information about CAM and CMe
| USA | Not reported | |
Mackereth PA, 2009 [42] | Uncover complemetary therapists’ motivation to work in cancer/supportive and palliative care setting | 19 nurses, 2 doctors, 3physiotherapists, 27 CAM therapists | One hospice, one cancer care hospital, one cancer care senter | Questionnaire survey followed by semi-structured interviews | Yes | Indirect risk, information about CAM and CMe
| UK | The Big Lottery Fund |
Mackereth PA, 2010 [50] | Investigate CAM providers’ challenges of working in cancer care settings and the value of clinical supervision | 15 CAM therapists | Five cancer care senters | Focus group interview | Yes | Indirect risk | UK | Not reported |
Madjar I, 2007 [47] | Provide insigth into how physicians perceive cancer patients who decide to forgo or stop medically recommended therapies | 12 medical and radiation oncologists | Two regional oncology senters | Individual semi-structured interview | Yes | Risk communication, indirect risk | Israel, Australia | Israeli Cancer Association, Newcastle Mater Hospital Margareth Mitchell Research Fund, Australia |
Maha N, 2007 [32] | Explore academic doctors’ use of CAM and its role within the NHSc, along with rationales given for these views | 9 doctors with a dual clinical and academic role | Study participants’ work place | Semi-structured interview | Yes | Indirect risk, risk perception, risk communication, information about CAM and CMe
| UK | Not reported |
Mazor KM, 2013 [43] | Assess patient-centered communication in cancer care, stakeholder perspective | 37 cancer patients, 17 family members, 52 clinicians | Cancer research networks, cancer communication research senter | Semi-structured interview | Yes | Indirect risk, risk communication, information about CAM and CMe
| A grant from Cancer Communication Research Center (P20CA137219). Cancer research network pilot grant (U19CA79689), grant from National Center for advancing Translational Science ((UI1TR000161) | |
Popper-Giveon A, 2012 [48] | Assess the role of CAM therapists who treat cancer patients to promote patients’ well-being during chemotherapy and advance stage of disease | 27 Arabic therapists (folk healers, complementary therapists and religious-spiritual healers) | Not reported | Semi-structured interviews | Yes | Risk communication | Israel | A grant from Clalit Research Institute by Clalit Health Services |
Popper-Giveon A, 2013 [37] | The attitudes towards integrative medicine among CTMd terapists’ who treat Arab cancerpatients in Israel | 27 arab therapists (folk healers, complementary therapist and religious-spiritual healer) | Not reported | Semi-structured interviews | Yes | Indirect risk, direct risk, risk communication | Israel | A grant from Clalit Research Institute by Clalit Health Services |
Richardson P, 2012 [44] | Highlight the importance of spirituality and religion in cancer care | Not reported | Literature review | Can’t tell | Indirect risk, information about CAM and CMe
| USA | Not reported | |
Roberts D, 2005 [33] | Discuss the current policies, perceptions and expectations regarding the use of complementary therapies in cancer care | Different policy documents | Literature review | Can’t tell | Indirect risk, risk communication, risk perception | UK | Not reported | |
Salamonsen A, 2015 [23] | Doctor-patient communication and how this communication influences treatment decisions | 9 patients from the Registry of Exceptional Courses of Disease | Participants’ home or other places where the participants were comfortable | In-depth interview | Yes | Risk communication | Norway | No financial support |
Schiff E, 2011 [52] | Improve communication between physicians and CAM practitioners | One main panel (n = 16), one extended panel (n = 25), one conference discussion forum (n = 247), survey (n = 1254) | Various places | Delphi process and one survey | Yes | Indirect risk, risk communication | Israel | Not reported |
Schofield P, 2010 [25] | Discuss CAM in oncology consultations and develop quidelines | 37 included papers | MedLine, Cinahl and PsyInfo | Systematic literature review | Yes | Risk perception, direct risk, indirect risk, risk communication | Australia | The National Breast and Ovarian Cancer Centre |
Verhoef M, 2007 [49] | Evaluate a research framework for cancer care using a complex whole system research model | Methodological paper/whole system research | Yes | |||||
Verhoef MJ, 2008 [45] | Physicians’ responsibility to discuss CAM with patients. Ethical perspectives | Opinion of an expert | Yes | Indirect risk | Canada | Supported by The Canadian Cancer Society |