Scholarlink

Background <p>In South Korea, collaborative practice between conventional medicine (CM) and traditional Korean medicine (CPCK) is expanding under consumer demand and supportive national policies in line with global trend. Yet studies of Korean Medicine Doctors’ (KMDs) experiences of CPCK, especially in relation to policy and institutional contexts, remain scarce. This study reconstructed KMDs’ hospital-based CPCK experiences, focusing on processes across institutions, perceived barriers and challenges that disrupt seamless operation, and strategies adopted to address them.</p> Methods <p>Through literature review and team discussions, a framework for data collection and analysis was pre-developed with three domains: CPCK process, barriers and challenges, and actions to address them. Focus groups and in-depth interviews were conducted with 26 licensed KMDs engaged in patient care at 10 South Korean hospitals (university-affiliated, public, and private). Participants (residents and specialists in internal medicine, rehabilitation, acupuncture and moxibustion, gynecology, neuropsychiatry, and other clinical fields) each had ≥ 1 month of direct CPCK experience. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim, and analyzed using qualitative content analysis; two researchers iteratively coded the data guided by the three domains.</p> Results <p>CPCK typically relied on referral-based consultations. Collaboration initially centered on stroke and musculoskeletal disorders but has gradually expanded. KMDs frequently sought CM collaboration for inpatient prescription renewal and diagnostic testing, whereas Western medical doctor (WMD)-to-KMD requests were infrequent. From KMDs’ accounts of barriers and coping strategies, three themes emerged: insufficient institutional support for seamless CPCK, physician indifference toward collaboration with KMDs, and fragmented CPCK owing to limitations in national policy. Participants regarded CPCK as promising but reported fatigue from limited support and negative attitudes among WMDs, with burdens falling disproportionately on KMDs.</p> Conclusion <p>Qualitative content analysis of KMD interviews at Korean hospitals explored CPCK processes, identified barriers and facilitators, and examined KMDs’ perspectives and attitudes toward collaboration. KMD-only sampling limits generalizability. Nonetheless, by detailing day-to-day CPCK procedures and challenges, the study highlights that true partnership and preservation of professional identity remain major concerns for KMDs striving to advance CPCK. Future studies should include diverse participants, test CPCK protocols, and address broader policy measures for sustainable integrative care.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Exploring collaborative practice between conventional and Korean medicine: a qualitative study of Korean medicine doctors’ experienced barriers and strategies

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2025年11月3日

查看全文
  • Dasol Park,
  • Moon Joo Cheong,
  • Hyungsun Jun,
  • Jungah Uhm,
  • Inae Youn,
  • Jungtae Leem

摘要

Background

In South Korea, collaborative practice between conventional medicine (CM) and traditional Korean medicine (CPCK) is expanding under consumer demand and supportive national policies in line with global trend. Yet studies of Korean Medicine Doctors’ (KMDs) experiences of CPCK, especially in relation to policy and institutional contexts, remain scarce. This study reconstructed KMDs’ hospital-based CPCK experiences, focusing on processes across institutions, perceived barriers and challenges that disrupt seamless operation, and strategies adopted to address them.

Methods

Through literature review and team discussions, a framework for data collection and analysis was pre-developed with three domains: CPCK process, barriers and challenges, and actions to address them. Focus groups and in-depth interviews were conducted with 26 licensed KMDs engaged in patient care at 10 South Korean hospitals (university-affiliated, public, and private). Participants (residents and specialists in internal medicine, rehabilitation, acupuncture and moxibustion, gynecology, neuropsychiatry, and other clinical fields) each had ≥ 1 month of direct CPCK experience. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim, and analyzed using qualitative content analysis; two researchers iteratively coded the data guided by the three domains.

Results

CPCK typically relied on referral-based consultations. Collaboration initially centered on stroke and musculoskeletal disorders but has gradually expanded. KMDs frequently sought CM collaboration for inpatient prescription renewal and diagnostic testing, whereas Western medical doctor (WMD)-to-KMD requests were infrequent. From KMDs’ accounts of barriers and coping strategies, three themes emerged: insufficient institutional support for seamless CPCK, physician indifference toward collaboration with KMDs, and fragmented CPCK owing to limitations in national policy. Participants regarded CPCK as promising but reported fatigue from limited support and negative attitudes among WMDs, with burdens falling disproportionately on KMDs.

Conclusion

Qualitative content analysis of KMD interviews at Korean hospitals explored CPCK processes, identified barriers and facilitators, and examined KMDs’ perspectives and attitudes toward collaboration. KMD-only sampling limits generalizability. Nonetheless, by detailing day-to-day CPCK procedures and challenges, the study highlights that true partnership and preservation of professional identity remain major concerns for KMDs striving to advance CPCK. Future studies should include diverse participants, test CPCK protocols, and address broader policy measures for sustainable integrative care.