BackgroundThe aim was to develop and evaluate a training program for physicians for communicating with breast cancer patients about complementary medicine (CM).MethodsIn a cluster-randomized pilot trial eight breast cancer centers (two physicians per center) were randomized to either a complementary communication training program (9 h e-learning + 20 h on-site skills training) or to a control group without training. Each physician was asked to consult ten patients for whom he or she is not the physician in charge. We used mixed methods: Quantitative outcomes included physicians’ assessments (empathy, complexity of consultation, knowledge transfer) and patients’ assessments (satisfaction, empathy, knowledge transfer). For qualitative analyses, 15 (eight in the training and seven in the control group) videotaped consultations were analyzed based on grounded theory, and separate focus groups with the physicians of both groups were conducted.ResultsA total of 137 patients were included. Although cluster-randomized, physicians in the two groups differed. Those in the training group were younger (33.4 ± 8.9 vs. 40.0 ± 8.5 years) and had less work experience (5.4 ± 8.9 vs. 11.1 ± 7.4 years). Patient satisfaction with the CM consultation was relatively high on a scale from 0 to 24 and was comparable in the two groups (training group: 19.4 ± 4.6; control group 20.5 ± 4.1). The qualitative findings showed that physicians structured majority of consultations as taught during the training. Comparing only the younger and less CM experienced physicians, those trained in CM communication felt more confident discussing CM-related topics than those without training.ConclusionA CM communication-training program might be especially beneficial for physicians with less consulting experience when communicating about CM-related issues. A larger trial using more suitable quantitative outcomes needs to confirm this.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02223091, date of registration: 7 February 2014.

ObjectivesThe aim of the study was to explore women's motivations for participating in a clinical trial and to evaluate how financial compensation impacts women's explanations for participation.Design, setting and participantsSemistructured interviews were conducted face to face or by telephone with 25 of 220 women who participated in a pragmatic randomised trial for app-administered self-care acupressure for dysmenorrhoea (AKUD). Of these 25 women, 10 had entered AKUD knowing they would receive a financial compensation of €30. A purposive sampling strategy was used.ResultsWomen had a long history of seeking help and were unsatisfied with the options available, namely painkillers and oral contraceptives. While interviewees were open to painkillers, they were uneasy about taking them on a monthly basis. The AKUD trial offered the possibility to find an alternative solution. A second reason for participation was the desire to add a new treatment to routine medical care, for which the interviewees considered randomised trials a prerequisite. The financial incentive was a subsidiary motivation in the interviewees' narratives.ConclusionsOur results contribute to the ongoing discussion of the impact of financial compensation on research participants' assessment of risk. The interviewed women considered all research participants able to make their own choices regarding trial participation, even in the face of financial compensation or payment of study participants. Furthermore, the importance of clinical trials providing new treatments that could change medical practice might be an overlooked reason for trial participation and could be used in future recruitment strategies.

BackgroundSelf-care acupressure might be successful in treating menstrual pain, which is common among young women. There is a need for comparative effectiveness research with stakeholder engagement in all phases seeking to address the needs of decision-makers. Our aim was to design a study on the effectiveness of additional self-care acupressure for menstrual pain comparing usual care alone using different methods of stakeholder engagement.MethodsThe study was designed using multiple mixed methods for stakeholder engagement. Based on the results of a survey and focus group discussion, a stakeholder advisory group developed the study design.ResultsStakeholder engagement resulted in a two-arm pragmatic randomized trial. Two hundred and twenty women aged 18 to 25 years with menstrual pain will be included in the study. Outcome measurement will be done using electronic questionnaires provided by a study specific mobile application (App). Primary outcome will be the mean pain intensity at the days of pain during the third menstruation after therapy start.ConclusionStakeholder engagement helped to develop a study design that better serves the needs of decision makers, including an App as a modern tool for both intervention and data collection in a young target group.Trial registrationClinicaltrials.gov identifier http://NCT01582724

No abstract

nom-hcc/. Besonderer HinweisDie Medizin unterliegt einem fortwährenden Entwicklungsprozess, sodass alle Angaben, insbesondere zu diagnostischen und therapeutischen Verfahren, immer nur dem Wissensstand zur Zeit der Drucklegung der Leitlinie entsprechen können. Hinsichtlich der angegebenen Empfehlungen zur Therapie und der Auswahl sowie Dosierung von Medikamenten wurde die größtmögliche Sorgfalt beachtet. Gleichwohl werden die Benutzer aufgefordert, die Beipackzettel und Fachinformationen der Hersteller zur Kontrolle heranzuziehen und im Zweifelsfall einen Spezialisten zu konsultieren. Fragliche Unstimmigkeiten sollen bitte im allgemeinen Interesse der OL-Redaktion mitgeteilt werden. Der Benutzer selbst bleibt verantwortlich für jede diagnostische und therapeutische Applikation, Medikation und Dosierung.In dieser Leitlinie sind eingetragene Warenzeichen (geschützte Warennamen) nicht besonders kenntlich gemacht. Es kann also aus dem Fehlen eines entsprechenden Hinweises nicht geschlossen werden, dass es sich um einen freien Warennamen handelt.Das Werk ist in allen seinen Teilen urheberrechtlich geschützt. Jede Verwertung außerhalb der Bestimmung des Urhebergesetzes ist ohne schriftliche Zustimmung der OL-Redaktion unzulässig und strafbar. Kein Teil des Werkes darf in irgendeiner Form ohne schriftliche Genehmigung der OL-Redaktion reproduziert werden. Dies gilt insbesondere für Vervielfältigungen, Übersetzungen, Mikroverfilmungen und die Einspeicherung, Nutzung und Verwertung in elektronischen Systemen, Intranets und dem Internet.In dieser Leitlinie wird aus Gründen der Lesbarkeit die männliche Form verwendet, nichtsdestotrotz beziehen sich die Angaben auf Angehörige aller Geschlechter.