Missed Opportunities: A Mixed-Methods Analysis of CAM Discussions and Practices in the Management of Pain in Oncology

Aaron L. Leppin, Cara Fernandez, Jon C. Tilburt

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Context Treatment of pain in cancer is a clinical priority. Many cancer patients seek and use complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) therapies. Objectives The aim of this study was to describe the role CAM plays in oncology, clinicians' approaches to pain management and its alignment with patient preference and self-care. Methods We used quantitative criteria to identify patients with high, self-reported pain and reduced quality of life. For these patients, we merged quantitative and qualitative data from encounter audio recordings, patient surveys, and the medical record. Results We identified 32 patients (72% women, average age 60) experiencing significantly symptomatic pain at enrollment. Merged themes were 1) Restricted and defined roles: Oncology clinicians suggested and documented cancer-specific approaches to pain management. Patients often (17, 53%) used CAM but rarely desired to discuss it in their encounters. 2) Proactive patients in setting of neutrality: Pain management strategies were considered in 22 instances. CAM was mentioned in 4 (18%) of these discussions but only after patient initiation. Clinicians took a neutral stance. 3) Missed opportunities for person-centered CAM discussions and management: Most (88%) patients were receiving conventional pain medications at enrollment or had them added or escalated during follow-up. Some patients in pain expressed preferences for avoiding opioids. One patient reported wishing CAM would have been discussed after an encounter in which it was not. Conclusion Bringing CAM discussions into the oncology encounter may facilitate a stronger patient-clinician partnership and a more open and safe understanding of pain-related CAM use.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)719-726
Number of pages8
JournalJournal of Pain and Symptom Management
Volume52
Issue number5
DOIs
StatePublished - Nov 1 2016
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Practice Management
Complementary Therapies
Pain
Pain Management
Cancer Pain
Patient Preference
Self Care

Keywords

  • CAM
  • cancer pain
  • Complementary and alternative medicine
  • mixed methods
  • oncology
  • pain

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Nursing(all)
  • Clinical Neurology
  • Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine

Cite this

Missed Opportunities : A Mixed-Methods Analysis of CAM Discussions and Practices in the Management of Pain in Oncology. / Leppin, Aaron L.; Fernandez, Cara; Tilburt, Jon C.

In: Journal of Pain and Symptom Management, Vol. 52, No. 5, 01.11.2016, p. 719-726.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{c498228f818d4651b1071411ad82b6cb,
title = "Missed Opportunities: A Mixed-Methods Analysis of CAM Discussions and Practices in the Management of Pain in Oncology",
abstract = "Context Treatment of pain in cancer is a clinical priority. Many cancer patients seek and use complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) therapies. Objectives The aim of this study was to describe the role CAM plays in oncology, clinicians' approaches to pain management and its alignment with patient preference and self-care. Methods We used quantitative criteria to identify patients with high, self-reported pain and reduced quality of life. For these patients, we merged quantitative and qualitative data from encounter audio recordings, patient surveys, and the medical record. Results We identified 32 patients (72{\%} women, average age 60) experiencing significantly symptomatic pain at enrollment. Merged themes were 1) Restricted and defined roles: Oncology clinicians suggested and documented cancer-specific approaches to pain management. Patients often (17, 53{\%}) used CAM but rarely desired to discuss it in their encounters. 2) Proactive patients in setting of neutrality: Pain management strategies were considered in 22 instances. CAM was mentioned in 4 (18{\%}) of these discussions but only after patient initiation. Clinicians took a neutral stance. 3) Missed opportunities for person-centered CAM discussions and management: Most (88{\%}) patients were receiving conventional pain medications at enrollment or had them added or escalated during follow-up. Some patients in pain expressed preferences for avoiding opioids. One patient reported wishing CAM would have been discussed after an encounter in which it was not. Conclusion Bringing CAM discussions into the oncology encounter may facilitate a stronger patient-clinician partnership and a more open and safe understanding of pain-related CAM use.",
keywords = "CAM, cancer pain, Complementary and alternative medicine, mixed methods, oncology, pain",
author = "Leppin, {Aaron L.} and Cara Fernandez and Tilburt, {Jon C.}",
year = "2016",
month = "11",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2016.05.025",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "52",
pages = "719--726",
journal = "Journal of Pain and Symptom Management",
issn = "0885-3924",
publisher = "Elsevier Inc.",
number = "5",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Missed Opportunities

T2 - A Mixed-Methods Analysis of CAM Discussions and Practices in the Management of Pain in Oncology

AU - Leppin, Aaron L.

AU - Fernandez, Cara

AU - Tilburt, Jon C.

PY - 2016/11/1

Y1 - 2016/11/1

N2 - Context Treatment of pain in cancer is a clinical priority. Many cancer patients seek and use complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) therapies. Objectives The aim of this study was to describe the role CAM plays in oncology, clinicians' approaches to pain management and its alignment with patient preference and self-care. Methods We used quantitative criteria to identify patients with high, self-reported pain and reduced quality of life. For these patients, we merged quantitative and qualitative data from encounter audio recordings, patient surveys, and the medical record. Results We identified 32 patients (72% women, average age 60) experiencing significantly symptomatic pain at enrollment. Merged themes were 1) Restricted and defined roles: Oncology clinicians suggested and documented cancer-specific approaches to pain management. Patients often (17, 53%) used CAM but rarely desired to discuss it in their encounters. 2) Proactive patients in setting of neutrality: Pain management strategies were considered in 22 instances. CAM was mentioned in 4 (18%) of these discussions but only after patient initiation. Clinicians took a neutral stance. 3) Missed opportunities for person-centered CAM discussions and management: Most (88%) patients were receiving conventional pain medications at enrollment or had them added or escalated during follow-up. Some patients in pain expressed preferences for avoiding opioids. One patient reported wishing CAM would have been discussed after an encounter in which it was not. Conclusion Bringing CAM discussions into the oncology encounter may facilitate a stronger patient-clinician partnership and a more open and safe understanding of pain-related CAM use.

AB - Context Treatment of pain in cancer is a clinical priority. Many cancer patients seek and use complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) therapies. Objectives The aim of this study was to describe the role CAM plays in oncology, clinicians' approaches to pain management and its alignment with patient preference and self-care. Methods We used quantitative criteria to identify patients with high, self-reported pain and reduced quality of life. For these patients, we merged quantitative and qualitative data from encounter audio recordings, patient surveys, and the medical record. Results We identified 32 patients (72% women, average age 60) experiencing significantly symptomatic pain at enrollment. Merged themes were 1) Restricted and defined roles: Oncology clinicians suggested and documented cancer-specific approaches to pain management. Patients often (17, 53%) used CAM but rarely desired to discuss it in their encounters. 2) Proactive patients in setting of neutrality: Pain management strategies were considered in 22 instances. CAM was mentioned in 4 (18%) of these discussions but only after patient initiation. Clinicians took a neutral stance. 3) Missed opportunities for person-centered CAM discussions and management: Most (88%) patients were receiving conventional pain medications at enrollment or had them added or escalated during follow-up. Some patients in pain expressed preferences for avoiding opioids. One patient reported wishing CAM would have been discussed after an encounter in which it was not. Conclusion Bringing CAM discussions into the oncology encounter may facilitate a stronger patient-clinician partnership and a more open and safe understanding of pain-related CAM use.

KW - CAM

KW - cancer pain

KW - Complementary and alternative medicine

KW - mixed methods

KW - oncology

KW - pain

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84995578548&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84995578548&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2016.05.025

DO - 10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2016.05.025

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:84995578548

VL - 52

SP - 719

EP - 726

JO - Journal of Pain and Symptom Management

JF - Journal of Pain and Symptom Management

SN - 0885-3924

IS - 5

ER -