In the pending work, Cancer Center support currently has many complementary therapies and complementary therapies. You can also ask about the choice of therapists, their preparation and observation. The integration of a TS practitioner into an institution should be designed to avoid isolation. Indeed, there is a potential risk that he practices under the guidance of an institution without participating in patient care in collaboration with traditional therapists. The risk may lie in freedom of speech for the exclusive – if not sectarian – speech of a TS practitioner, and in any case, the lack of teamwork can lead to a project of individual and consistent patient care. What are the risks?
CT risks for patients: delay in the diagnosis and management of the patient using traditional medicine. This most serious risk is the lie of sectarian excesses (the risk is all the more important because the therapy is used in an alternative way); direct toxicity of substances to the body (anaphylaxis, liver toxicity, renal failure, etc.); Interaction with traditional treatment (by induction or enzymatic inhibition), which may reduce the effectiveness of some types of treatment. In parallel with these proven and measurable risks, there is cultural reluctance on the part of ordinary carers, and even unconscious fears about using additional treatment methods, especially if they interact with their own practices and prescriptions.
One fear, for example, is that you are not responsible for the relationship with the patient and will not be covered by a stream of questions or comments on this issue. Due to lack of information, time or personal fear, the healthcare provider prefers to avoid this issue or not to discuss it with his patient.
Coordinating supportive care at the charity center: organizing for these additional treatments? Can the integration of CT into supportive therapy be sufficient to oversee additional therapy? The success of supportive care is not the result of juxtaposing medical workers, but the complementary interaction of these specialists with each other. This multidisciplinary approach requires a coordinated organization. The coordination of supportive care is the foundation of complementarity and transversality necessary to account for the patient as a whole.
It is within the framework of this coordinated organization that TCs can register. The goal is not to add specialists to the institution’s referral service, but to bring these specialists from different walks of life to the dialogue so that they can better represent the reality of the patient. It would be counterproductive, if not dangerous, to integrate uncoordinated CT scans into a medical facility. A 2013 report by the commission investigating the impact of sectarian movements in the field of health suggests “integrating a patient’s well-being review with medical care protocols to combat the feeling of“ dehumanizing care ”and“ integrating the follow-up liberal practices of practitioners practicing alternative methods in the hospital through surveys patients under the supervision of the chief medical officer or chief.
Is this not exactly the role of supportive care and coordination? It would be illusory – even undesirable – to try to control the discourse of each practitioner. Whether it is traditional medicine or complementary therapy, his speech may also shift towards sectarianism. But it is also illusory to think that the only permission to conduct additional therapy in an institution remains the risk of drift.
Coordinated integration is an effective way to control practice and minimize risks. In addition, research whose complementary therapies are essential to demonstrate their effectiveness, to understand how they work, or to identify their harmlessness, requires collaboration between their practitioners and conventional doctors. With this in mind, coordinating supportive care at each institution could at least evaluate complementary treatment for cancer patients.
Placebo effect? When a patient encounters a doctor who often imposes complex protocols, he may feel the need to use additional methods of treatment in order to restore the lost autonomy in his own treatment of his disease.