ArticleHealth services insights2025
Opportunities and Challenges of an Integrative Care Structure for Oncological Patients: A Qualitative Analysis of Provider Perspectives.
Article in Health services insights, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Considering the global increase in cancer, integrative medicine combines conventional and complementary methods, offering a holistic approach to treating cancer patients. To optimize care and support care continuity for oncological patients, the integrative healthcare structure CCC-Integrativ provided evidence-based, interprofessional counseling in four oncology centers in Southern Germany. A process evaluation explored the program's perceived effects and factors relevant to the implementation process to identify opportunities and challenges for a sustainable implementation of the program. Methods: In a qualitative study, semi-structured guide-based interviews with medical and nursing staff directly and indirectly involved in the program were conducted to explore their perspectives. The generated data were analyzed in a content analysis. Participant perceptions regarding potential program effects and factors influencing its' implementation were first identified through open inductive coding. The Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) was then used as a categorizing analytical framework to guide further coding and facilitate a deeper understanding of the implementation process. Results: N = 21 interviews were analyzed (n = 12 directly involved in counseling; n = 9 indirectly involved through leadership position). Participants perceived an added value of the integrative care approach and expressed a positive attitude towards a continuation of the program. Patient interest in complementary medicine and care, their positive response to the program, and a perceived supportive effect of the interprofessional collaboration were reported as promoting factors. Still, insufficient evidence and a perceived low acceptance of some complementary medicine methods by hospital staff, skepticism, lack of space, and recruitment problems, were identified as key challenges for successful long-term implementation. Conclusions: A variety of factors need to be addressed for sustained implementation. Promoting acceptance of supportive complementary methods is essential for evidence-based, patient-centered cancer care. Consideration of interprofessional care could be a key factor for the long-term implementation of consultations on complementary and integrative healthcare.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.