Clinical supervision and complementary therapists: an exploration of the rewards and challenges of cancer care.

AIM: The study explored the experiences of therapists working in cancer care settings and more specifically, the value of clinical supervision. METHODOLOGY: Invitations for therapists to participate in three focus groups were sent to five cancer care settings. Each group responded to seven trigger questions, formulated from the literature review. Audiotapes were transcribed aided by notes taken during the sessions. FINDINGS: There were 15 therapists participated in the three groups. Themes and sub - themes were identified; these related to the rewards of being in a privileged and honoured position, the importance of prior experience and motivation, and supervision as a supportive resource. Participants acknowledged and explored shared experiences and identified common coping and 'taking care of self' strategies. LIMITATIONS: The participants were all from the North West of England cancer care centres with local support and supervision arrangements in place. Limited demographic details were collected. One group fell short of the recommended number of participants. CONCLUSION: This exploratory study identified that supervision was appreciated, with therapists reporting that the work itself helped sustain them. Individuals also reported that they used complementary therapies to manage work related stress.

Complementary therapists' training and cancer care: a multi-site study.

PURPOSE: To explore professional experience and training of complementary therapists working within cancer care. METHOD: A Questionnaire survey of complementary therapists practising in three cancer care settings in North West England. RESULTS: Respondents (n=51; n=47 female; mean age 50 years, range 23-78 years) had varied career backgrounds; 24 were healthcare professionals who also practised as complementary therapists (nurse n=19; physiotherapist n=3; doctor n=2) whilst 27 were complementary therapists with no prior healthcare background. Twenty-eight respondents reported working as therapists within a supportive and palliative care setting for over 6 years. Forty-seven respondents had undertaken healthcare-related continuing professional development in complementary therapies, although only just over half of the sample (n=27) had received cancer-specific training. Cancer-related complementary therapy training related to the adaptation of therapies and comprised predominantly short courses. There was a lack of standardisation in the training received, nor was it clear how many courses were accredited. CONCLUSION: Findings highlight the need for standardisation of training for complementary therapy provision in cancer care and statutory review of continuing professional development within this emerging field.