Use of Complementary and Alternative Medicines among Cancer Patients: A Single-Center Study.
Acupuncture Therapy
/ methods
Complementary Therapies
/ methods
Female
France
/ epidemiology
Homeopathy
/ methods
Humans
Hypnosis
/ methods
Male
Massage
/ methods
Medicine, Chinese Traditional
/ methods
Naturopathy
/ methods
Neoplasms
/ epidemiology
Patient Acceptance of Health Care
/ psychology
Patient Satisfaction
Treatment Outcome
Acupuncture
Cancer
Complementary and alternative medicine
Healing touch
Homeopathy
Osteopathy
Journal
Oncology
ISSN: 1423-0232
Titre abrégé: Oncology
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 0135054
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2019
2019
Historique:
received:
08
02
2019
accepted:
14
03
2019
pubmed:
28
5
2019
medline:
16
7
2019
entrez:
28
5
2019
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
It is usual for cancer patients to use complementary and alternative medicines (CAMs) and yet the literature evaluating their efficacy in cancer patients is very limited. The objective of the present study was to report on the nature, frequency of use, and patient-reported outcome of CAMs in a single-center study. All the consecutive patients treated between November 2017 and June 2018 at the Lucien Neuwirth Cancer Institute (France) were screened. Their reasons for using CAMs and their usage habits were collected. Patients evaluated their benefit. Of the 209 patients screened, 200 patients were included. CAMs ranged from osteopathy, homeopathy, acupuncture, healing touch, magnetism, naturopathy, suction cups, Chinese medicine, reflexology, to hypnosis. CAMs were widely used (n = 166, 83%), the first being osteopathy (n = 99, 49.5%), the second homeopathy (n = 78, 39.0%), and finally acupuncture (n = 76, 38.0%). Whatever the CAM, high satisfaction rates were reported (median satisfaction: 61-81%). CAMs were mainly used to prevent/treat side effects of anticancer treatments (81.2% for healing touch), increase well-being (55.4% for naturopathy), improve the immune system (16.9% for homeopathy), and treat cancer (n = 3, 5.1% for homeopathy). Patients could easily consider using CAMs, as up to 50.8% would have accepted a consultation. The reasons for using CAMs differed among patients. They praised CAMs and kept asking for more information although there is limited evidence about their efficacy in the literature. Thus, prospective randomized controlled trials exploring the safety and efficacy of CAMs in cancer patients are needed.
Identifiants
pubmed: 31132779
pii: 000499629
doi: 10.1159/000499629
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
18-25Informations de copyright
© 2019 S. Karger AG, Basel.