Use of Mind-Body Therapies in Psychiatry and Family Medicine Faculty and Residents: Attitudes, Barriers, and Gender Differences

Victor Sierpina, Ruth Levine, John Astin, Alai Tan

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

23 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: Mind-body medicine (MBM) approaches to many health problems have been well documented in the literature, including through multiple meta-analyses. Efficacy has been well demonstrated in conditions such as headache, irritable bowel syndrome, anxiety, fibromyalgia, hypertension, low back pain, depression, cancer symptoms, and postmyocardial infarction. However, an apparent disconnect (ie, translational block) prevents more widespread adoption of such therapies into practice. Biofeedback, relaxation therapy, hypnosis, guided imagery, cognitive behavioral therapy, and psychoeducational approaches are the domain of MBM we examined in assessing physician attitudes, beliefs, and practices. Methods: Using a Web-based survey, we obtained responses from 74 faculty and resident physicians in the Department of Family Medicine and the Department of Psychiatry. Our response rate was 69%. We conducted descriptive statistics, bivariate analysis, and multivariate analysis using a logistic regression model. Various statistics were chosen depending on the nature of analyzed variables. Synoptic tables are presented. Results: Comparing these cohorts, we found little difference between physicians in the two specialties, but substantial reports that barriers to the use of MBM were largely based on lack of training, inadequate expertise, and insufficient clinic time. Lack of expertise and insufficient clinic time were higher among family physicians than among psychiatrists. There was a high interest in both groups in learning relaxation techniques and meditation and lower interest in biofeedback and hypnosis. Female physicians were significantly more likely to use MBM, both with patients and for their own self-care, and were less likely to be concerned that recommending these therapies would make patients feel that their symptoms were being discounted. Female physicians also had significantly higher beliefs about the benefits of MBM on health disorders in several of the conditions examined, with a consistent though nonsignificant trend in others.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)129-135
Number of pages7
JournalExplore: The Journal of Science and Healing
Volume3
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - Mar 2007

Fingerprint

Mind-Body Therapies
Gender Differences
Medicine
Therapy
Psychiatry
Physicians
Relaxation Therapy
Hypnosis
Expertise
Logistic Models
Health
Meditation
Likely
Fibromyalgia
Irritable Bowel Syndrome
Imagery (Psychotherapy)
Statistics
Family Physicians
Cognitive Therapy
Infarction

Keywords

  • medical education
  • Mind-Body therapies
  • translational barriers

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Complementary and alternative medicine
  • Chiropractics
  • Analysis
  • Nursing(all)

Cite this

@article{3bada572bb85453e8b8ee4d7994990a6,
title = "Use of Mind-Body Therapies in Psychiatry and Family Medicine Faculty and Residents: Attitudes, Barriers, and Gender Differences",
abstract = "Background: Mind-body medicine (MBM) approaches to many health problems have been well documented in the literature, including through multiple meta-analyses. Efficacy has been well demonstrated in conditions such as headache, irritable bowel syndrome, anxiety, fibromyalgia, hypertension, low back pain, depression, cancer symptoms, and postmyocardial infarction. However, an apparent disconnect (ie, translational block) prevents more widespread adoption of such therapies into practice. Biofeedback, relaxation therapy, hypnosis, guided imagery, cognitive behavioral therapy, and psychoeducational approaches are the domain of MBM we examined in assessing physician attitudes, beliefs, and practices. Methods: Using a Web-based survey, we obtained responses from 74 faculty and resident physicians in the Department of Family Medicine and the Department of Psychiatry. Our response rate was 69{\%}. We conducted descriptive statistics, bivariate analysis, and multivariate analysis using a logistic regression model. Various statistics were chosen depending on the nature of analyzed variables. Synoptic tables are presented. Results: Comparing these cohorts, we found little difference between physicians in the two specialties, but substantial reports that barriers to the use of MBM were largely based on lack of training, inadequate expertise, and insufficient clinic time. Lack of expertise and insufficient clinic time were higher among family physicians than among psychiatrists. There was a high interest in both groups in learning relaxation techniques and meditation and lower interest in biofeedback and hypnosis. Female physicians were significantly more likely to use MBM, both with patients and for their own self-care, and were less likely to be concerned that recommending these therapies would make patients feel that their symptoms were being discounted. Female physicians also had significantly higher beliefs about the benefits of MBM on health disorders in several of the conditions examined, with a consistent though nonsignificant trend in others.",
keywords = "medical education, Mind-Body therapies, translational barriers",
author = "Victor Sierpina and Ruth Levine and John Astin and Alai Tan",
year = "2007",
month = "3",
doi = "10.1016/j.explore.2006.12.001",
language = "English",
volume = "3",
pages = "129--135",
journal = "Explore",
issn = "1550-8307",
publisher = "Elsevier Inc.",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Use of Mind-Body Therapies in Psychiatry and Family Medicine Faculty and Residents

T2 - Attitudes, Barriers, and Gender Differences

AU - Sierpina, Victor

AU - Levine, Ruth

AU - Astin, John

AU - Tan, Alai

PY - 2007/3

Y1 - 2007/3

N2 - Background: Mind-body medicine (MBM) approaches to many health problems have been well documented in the literature, including through multiple meta-analyses. Efficacy has been well demonstrated in conditions such as headache, irritable bowel syndrome, anxiety, fibromyalgia, hypertension, low back pain, depression, cancer symptoms, and postmyocardial infarction. However, an apparent disconnect (ie, translational block) prevents more widespread adoption of such therapies into practice. Biofeedback, relaxation therapy, hypnosis, guided imagery, cognitive behavioral therapy, and psychoeducational approaches are the domain of MBM we examined in assessing physician attitudes, beliefs, and practices. Methods: Using a Web-based survey, we obtained responses from 74 faculty and resident physicians in the Department of Family Medicine and the Department of Psychiatry. Our response rate was 69%. We conducted descriptive statistics, bivariate analysis, and multivariate analysis using a logistic regression model. Various statistics were chosen depending on the nature of analyzed variables. Synoptic tables are presented. Results: Comparing these cohorts, we found little difference between physicians in the two specialties, but substantial reports that barriers to the use of MBM were largely based on lack of training, inadequate expertise, and insufficient clinic time. Lack of expertise and insufficient clinic time were higher among family physicians than among psychiatrists. There was a high interest in both groups in learning relaxation techniques and meditation and lower interest in biofeedback and hypnosis. Female physicians were significantly more likely to use MBM, both with patients and for their own self-care, and were less likely to be concerned that recommending these therapies would make patients feel that their symptoms were being discounted. Female physicians also had significantly higher beliefs about the benefits of MBM on health disorders in several of the conditions examined, with a consistent though nonsignificant trend in others.

AB - Background: Mind-body medicine (MBM) approaches to many health problems have been well documented in the literature, including through multiple meta-analyses. Efficacy has been well demonstrated in conditions such as headache, irritable bowel syndrome, anxiety, fibromyalgia, hypertension, low back pain, depression, cancer symptoms, and postmyocardial infarction. However, an apparent disconnect (ie, translational block) prevents more widespread adoption of such therapies into practice. Biofeedback, relaxation therapy, hypnosis, guided imagery, cognitive behavioral therapy, and psychoeducational approaches are the domain of MBM we examined in assessing physician attitudes, beliefs, and practices. Methods: Using a Web-based survey, we obtained responses from 74 faculty and resident physicians in the Department of Family Medicine and the Department of Psychiatry. Our response rate was 69%. We conducted descriptive statistics, bivariate analysis, and multivariate analysis using a logistic regression model. Various statistics were chosen depending on the nature of analyzed variables. Synoptic tables are presented. Results: Comparing these cohorts, we found little difference between physicians in the two specialties, but substantial reports that barriers to the use of MBM were largely based on lack of training, inadequate expertise, and insufficient clinic time. Lack of expertise and insufficient clinic time were higher among family physicians than among psychiatrists. There was a high interest in both groups in learning relaxation techniques and meditation and lower interest in biofeedback and hypnosis. Female physicians were significantly more likely to use MBM, both with patients and for their own self-care, and were less likely to be concerned that recommending these therapies would make patients feel that their symptoms were being discounted. Female physicians also had significantly higher beliefs about the benefits of MBM on health disorders in several of the conditions examined, with a consistent though nonsignificant trend in others.

KW - medical education

KW - Mind-Body therapies

KW - translational barriers

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=33847694208&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=33847694208&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.explore.2006.12.001

DO - 10.1016/j.explore.2006.12.001

M3 - Article

C2 - 17362848

AN - SCOPUS:33847694208

VL - 3

SP - 129

EP - 135

JO - Explore

JF - Explore

SN - 1550-8307

IS - 2

ER -