Integrative medicine reports最新文献

Background: Opioid use disorder (OUD) remains a major public health concern. Despite the use of medications for OUD such as buprenorphine, the current gold-standard treatment, relapse in the context of increased craving remains common. Cannabidiol (CBD) has been shown to reduce cue-induced craving in individuals with OUD, but among those who were not receiving any buprenorphine treatment. This small proof-of-concept open-label study sought to evaluate the effect of CBD on cue-induced craving among individuals with OUD who were being actively treated with buprenorphine.

Methods: Participants (n = 5) received CBD (Epidiolex^®) 600 mg once daily for 3 consecutive days in an open-label manner. Primary outcome was cue-induced craving measured on a visual analog scale of 0 to 10, calculated as the difference in craving in response to drug-related versus neutral cues. The cue-reactivity paradigm was performed at baseline before CBD administration, and was repeated after 3 days of CBD. Secondary outcomes included scores on depression, anxiety, pain, opioid withdrawal, and side effects.

Results: All participants were actively taking buprenorphine for an average of 37.8 months (range 1-120 months). Cue-induced craving was significantly lower after CBD dosing compared with baseline (0.4 vs. 3.2, paired t-test, p = 0.0046). No significant changes in scores for depression, anxiety, pain, or opioid withdrawal were noted. CBD was well tolerated, although one participant experienced moderate sedation; otherwise, no other adverse effects were reported.

Conclusions: Given the high risk for bias in a small uncontrolled open label study such as this, results must be interpreted with caution. A larger adequately powered trial with a suitable control group is needed to confirm the finding that CBD may help to reduce cue-induced craving among individuals with OUD currently on buprenorphine treatment. Research should further evaluate whether adjunctive use of CBD can improve clinical outcomes for individuals with OUD maintained on buprenorphine. ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04192370).

Purpose: The use of integrative approaches for symptom management is highly prevalent among patients undergoing cancer treatment and among cancer survivors and is increasingly endorsed by clinical practice guidelines. However, access to and implementation of integrative oncology (IO) approaches are hindered by barriers at multiple levels, including logistic, geographic, financial, organizational, and cultural barriers. The goal of this mixed-method study was to examine oncology provider and patient knowledge, beliefs, and preferences in IO to identify facilitators, barriers, and recommendations for implementation of IO modalities.

Materials and methods: Data sources included patient surveys and provider semistructured interviews. Patients were in active treatment (n = 100) and survivors (n = 100) of heterogeneous cancer types. Patient and survivor surveys interrogated: (1) interest in types of IO approaches; and (2) preferences for delivery modality, frequency, and location. Providers (n = 18) were oncologists and nurse navigators working with diverse cancer types. Interviews queried their knowledge of and attitudes about IO, about their patients' needs for symptom management, and for recommendations for implementation of IO approaches in their clinic. We used the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research framework to systematically analyze provider interviews.

Results: The primary interests reported among actively treated patients and survivors were massage therapy, acupuncture, and wellness/exercise. Most patients expressed interest in both group and individual sessions and in telehealth or virtual reality options. Emergent themes from provider interviews identified barriers and facilitators to implementing IO approaches in both the internal and external settings, as well as for the implementation process.

Conclusion: The emphasis on mind-body interventions as integrative rather than alternative highlights the importance of interventions as evidence-based, comprehensive, and integrated into health care. Gaining simultaneous perspectives from both patients and physicians generated insights for the implementation of IO care into complex clinical systems within a comprehensive cancer center.