Journal of Osteopathic Medicine, 2021/04, 121(4):361–370. doi: 10.1515/jom-2020-0052, type of study: ,sr,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

Free full text   (https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1515/jom-2020-0052/html)

Keywords:

animals [14]
beliefs [14]
clinical reasoning [85]
cultural competence [6]
drugs [33]
medication [14]
patients [167]
religion [10]
systematic review [445]
USA [1752]

Abstract:

CONTEXT: Cultural competency is a cornerstone of patient-centered health care. Religious doctrines may define appropriate consumption or use of certain animals and forbid use of others. Many medications contain ingredients that are animal-derived; these medications may be unacceptable to individual patients within the context of their religious beliefs and lifestyle choices. Knowledge of animal-derived medications as a component of cultural competency can facilitate a dialogue that shifts focus from the group to the individual, away from cultural competency toward cultural humility, and away from a paternalistic provider/patient dynamic toward one of partnership. OBJECTIVES: To explore how animal-derived drug components may impact medication selection and acceptability from the perspective of patients, physicians, and religious leaders as evidenced by studies that explore the question via survey or questionnaire. A secondary objective is to use the context of animal-derived drug products as a component of cultural competency to build a framework supporting the development of cultural humility. METHODS: A systematic search was performed in the PubMed, CINAHL, Cochrane, and ProQuest databases using combinations of the following terms: “medication selection,“ “medication,“ “adherence,“ “pharmaceutical preparations,“ “religion and medicine,“ “religion,“ “animal,“ “dietary,“ “porcine,“ and “bovine.“ Studies that reported using surveys or questionnaires to examine patient, physician, or religious leader perspective on animal-derived medications published in English between 1990 and 2020 were included. Review articles, opinion pieces, case reports, surveys of persons other than patients, religious leaders, or physicians, and studies published in languages other than English were excluded. Three authors independently reviewed articles to extract information pertaining to perspectives on animal-based medication ingredients. RESULTS: Eight studies meeting the described criteria were found that queried beliefs or knowledge of patients, religious leaders, or physicians regarding medications and medical products of biologic origin. Those studies are described in full in this review. CONCLUSIONS: Knowledge of animal-derived ingredients may help open conversations with patients around spiritual history and cultural competency, particularly for those patients belonging to religious sects with doctrines that define appropriate use of human- or animal-derived products. Further formal study is needed to explore more fully the extent to which religious beliefs may impact selection of animal- or human-derived medications. Guidelines developed from this knowledge may aid in identifying individual patients with whom the discussion may be particularly relevant. More studies are needed to quantify and qualify beliefs regarding animal-derived medication constituents.