I will always be with you: Traditional and complementary therapists’ perspectives on patient–therapist–doctor communication regarding treatment of Arab patients with cancer in Israel

Perception of risk and communication among conventional and complementary health care providers involving cancer patients’ use of complementary therapies: a literature review

“…Twenty-seven studies [ 14 , 23 – 25 , 30 – 52 ] with a variety of qualitative study designs, such as focus groups and individual interviews, videotaped studies, literature reviews, opinion of experts and mixed studies were included in this review. Of these studies, 12 included complementary providers [ 35 – 42 , 48 , 50 – 52 ], 5 included oncology experts (doctors and nurses) [ 24 , 25 , 43 , 44 , 46 ] and 11 included physicians [ 14 , 23 , 30 – 34 , 45 , 47 , 49 , 52 ].…”

Complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) use in advanced cancer: a systematic review

“…82 Future exploration of preferences for lay information sources-and its relationship to helpful and unhelpful communication by HCPs about CAM-may offer an alternative perspective to inform how best to support CAM decision-making in advanced cancer patients. [79][80][81][82][83][84][85][86][87] The nondisclosure of CAM use by patients in phase I trials encapsulates many of these issues, signaling possible lack of trust in their HCP, a strategy to maintain hope in the face of adversity, potential distress, fear of abandonment by their HCP, or other unknown reasons. Nondisclosure must be explored further from the patient's perspective to understand the support needed to address the individual's unique CAM information and decision-support needs and goals while maintaining the integrity of the trials results.…”

“…It is essential for HCPs to discuss CAM use with all patients, assessing individuals' beliefs and values and goals for CAM use, including conventional treatment and care. 77,[79][80][81][82][83][84][85][86][87]94 Understanding patterns of CAM use in the advanced cancer population and specifically identifying those who are more likely to use CAM (ie, female, younger age, with higher education, psychological or physical symptoms, dissatisfaction with conventional care, longer disease duration, and previous CAM use) is important to understand and assess. Phase I clinical trials patients merit special consideration and support to discuss their CAM use and to consider using nonbiological CAM therapies that will achieve their CAM-related goals.…”

“…Previous research with early stage and mixed (early/advanced) cancer populations has shown that informed CAM decision-making requires open and respectful communication; and shared decision-making between patients and HCPs. 77,[79][80][81][82][83][84][85][86][87] In this review, while some HCPs did communicate with patients about CAM, most studies reported communication gaps. Patients using ingested therapies and patients with prostate cancer discussed their CAM use with physicians; however, noningested therapies were not discussed.…”

Quality of life-related outcomes from a patient-tailored integrative medicine program: experience of Russian-speaking patients with cancer in Israel

“…In developing countries and among minorities residing in developed countries, health care involves an experience of suffering which reflects collective social and cultural values [1]. Crosscultural research seeks to bridge this individualistic (versus collectivistic) perspective of patients' health belief models, within a broader context of societal values [2,3]. A US study examining three ethnic groups of female patients with early breast cancer (Hispanic, non-Hispanic White, and AfricanAmerican; n = 223) found that Hispanic women had stronger health-related concerns than the other groups [4].…”