Skip to main content

Intervention fidelity: aspects of complementary and alternative medicine research

Authors: Wyatt Gwen, Sikorskii Alla, Rahbar Mohammad Hossein, Victorson David, Adams LoraJournal: Cancer nursingPublished: January 1, 2010DOI: 10.1097/NCC.0b013e3181d0b4b7
Q1 JournalSJR: 1h-index: 89SCImago
Strong EvidenceRandomized Controlled Trialn=318 participants

In Plain Language: cancer pain, explained

The Treatment Fidelity Workgroup (TFW) established by the National Institutes of Health provides a 5-point structure for intervention fidelity: dosing, interventionists' consistency, intervention delivery, receipt, and enactment of the intervention. Using our reflexology trial, we apply the first 3 points. Study objectives were to (1) evaluate key dosage dimensions associated with complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) research, (2) evaluate approaches to interventionists' consistency of delivery of CAM protocols, and (3) evaluate and discuss data that reflect CAM intervention fidelity. Women with late-stage breast cancer (N = 318) were randomly assigned to either 4 weeks of reflexology, placebo, or standard care. Dosing consists of 3 dimensions: frequency (4 sessions), duration (30 minutes), and interval between sessions (5-9 days). Interventionist consistency revealed more than a 90% accuracy rate in following the protocol; 84% and 89% completion rate of the 4 sessions in the reflexology and placebo groups, respectively; and no differences in attrition after randomization between reflexology and placebo groups (17% and 15%, respectively). Intervention delivery, examined through debriefing data, indicated a significantly higher rate of correct guesses on group assignment in the reflexology group as compared with the placebo (82% vs 46%, P = .0002). This study points out the relevance of dosing, interventionists' consistency, and delivery data within a CAM clinical trial, as well as the challenges of blinding. Monitoring intervention fidelity by using the key areas identified by the TFW ensures that findings from a clinical trial are meaningful and have the potential to be translated to clinical practice.

Key Findings: what this randomised trial found about cancer pain

  • ✓The reflexology intervention was standardized with specific dosing parameters: 4 sessions of 30 minutes each with 5-9 day intervals between sessions.
  • ✓Interventionists demonstrated more than 90% accuracy in protocol adherence, with 84-89% of participants completing all 4 reflexology sessions.
  • ✓The National Institutes of Health's 5-point treatment fidelity framework (dosing, interventionists' consistency, intervention delivery, receipt, and enactment) provides a structured approach for evaluating complementary and alternative medicine research quality.

What This Means for You

This study shows reflexology treatments can be reliably delivered with consistency, though the noticeable effects during treatment may make it difficult to maintain blinding in research studies.

What This Means for Practitioners

Maintaining strict adherence to standardized reflexology protocols is achievable and important for research credibility, and practitioners should be aware that distinctive sensations from reflexology may be recognizable to clients.

Study Design: how this randomised trial was run

Sample Size
318 participants
Read Full Paper↗

Cancer pain: common questions

What does this study say about cancer pain?

This study shows reflexology treatments can be reliably delivered with consistency, though the noticeable effects during treatment may make it difficult to maintain blinding in research studies.

What did this study find?

The reflexology intervention was standardized with specific dosing parameters: 4 sessions of 30 minutes each with 5-9 day intervals between sessions. Interventionists demonstrated more than 90% accuracy in protocol adherence, with 84-89% of participants completing all 4 reflexology sessions. The National Institutes of Health's 5-point treatment fidelity framework (dosing, interventionists' consistency, intervention delivery, receipt, and enactment) provides a structured approach for evaluating complementary and alternative medicine research quality.

How strong is this evidence?

This is a randomised trial and we rate its evidence strong. It covers 318 participants. It was published in Cancer nursing, a Q1 journal. This study is indexed here for context; it did not test reflexology itself.

Related Research

Looking for a reflexologist?

Find practitioners who can help with the conditions studied in this research.

Find a Reflexologist