Healthcare professionals' sources of knowledge of complementary medicine in an academic center.

Détails

Ressource 1Télécharger: 28961256.pdf (682.34 [Ko])
Etat: Public
Version: Final published version
ID Serval
serval:BIB_9354F1DB290E
Type
Article: article d'un périodique ou d'un magazine.
Collection
Publications
Titre
Healthcare professionals' sources of knowledge of complementary medicine in an academic center.
Périodique
PloS one
Auteur(s)
Aveni E., Bauer B., Ramelet A.S., Decosterd I., Ballabeni P., Bonvin E., Rodondi P.Y.
ISSN
1932-6203 (Electronic)
ISSN-L
1932-6203
Statut éditorial
Publié
Date de publication
2017
Peer-reviewed
Oui
Volume
12
Numéro
9
Pages
e0184979
Langue
anglais
Notes
Publication types: Journal Article
Publication Status: epublish
Résumé
Complementary medicine (CM) is utilized in a growing number of academic centers despite the debate concerning its value, risks and benefits. Healthcare professionals often feel uncomfortable discussing CM with patients, and little is known about their sources of knowledge in the field of CM.
To assess healthcare professionals' sources of knowledge and attitude toward CM in an academic hospital.
The cross-sectional web-based survey took place from October to December 2013. A total of 4,925 healthcare professionals working at Lausanne University Hospital, Switzerland, were invited to answer the questionnaire.
Factors influencing healthcare professionals' opinion toward CM, knowledge and communication about CM.
The questionnaire was answered by 1,247 healthcare professionals. The three key factors influencing professionals' opinion toward CM were personal experience, clinical experience and evidence demonstrating the physiological mechanism of CM. Personal experience was more associated with nurses' and midwives' opinion compared to physicians' (80.8% vs 57.1%, OR = 3.08, [95% CI: 2.35-4.05], P<0.001 and 85.3% vs 57.1%, OR = 3.83, [95% CI: 1.95-7.53], P<0.001, respectively) as well as with professionals trained in CM compared to non-trained professionals (86.0% vs 73.2%, OR = 2.60, [95% CI: 1.92-3.53], P<0.001). Physicians relied more on randomized controlled clinical trials compared to nurses (81.3% vs 62.9%, OR = 0.43, [95% CI: 0.33-0.57], P<0.001). A majority of the respondents (82.5%) agreed that they lacked knowledge about CM and 65.0% noted that it was the patient who initially started the discussion about CM.
Different professionals used different strategies to forge opinions regarding CM: physicians relied more on scientific evidence, while nurses and midwives were more influenced by personal experience. Regardless of preferred information source, most respondents did not feel prepared to address patient questions regarding CM. Enhancing interprofessional education opportunities is an important strategy to help providers become empowered to discuss CM with patients. This in turn will help patients making informed decisions in their healthcare.

Mots-clé
General Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology, General Agricultural and Biological Sciences, General Medicine
Pubmed
Web of science
Open Access
Oui
Création de la notice
02/10/2017 19:17
Dernière modification de la notice
20/08/2019 14:56
Données d'usage