Why cancer patients choose in-patient complementary therapy in palliative care: a qualitative study at Arokhayasala Hospice in Thailand

Cancer patients often choose complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) in palliative care, often in addition to conventional treatment and without medical advice or approval. Herbal medicines (HM) are the most commonly used type of CAM, but rarely available on an in-patient basis for palliative care. The motivations which lead very ill patients to travel far to receive such therapies are not clear. A qualitative study was therefore carried out to investigate influences on choosing to attend a CAM herbal hospice, to identify cancer patients’ main concerns about end-of-life care. Semi-structured interviews with 32 patients were conducted and analysed using thematic analysis. Patients were recruited from Arokhayasala, a Buddhist cancer hospice in Thailand which provides CAM, in the form of HM, a restricted diet, Thai yoga, deep-breathing exercises, meditation, chanting, Dhamma, laughter and music therapy, free-of-charge. The main factors influencing decision-making were a positive attitude towards HMs and previous use of them, dissatisfaction with conventional treatment, the home environment and their relationships with hospital doctors. Patients’ own perceptions and experiences were more important in making the decision to use CAM, and especially HM, in palliative cancer care than referral by healthcare professionals or scientific evidence of efficacy. Patients were prepared to travel far and live away from home to receive such care, especially as it was cost-free. In view of patients’ previously stated satisfaction with the regime at the Arokhayasala, these findings may be relevant to the provision of in-patient cancer palliative care to other patients.

What determines the out-of-home placement of children in the USA?

Using NCANDS data of US child maltreatment reports for 2009, logistic regression, probit analysis, discriminant analysis and an artificial neural network are used to determine the factors which explain the decision to place a child in out-of-home care. As well as developing a new model for 2009, a previous study using 2005 data is replicated. While there are many small differences, the four estimation techniques give broadly the same results, demonstrating the robustness of the results. Similarly, apart from age and sexual abuse, the 2005 and 2009 results are roughly similar. For 2009, child characteristics (particularly child emotional problems) are more important than the nature of the abuse and the situation of the household; while caregiver characteristics are the least important. All these models have low explanatory power.

Challenges in identifying factors which determine the placement of children in care? An international review

Placing a child in out-of-home care is one of the most important decisions made by professionals in the child care system, with substantial social, psychological, educational, medical and economic consequences. This paper considers the challenges and difficulties of building statistical models of this decision by reviewing the available international evidence. Despite the large number of empirical investigations over a 50 year period, a consensus on the variables associated with this decision is hard to identify. In addition, the individual models have low explanatory and predictive power and should not be relied on to make placement decisions. A number of reasons for this poor performance are offered, and some ways forwards suggested. This paper also aims to facilitate the emergence of a coherent and integrated international literature from the disconnected and fragmented empirical studies. Rather than one placement problem, there are many slightly different problems, and therefore it is expected that a number of related sub-literatures will emerge, each concentrating on a particular definition of the placement problem.

Healthcare providers in the English National Health Service: public, private or hybrids?

In recent years it has been noted that boundaries between public and private providers of many types of welfare have become blurred. This paper uses three dimensions of publicness to analyse this blurring of boundaries in relation to providers of healthcare in England. The authors find that, although most care is still funded and provided by the state, there are significant additional factors in respect of ownership and social control which indicate that many English healthcare providers are better understood as hybrids. Furthermore, the authors raise concerns about the possible deleterious effects of diminishing aspects of publicness on English healthcare. The most important of these is a decrease in accountability