Research Article

Testing the Traditional Chinese Medicine Consultation Model for Adherence in Complementary and Alternative Medicine

Table 9

Spearman correlation coefficients and values for each item by the adherence type.

ItemRho for overall adherence
( value)
(number of participants: 101)
Rho for appointment adherence
( value)
(number of participants: 92)
Rho for lifestyle advice adherence
( value)
(number of participants: 87)
Rho for remedy adherence
( value)
(number of participants: 49)

Patients feeling cared for “Showing care and compassion”0.237 (0.017)0.251 (0.016)0.164 (0.129)0.258 (0.074)

Patients feeling comfortable0.108 (0.281)0.154 (0.143)0.102 (0.347)0.199 (0.171)
“Making you feel at ease”

Opening patients up about themselves0.346 (<0.001)0.296 (0.004)0.275 (0.010)0.462 (0.001)
“I am comfortable talking to my therapist about my health problem”

Setting up a relaxing environment0.018 (0.857)−0.060 (0.569)−0.050 (0.646)0.237 (0.101)
“The clinic has a relaxing atmosphere”

Providing warmth physically and emotionally0.108 (0.281)0.154 (0.143)0.102 (0.347)0.199 (0.171)
“Making you feel at ease”

Welcoming0.108 (0.281)0.154 (0.143)0.102 (0.347)0.199 (0.171)
“Making you feel at ease”

Patients feeling valued as individuals0.174 (0.082)0.211 (0.043)0.164 (0.130)0.294 (0.040)
“Being interested in you as a whole person”

Assessing and treating holistically0.174 (0.082)0.211 (0.043)0.164 (0.130)0.294 (0.040)
“Being interested in you as a whole person”

Tailoring treatment0.274 (0.006)0.268 (0.010)0.309 (0.004)0.389 (0.006)
“My therapist tailors my treatment to be most suitable for me”

Checking treatment0.364 (<0.001)0.352 (0.001)0.285 (0.007)0.388 (0.006)
“My therapist checks my treatment to make sure it is safe and effective”

Patients feeling understood0.191 (0.056)0.214 (0.040)0.225 (0.037)0.203 (0.161)
“Fully understanding your concerns”

Communicating well0.053 (0.598)0.153 (0.146)0.070 (0.519)0.091 (0.533)
(i) Listening
“Really listening”

Empathising0.251 (0.011)0.198 (0.059)0.251 (0.019)0.279 (0.052)
CARE Measure summary score

Empathising0.326 (0.001)0.230 (0.028)0.268 (0.012)0.243 (0.092)
(i) Taking concerns seriously
“My therapist is interested when I talk about my health problem”

Empathising0.332 (0.001)0.280 (0.007)0.400 (<0.001)0.161 (0.269)
(i) Touching appropriately
“My therapist shies away from physical contact”

Patients feeling known0.174 (0.082)0.211 (0.043)0.164 (0.130)0.294 (0.040)
“Being interested in you as a whole person”

Presenting in a manner suited to the patient1038.000 (0.138) (number of participants in each group: 43 versus 58)998.000 (0.704) (number of participants in each group: 40 versus 52)695.000 (0.038) (number of participants in each group: 37 versus 50)313.500 (0.672) (number of participants in each group: 21 versus 28)
(i) Funny
“My therapist is funny” (Mann–Whitney U ( value))

Presenting in a manner suited to the patient286.500 (0.117) (number of participants in each group: 92 versus 9)261.000 (0.232) (number of participants in each group: 84 versus 8)161.500 (0.017) (number of participants in each group: 79 versus 8)69.000 (0.469) (number of participants in each group: 45 versus 4)
(i) Confident
“My therapist is confident” (Mann–Whitney U ( value))

Presenting in a manner suited to the patient102.000 (0.113) (number of participants in each group: 97 versus 4)101.000 (0.159) (number of participants in each group: 88 versus 4)86.500 (0.109 (number of participants in each group: 83 versus 4)44.500 (0.900) (number of participants in each group: 47 versus 2)
(i) Calm
“My therapist is calm” (Mann–Whitney U ( value))

Presenting in a manner suited to the patient0.403 (<0.001)0.291 (0.005)0.321 (0.002)0.372 (0.009)
(i) Enthusiastic
“Being positive”

Patients feeling supported in the management of their health0.357 (<0.001)0.352 (0.001)0.299 (0.005)0.437 (0.002)
“My therapist wants to help me with my health problem”
Example: making a plan of action (not part of the model)0.332 (0.001)0.226 (0.031)0.283 (0.008)0.226 (0.118)
“Making a plan of action with you”

Reassuring0.232 (0.020)0.232 (0.026)0.215 (0.045)0.285 (0.047)
“My therapist reassures me”

Educating
(i) Explaining in a way that makes sense to the patient (3 items)0.144 (0.149)0.050 (0.634)0.126 (0.247)0.381 (0.007)
“Explaining things clearly”0.426 (<0.001)0.422 (<0.001)0.367 (<0.001)0.386 (0.006)
“When my therapist talks about my health problem, it does not make sense to me” (reverse item)0.462 (<0.001)0.393 (<0.001)0.420 (<0.001)0.352 (0.013)
“My therapist provides explanations of my treatment that make sense to me”0.093 (0.354)−0.001 (0.990)0.168 (0.119)−0.009 (0.951)

Educating
(i) Giving a lot of multilevel advice, self-help, or homework
“My therapist offers advice beyond the immediate health problem”

Helping as much as possible0.357 (<0.001)0.352 (0.001)0.299 (0.005)0.437 (0.002)
“My therapist wants to help me with my health problem”

Helping as much as possible0.340 (<0.001)0.351 (0.001)0.337 (0.001)0.369 (0.009)
(i) Knowing limits
“My therapist has, at times, overstepped what I think are his or her limits”

Helping as much as possible0.071 (0.478)0.182 (0.082)0.049 (0.650)0.157 (0.282)
(i) Giving time
“Letting you tell your “story”

Helping as much as possible1009.000 (0.785) (number of participants in each group: 26 versus 75)832.500 (0.686) (number of participants in each group: 23 versus 69)681.000 (0.454) (number of participants in each group: 24 versus 63)195.500 (0.694) (number of participants in each group: 9 versus 40)
(i) Adopting role required, for example, technician (not part of the model)
“My therapist is a technician”(Mann–Whitney U (value))

Helping as much as possible913.500 (0.011) (number of participants in each group: 52 versus 49)875.500 (0.102) (number of participants in each group: 47 versus 45)580.500 (0.002) (number of participants in each group: 49 versus 38)239.000 (0.310) (number of participants in each group: 30 versus 19)
(i) Adopting the role required, for example, a wise healer (not part of the model)
“My therapist is a wise healer” (Mann–Whitney U ( value))

Helping as much as possible853.500 (0.013) (number of participants in each group: 38 versus 63)853.000 (0.115) (number of participants in each group: 38 versus 54)687.000 (0.050) (number of participants in each group: 34 versus 53)259.000 (0.378) (number of participants in each group: 24 versus 25)
(i) Adopting the role required, for example, like a friend
“My therapist is like a friend”(Mann–Whitney U ( value))

Helping as much as possible32.500 (0.015) (number of participants in each group: 98 versus 3)30.500 (0.017) (number of participants in each group: 89 versus 3)66.500 (0.176) (number of participants in each group: 84 versus 3)9.000 (0.408) (number of participants in each group: 48 versus 1)
(i) Adopting the role required, for example, a professional (not part of the model)
“My therapist is a professional” (Mann–Whitney U ( value))

Imparting responsibility for health0.255 (0.010)0.156 (0.137)0.219 (0.041)0.319 (0.025)
“Helping you to take control”

Patients trusting in their practitioner0.353 (<0.001)0.329 (0.001)0.275 (0.010)0.469 (0.001)
“I trust my therapist”

Example trait: well qualified (not part of the model)0.341 (<0.001)0.324 (0.002)0.218 (0.042)0.479 (<0.001)
“I have confidence that my therapist is well qualified to treat me”

Example trait: competent (not part of the model)0.372 (<0.001)0.346 (0.001)0.255 (0.017)0.436 (0.002)
“My therapist is a competent provider of my treatment”

Example trait: expert (not part of the model)0.314 (0.001)0.272 (0.009)0.185 (0.087)0.265 (0.066)
“My therapist is an expert in my treatment”

Example trait: knows how to treat the patient’s health problem (not part of the model)0.333 (0.001)0.286 (0.006)0.264 (0.014)0.237 (0.101)
“My therapist knows how to treat my health problem”

Example trait: strong reputation0.121 (0.229)0.113 (0.284)0.183 (0.090)0.124 (0.397)
“My therapist has a strong reputation”

Example trait: a good person283.000 (0.107) (number of participants in each group: 92 versus 9)239.000 (0.322) (number of participants in each group: 85 versus 7)243.000 (0.543) (number of participants in each group: 80 versus 7)89.500 (0.510) (number of participants in each group: 44 versus 5)
“My therapist is a good person” (Mann–Whitney U ( value))

Example trait: of the same culture as the patient852.500 (0.007) (number of participants in each group: 41 versus 60)707.500 (0.005) (number of participants in each group: 37 versus 55)672.500 (0.031) (number of participants in each group: 35 versus 52)274.000 (0.964) (number of participants in each group: 17 versus 32)
“My therapist is of the same culture” (Mann–Whitney U ( value))

Example trait: of the same gender as the patient1209.000 (0.831) (number of participants in each group: 59 versus 42)933.000 (0.361) (number of participants in each group: 53 versus 39)775.000 (0.160) (number of participants in each group: 49 versus 38)369.000 (0.132) (number of participants in each group: 26 versus 23)
“My therapist is of the same gender”(Mann–Whitney U ( value))

Patients having a therapeutic relationship with their practitioner0.309 (0.002)0.216 (0.039)0.226 (0.036)0.377 (0.008)
“I have a good relationship with my therapist”

Sharing the same views and values on health0.282 (0.004)0.260 (0.012)0.333 (0.002)0.232 (0.109)
“My therapist shares the same values as me“

Perception of therapist0.483 (<0.001)0.434 (<0.001)0.401 (<0.001)0.371 (0.009)
Summary score (not part of the model)

indicates a statistically significant association at .