ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to assess what factors the Tzu Chi Institute (TCI) practitioners identified as supports and barriers to providing care within an integrative health care setting. DESIGN: Qualitative data were collected by means of in-depth, semi-structured interviews with 16 practitioners who worked at a comprehensive integrative care clinic in Vancouver, Canada over 5 years. RESULTS: Practitioners identified four elements critical to forming and sustaining an effective integrative care team: (1) effective communication tools, (2) personal attributes (3) satisfactory compensation, and (4) a supportive organizational structure. CONCLUSIONS: Because of the influence practitioners have on the outcomes of patients in an integrative care program, attention must be focused not only on creating optimal healing environments for patients but also towards establishing and nurturing optimal working environments for practitioners.
Subject(s)
Attitude of Health Personnel , Complementary Therapies/organization & administration , Canada , Communication , Complementary Therapies/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Interviews as TopicABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: There are an increasing number of clinics providing integrative health care using new and innovative delivery models. The purpose of this study was to quantitatively and qualitatively evaluate the Integrative Care Program offered at the Tzu Chi Institute for Complementary and Alternative Medicine, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada. DESIGN: At enrollment, data are collected on demographics, health history, current health concerns and diagnoses, quality of life/health status (SF-36) and patient satisfaction. The measures are repeated 6 months into the program. Descriptive analysis was used to summarize the data. Focus groups were also included as part of the study design. RESULTS: Patients seeking integrative care are a highly complex population living with numerous comorbid chronic conditions. Although their baseline scores on the SF-36 are lower than Canadian population norms across all subscales, significant improvement occurred from baseline to 6 months. Qualitative data support that patients were pleased with the clinical care they received and aligned with the philosophical underpinnings of the program. DISCUSSION: This is one of the first studies to evaluate integrative health care. Studies like this are needed to develop appropriate methods to assess models of integrative health care delivery.
Subject(s)
Complementary Therapies , Delivery of Health Care, Integrated , Health Status , Patient Acceptance of Health Care , Patient Satisfaction , Adult , British Columbia , Female , Focus Groups , Health Status Indicators , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Outcome Assessment, Health Care , Patient Acceptance of Health Care/psychology , Quality Assurance, Health Care , Surveys and QuestionnairesABSTRACT
PURPOSE: To determine prevalence and patterns of use of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) among men recently diagnosed with prostate cancer. STUDY DESIGN: Men, diagnosed with prostate cancer over a 10-month period in British Columbia, Canada, were randomly selected to obtain a population-based sample. METHODS: Surveys, addressing patient demographics, types of CAM therapies, and CAM information resources utilized, reasons for use, and disclosure to physician(s), were mailed to 1108 men newly diagnosed with prostate cancer. A 42% response rate was obtained. RESULTS: Thirty-nine percent of patients used CAM therapies with the most common being herbal supplements (saw palmetto), vitamins (vitamin E), and minerals (selenium). The most common reasons given for choosing to use CAM therapies were to (1) boost the immune system and (2) prevent recurrence. The majority of men (58%) had told their physician(s) about their CAM use, but few utilized either their family physician (15%) or their oncologist (7%) as sources of CAM information. CAM users most commonly consulted friends or family (39%) or the Internet (19%) for information about CAM. CAM users were more likely than nonusers to delay (9%) or decline (4%) conventional treatment. Respondents who had never used CAM had typically never thought about it or did not have enough information about the treatments. CONCLUSIONS: More than one third of recently diagnosed prostate cancer patients utilize some form of CAM therapy, and the majority disclose their use to their physician(s). However, they tend to rely on anecdotal information for their CAM decision making. Dissemination of reliable CAM information is one key to helping men navigate this difficult arena.
