Survey of complementary and alternative medicine practitioners regarding cancer management and research.

Office of Cancer Complementary and Alternative Medicine, National Cancer Institute, National Institute of Health, Department of Health and Human Services, Bethesda, MD 20892, USA.
Journal of the Society for Integrative Oncology 02/2009; 7(1):26-34.
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT The primary purpose of this survey was to assess the interest and concerns of a group of cancer complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) practitioners regarding CAM research issues. These issues include the CAM modalities used most often by CAM practitioners in the treatment of cancer patients, cancer CAM practitioners' perceptions of the most promising areas of cancer CAM research, the perceived obstacles to carrying out research objectives in the emerging field of cancer CAM research, the extent of awareness of the National Cancer Institute (NCI) Best Case Series Program, and CAM practitioners' level of interest in research collaboration with CAM researchers. A cross-sectional survey of a convenience sample of cancer CAM practitioners was conducted. One hundred thirty-four respondents completed the survey. About 72% of the respondents were involved in the care of cancer patients, and these were considered the informative respondents. All results were from the informative respondent group. Respondent practitioners provided care using interventions from all seven of the predefined CAM categories. This care was provided to improve both quality of life and survival. Over two-thirds of the respondents rated research in pharmacologic and biologic treatments, alternative medical systems and nutritional therapeutics for cancer treatment, and symptom/side-effect management as high-priority areas. Although no single obstacle to research predominated as the most significant, the most frequently encountered obstacle was lack of awareness of appropriate funding sources (75.4%). More than 83% of respondents expressed some interest in or willingness to establish research collaboration with a cancer researcher. The results from this survey indicate that many cancer CAM practitioners have shared interests, perceived obstacles, and desired research opportunities. Despite a small sample size and lack of a feasible process for random sampling, this survey highlights avenues to promote and support collaborative research. The NCI/Office of Cancer Complementary and Alternative Medicine will continue to respond to the concerns elucidated by the survey by developing strategies for future program opportunities within the NCI.

22 Reads
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Complementary and alternative medicine use is common amongst cancer patients. In many surveys, herbal medicines are amongst the most commonly used group of treatments. Herbal remedies are believed by the general public to be safe, cause less side-effects and less likely to cause dependency. The authors performed a literature review to assess which herbal approaches have had associated cancer case reports and determine which of these have been studied in prospective research. Eighteen case reports of patients having apparent antitumour effects from herbal therapy and 21 case reports of toxic effects of herbs used by cancer patients were identified. and MEDLINE (via PubMed) were searched for each of the herbal products identified in these reports. Clinical trials in cancer populations were identified for green tea extracts or compounds (n=34), phytoestrogens (n=27), mistletoe (n=8), Ganoderma lucidum (n=1), noni (n=1) and Silymarin (n=1). Daikenchuto, PC-SPES, Nyoshinsan/TJ and Saw palmetto have also been studied prospectively. In conclusion, some of the herbs with promising case report findings have undergone prospective clinical investigations but many others have either not yet been explored or the results have not been reported in English. Unconventional therapies, such as herbs and minerals, used in ancient medical traditions have led to the identification of active anticancer agents. Mechanisms to support prospective research with such approaches are discussed.
    European journal of cancer (Oxford, England: 1990) 03/2011; 47(4):508-14. DOI:10.1016/j.ejca.2010.11.018 · 5.42 Impact Factor
  • Source
    A Compendium of Essays on Alternative Therapy, 01/2012; , ISBN: 978-953-307-863-2
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Aim: To investigate complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) use among women with breast cancer in Ireland using a mixed methods modified sequential explanatory design. Methods: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with oncology professionals (n = 20) and CAM practitioners (n = 20) and this was followed by a survey of 406 women with breast cancer using the 'Use of Complementary and Alternative Therapies Survey' questionnaire (UCATS) (Lengacher et al., 2003). Follow up interviews were subsequently undertaken with a subset of this survey sample (n = 31). Results: Over half of those surveyed (55.7%, n = 226) used some form of CAM since diagnosis. The most frequently used therapies were massage, herbal supplements (including herbs with oestrogenic properties), antioxidants, relaxation, counselling, health supplements, reflexology, reiki and support groups. Dietary interventions were used primarily to reduce symptoms and/or side effects while reduction of psychological stress was the primary reason for use of stress-reducing therapies. Most respondents reported that the CAM therapies they had used were helpful. The qualitative data elaborated on and provided clarification of the survey results. Conclusions: Similar to international studies, CAM is popular among women with breast cancer in Ireland. As such, the challenge for Irish oncology professionals is to identify low risk CAM therapies that are likely to benefit patients while educating patients and themselves on therapies which may be of concern. This study clearly illustrates the benefits of using a mixed methods approach to enhance our understanding of a complex clinical issue and thus we recommend that this method should be the method of choice when planning health services research.
    European journal of oncology nursing: the official journal of European Oncology Nursing Society 11/2012; 17(4). DOI:10.1016/j.ejon.2012.10.008 · 1.43 Impact Factor