Abstract

BackgroundCooperative practice between traditional health practitioners (THPs) and radiation oncologists (ROs) is crucial for the continuity of care in the treatment of patients with cancer. However, scant information exists on how to co-ordinate cooperation between these health practitioners without interrupting the treatment of the patients.AimThe study aimed to explore the practices of THPs and ROs in cancer treatment and ultimately derive a workable practice framework between these health practitioners in the KwaZulu-Natal (KZN) province.SettingThe study was conducted in selected districts, namely eThekwini, uThukela, Amajuba, uMkhanyakude, iLembe, uMzinyathi and uMgungundlovu, in KZN.MethodsA qualitative study by using a descriptive phenomenological approach was conducted to collect data from 28 THPs involved in the treatment of cancer and four ROs from public oncology hospitals. Focus groups and one-on-one semi-structured interviews by using open-ended questions were conducted to collect data from THPs and ROs, respectively. Framework analysis was used for data analysis to identify themes.ResultsThe study found that in KZN, THPs and ROs are working in parallel and that there are problems when patients seek cancer treatment from both health practitioners. Furthermore, the THPs and ROs work in an environment where there is no relationship, respect and trust, open communication and referral of patients by ROs to THPs. Both teams indicated that patients consult both traditional medicine (TM) and allopathic medicine (AM) by moving between the two health practitioners, resulting in interruptions in treatment. In addition, the study found that cooperation between THPs and ROs is understood as the provision of continuity care, where the parties work independently but share certain information of the patient on treatment, or as already being treated by each of them. The focus was on the type of relationship, enablers and common grounds for cooperation.ConclusionThe workable cooperative practice framework could be an inclusive health system where the parties work in parallel, with the patient being the main actor in the collaboration.

Highlights

  • Cancer is a global concern because of its morbidity and mortality in the population

  • The analysis is based on the cooperative practice between traditional health practitioners (THPs) and radiation oncologists (ROs) and the framework for cooperative practice

  • The practice framework developed describes the type of relationship, enablers and common grounds to ensure that the health practitioners collaborate in the cancer treatment

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Cancer is a global concern because of its morbidity and mortality in the population. With conventional treatment, a patient diagnosed with cancer requires allopathic medicine (AM) and follow-ups for months, and frequently years, after the diagnosis of cancer (International Agency for Research on Cancer [IARC] 2018). Patients with cancer move between traditional health practitioners (THPs) and radiation oncologists (ROs), using both systems simultaneously or consecutively to search for diagnosis, healing or other services (Adams et al 2009). These health practitioners do not communicate with each other. Cooperative practice between traditional health practitioners (THPs) and radiation oncologists (ROs) is crucial for the continuity of care in the treatment of patients with cancer. Scant information exists on how to co-ordinate cooperation between these health practitioners without interrupting the treatment of the patients

Objectives
Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call