» Articles » PMID: 20180688

Unanticipated Benefits of CAM Therapies for Back Pain: an Exploration of Patient Experiences

Overview
Date 2010 Feb 26
PMID 20180688
Citations 19
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Objectives: The goal of this research was to provide insight into the full range of meaningful outcomes experienced by patients who participate in clinical trials of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) therapies.

Design: Data for this study were assembled from five randomized trials evaluating six different CAM treatments for back pain. A conventional qualitative content analysis was conducted on responses to open-ended questions asked at the end of telephone interviews assessing treatment outcomes.

Subjects: A total of 884 study participants who received CAM therapies completed post-treatment interviews. Of these, 327 provided qualitative data used in the analyses.

Results: Our analysis identified a range of positive outcomes that participants in CAM trials considered important but were not captured by standard quantitative outcome measures. Positive outcome themes included increased options and hope, increased ability to relax, positive changes in emotional states, increased body awareness, changes in thinking that increased the ability to cope with back pain, increased sense of well-being, improvement in physical conditions unrelated to back pain, increased energy, increased patient activation, and dramatic improvements in health or well-being. The first five of these themes were mentioned for all of the CAM treatments, while others tended to be more treatment specific. A small fraction of these effects were considered life transforming.

Conclusions: Our findings suggest that standard measures used to assess the outcomes of CAM treatments fail to capture the full range of outcomes that are important to patients. In order to capture the full impact of CAM therapies, future trials should include a broader range of outcomes measures.

Citing Articles

Incorporating Acupuncture Into American Healthcare: Initiating a Discussion on Implementation Science, the Status of the Field, and Stakeholder Considerations.

Miller D, Roseen E, Stone J, Gardiner P, Olson J, Rosen S Glob Adv Health Med. 2021; 10:21649561211042574.

PMID: 34471570 PMC: 8404666. DOI: 10.1177/21649561211042574.


Attributes Underlying Non-surgical Treatment Choice for People With Low Back Pain: A Systematic Mixed Studies Review.

Poder T, Beffarat M Int J Health Policy Manag. 2020; 10(4):201-210.

PMID: 32610721 PMC: 8167275. DOI: 10.34172/ijhpm.2020.49.


"It Gave Me Hope" Experiences of Diverse Safety Net Patients in a Group Acupuncture Intervention for Painful Diabetic Neuropathy.

Liu R, Santana T, Schillinger D, Hecht F, Chao M Health Equity. 2020; 4(1):225-231.

PMID: 32462104 PMC: 7247034. DOI: 10.1089/heq.2020.0004.


Can Adults with Mild Cognitive Impairment Build Cognitive Reserve and Learn Mindfulness Meditation? Qualitative Theme Analyses from a Small Pilot Study.

Wells R, Kerr C, Dossett M, Danhauer S, Sohl S, Sachs B J Alzheimers Dis. 2019; 70(3):825-842.

PMID: 31282418 PMC: 6753379. DOI: 10.3233/JAD-190191.


Stakeholder expectations from the integration of chiropractic care into a rehabilitation setting: a qualitative study.

Shannon Z, Salsbury S, Gosselin D, Vining R BMC Complement Altern Med. 2018; 18(1):316.

PMID: 30514271 PMC: 6278071. DOI: 10.1186/s12906-018-2386-3.


References
1.
McCaffrey A, Pugh G, OConnor B . Understanding patient preference for integrative medical care: results from patient focus groups. J Gen Intern Med. 2007; 22(11):1500-5. PMC: 2219802. DOI: 10.1007/s11606-007-0302-5. View

2.
Richardson J . What patients expect from complementary therapy: a qualitative study. Am J Public Health. 2004; 94(6):1049-53. PMC: 1448388. DOI: 10.2105/ajph.94.6.1049. View

3.
Oberbaum M, Singer S, Vithoulkas G . The colour of the homeopathic improvement: the multidimensional nature of the response to homeopathic therapy. Homeopathy. 2005; 94(3):196-9. DOI: 10.1016/j.homp.2005.05.004. View

4.
Hsieh H, Shannon S . Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qual Health Res. 2005; 15(9):1277-88. DOI: 10.1177/1049732305276687. View

5.
Bell I, Caspi O, Schwartz G, Grant K, Gaudet T, Rychener D . Integrative medicine and systemic outcomes research: issues in the emergence of a new model for primary health care. Arch Intern Med. 2002; 162(2):133-40. DOI: 10.1001/archinte.162.2.133. View