Regina Stolz

Background: Most individuals affected by cancer who are treated with certain chemotherapies suffer of CIPN. Therefore, there is a high patient and provider interest in complementary non-pharmacological therapies, but its evidence base has not yet been clearly pointed out in the context of CIPN. Methods: The results of a scoping review overviewing the published clinical evidence on the application of complementary therapies for improving the complex CIPN symptomatology are synthesized with the recommendations of an expert consensus process aiming to draw attention to supportive strategies for CIPN. The scoping review, registered at PROSPERO 2020 (CRD 42020165851), followed the PRISMA-ScR and JBI guidelines. Relevant studies published in Pubmed/MEDLINE, PsycINFO, PEDro, Cochrane CENTRAL, and CINAHL between 2000 and 2021 were included. CASP was used to evaluate the methodologic quality of the studies. Results: Seventy-five studies with mixed study quality met the inclusion criteria. Manipulative therapies (including massage, reflexology, therapeutic touch), rhythmical embrocations, movement and mind–body therapies, acupuncture/acupressure, and TENS/Scrambler therapy were the most frequently analyzed in research and may be effective treatment options for CIPN. The expert panel approved 17 supportive interventions, most of them were phytotherapeutic interventions including external applications and cryotherapy, hydrotherapy, and tactile stimulation. More than two-thirds of the consented interventions were rated with moderate to high perceived clinical effectiveness in therapeutic use. Conclusions: The evidence of both the review and the expert panel supports a variety of complementary procedures regarding the supportive treatment of CIPN; however, the application on patients should be individually weighed in each case. Based on this meta-synthesis, interprofessional healthcare teams may open up a dialogue with patients interested in non-pharmacological treatment options to tailor complementary counselling and treatments to their needs.

Background Spiritual needs gain importance in old age but are often ignored in health care. Within the ‘Holistic care program for elderly patients to integrate spiritual needs, social activity and self-care into disease management in primary care (HoPES3)’ a complex intervention was evaluated in a cluster-randomized trial. The aim of this study was to explore the acceptability, feasibility, benefits, and harms of a spiritual history taken by general practitioners (GPs) as part of the complex intervention. Methods In this mixed-methods study telephone interviews with 11 German GPs and 12 medical assistants (MAs) of the HoPES3 intervention group were conducted and analysed using a content-analytical approach. Furthermore, GPs were asked to complete a questionnaire after each spiritual history. One hundred and forty-one questionnaires from 14 GPs were analysed descriptively. Results GPs considered the spiritual history very/quite helpful for the patient in 27% (n= 38) and very/quite stressful in 2% (n = 3) of the cases. Interviews indicated that GPs found discussing spiritual history easier than anticipated. GPs and MAs saw a difficulty in that many patients associated spirituality with religion or church and reacted with surprise or rejection. Benefits for patients were seen in the opportunity to talk about non-medical topics, and increased awareness of their own resources. Benefits for GPs mainly related to information gain and an intensified patient–physician relationship. Conclusions A spiritual history in general practice has the potential to reveal important information about patients’ lives and to improve the patient–physician relationship. Implementation barriers identified in this study have to be considered and addressed.