Interest in and Barriers to Practicing Yoga among Family Caregivers of People with Cancer.

Background: Family caregivers of people with cancer report high levels of psychological distress. Yoga, with well-documented mental health benefits, could be a useful intervention to address distress in this population. However, little is known about yoga practices among cancer caregivers. The present study evaluates their interest in and barriers to yoga practice. Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional survey study of family caregivers of cancer patients at five suburban satellite locations of an academic cancer center. Survey items and statistical analyses focused on yoga usage as well as interest in and barriers to yoga practice. Results: Among 539 participants, most were females (64.8%), white (84.2%), and caring for a spouse or partner (54.7%). Interest in practicing yoga among study participants was 42.3%. Increased interest was independently associated with being females (odds ratio [OR] = 3.30, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.98-5.51, P < 0.001) and employed (part-time: OR = 2.58, 95% CI = 1.1-6.18, P = 0.03; full-time: OR = 1.77, 95% CI = 1.1-2.01, P = 0.02). Few participants (6.3%) were currently practicing yoga, although 31% had done so in the past. Sixty-one percent of those who had practiced before their loved one's diagnosis stopped practicing yoga afterward. Commonly cited barriers to yoga practice included time constraints (37.3%) and psychological obstacles (33.6%). About a quarter of those who had never practiced yoga lacked awareness of yoga's benefits (26.6%). Conclusion: Despite the low use of yoga, interest in practicing was moderately high, especially among women and employed caregivers. As caregivers face numerous barriers to yoga practice, strategies are needed to overcome these barriers and help them access yoga's health benefits.

Assessment of Oncology Patient Engagement and Interest in Virtual Mind-Body Programming: Moving Toward Personalization of Virtual Care.

PURPOSE: Accelerated by the COVID-19 pandemic, the virtual platform has become a prominent medium to deliver mind-body therapies, but the extent to which patients engage in virtual mind-body programming remains unclear. This study aims to assess oncology patient engagement in a virtual mind-body program. METHODS: We surveyed oncology patients enrolled in a live-streamed (synchronous) virtual mind-body program in May 2021. Patients self-reported engagement by weekly attendance. We applied multivariate regression to identify associations of engagement with sociodemographic and clinical factors. As an exploratory analysis, we used machine learning to partition engagement subgroups to determine preferential interest in prerecorded (asynchronous) mind-body therapy videos. RESULTS: Among 148 patients surveyed (response rate: 21.4%), majority were female (94.5%), White (83.1%), age 65 years or older (64.9%), retired (64.2%), and in survivorship (61.8%). Patient engagement ranged from 1 to 13 classes/week (mean [standard deviation]: 4.23 [2.56]) and was higher for female (ß, .82; 95% CI, 0.01 to 1.62), non-White (ß, .63; 95% CI, 0.13 to 1.13), and retired patients (ß, .50; 95% CI, 0.12 to 0.88). The partition model identified three engagement subgroups: employed (low engagers), retired White (intermediate engagers), and retired non-White (high engagers). Particularly, low engagers had preferential interest in meditation videos (odds ratio, 2.85; 95% CI, 1.24 to 6.54), and both low and high engagers had preferential interest in Tai Chi videos (odds ratio, 2.26; 95% CI, 1.06 to 4.82). CONCLUSION: In this cross-sectional study among oncology patients, engagement in virtual mind-body programming was higher for female, non-White, and retired patients. Our findings suggest the need for both synchronous and asynchronous mind-body programming to meet the diverse needs of oncology patients.

Rapid deployment of virtual mind-body interventions during the COVID-19 outbreak: feasibility, acceptability, and implications for future care.

INTRODUCTION: COVID-19 increased stress levels while reducing access to mind-body services in patients with cancer. We describe the rapid deployment of remotely delivered mind-body services to people with cancer during COVID-19, rates of participation, and acceptability from patients' perspectives. METHODS: Eligible participants were patients with cancer age ≥ 18 years enrolled in a single academic cancer center's online patient portal. Interventions included mind-body group therapy sessions in fitness, meditation, yoga, dance, tai chi, and music delivered using Zoom video conferencing. Sessions were 30-45 min and led by an integrative medicine clinician. Following each session, participants were asked to complete a three-item questionnaire assessing (1) satisfaction with the class session, (2) reduction in stress/anxiety, and (3) likelihood of recommending the class to others. Patients could also provide comments in real-time using the Zoom chat function. RESULTS: Among 5948 unique visits, the most frequently attended classes were fitness (n = 2513, 42.2%) followed by meditation (n = 1176, 19.8%) and yoga (n = 909, 15.3%). Of these visits, 3902 (65.6%) had an associated completed questionnaire. Across class types, a large majority of participants reported being extremely satisfied (n = 3733, 95.7%), experiencing extreme reductions in anxiety/stress (n = 3268, 83.8%), and being extremely likely to recommend the class to others (n = 3605, 92.4%). Fitness had the highest endorsement among class types (all p values < 0.001). Themes from the chat responses included gratitude, expressions of helpfulness, and feelings of connection. CONCLUSION: High utilization of and satisfaction with these virtual mind-body services demonstrate the significant potential of remote delivery to facilitate patient access to services.

Managing Patient Expectations: Integrative, Not Alternative.

Expectations and beliefs about complementary and integrative medicine are the main predictors of its use in cancer patients. These expectations are rarely informed by consultation with a health care provider but are, rather, a result of family endorsement and information from nonmedical sources. As a rising number of cancer patients pursue integrative medicine, it is of increasing importance that health care providers understand their patients' expectations and motivations. These can range from symptom management to unrealistic hopes for cure. Complementary and integrative medicine can be used to complement criterion-standard cancer care, but is sometimes dangerously touted as an alternative for it. Awareness of these nuances enables providers to initiate effective communication about complementary and integrative medicine and to intervene when unrealistic expectations stand in the way of lifesaving care. Refining patient-centered communication around integrative medicine is essential to avoid unsupervised, potentially harmful use, delays, or interruptions in cancer care and, ultimately, to maximize the benefits of integrative therapies during cancer treatment.

Putting Integrative Oncology Into Practice: Concepts and Approaches.

Unmet symptom needs and a desire for holistic health approaches or even cure are among the motivations patients have for seeking out complementary and alternative medicine. Using complementary and alternative medicine instead of conventional cancer treatment can have a negative impact on clinical outcomes and survival. Integrative oncology is a patient-centered, evidence-informed field of comprehensive cancer care that uses mind-body practices, natural products, and lifestyle modifications from different traditions alongside conventional cancer treatments. It prioritizes safety and best available evidence to offer appropriate therapeutic interventions along with conventional care. This review summarizes the underlying principles of integrative oncology and how it is distinct from alternative medicine, and it provides a practical guide for the effective application of evidence-based complementary and alternative medicine interventions in patient-centered care. In addition, we recommend resources for patients and clinicians and provide algorithms for appropriate integrative medicine referrals. Finally, we offer suggestions on developing and implementing an integrative oncology program and addressing current challenges in the field.

Influence of family on expected benefits of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) in cancer patients.

BACKGROUND: Cancer patients often use complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) based on recommendations from family. However, the relationship between family endorsement of CAM and the patient's expectation of its benefits has never been quantified. METHODS: Between 2010 and 2011, we conducted a cross-sectional survey study among patients with a diagnosis of cancer recruited from thoracic, breast, and gastrointestinal medical oncology clinics at a single academic cancer center. We performed multivariate linear regression analyses to evaluate the relationship between perceived family endorsement of and expected benefits from CAM, adjusting for covariates. RESULTS: Among the 962 participants, 303 (31.3%) reported family endorsement of CAM use. Younger patients and those who had college or higher education were more likely to report family endorsement (both p < 0.05). Patients with family support had expectation scores that were 15.9 higher than patients without family support (coefficient 15.9, 95% CI 13.5, 18.2, p < 0.001). Participants with family encouragement of CAM use were also more likely to expect CAM to cure their cancer (12 vs. 37%) and prolong their life (24 vs. 61%). These relationships remained highly significant after adjusting for covariates). CONCLUSIONS: Family endorsement of CAM use is strongly associated with patient expectation of its clinical efficacy, including expectations for cure and improved survival. These findings underscore the importance of including family in counseling and education on CAM use in order to achieve realistic patient expectations, maximize benefits, and avoid potential medical adverse effects through herb-drug interactions or rejections of conventional care.