Development and Validation of an Instrument for Measuring Attitudes and Beliefs about Complementary and Alternative Medicine (CAM) Use among Cancer Patients

Department of Family Medicine and Community Health, University of Pennsylvania Health System, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA.
Evidence-based Complementary and Alternative Medicine (Impact Factor: 1.88). 05/2012; 2012(13):798098. DOI: 10.1155/2012/798098
Source: PubMed


Despite cancer patients' extensive use of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM), validated instruments to measure attitudes, and beliefs predictive of CAM use are lacking. We aimed at developing and validating an instrument, attitudes and beliefs about CAM (ABCAM). The 15-item instrument was developed using the theory of planned behavior (TPB) as a framework. The literature review, qualitative interviews, expert content review, and cognitive interviews were used to develop the instrument, which was then administered to 317 outpatient oncology patients. The ABCAM was best represented as a 3-factor structure: expected benefits, perceived barriers, and subjective norms related to CAM use by cancer patients. These domains had Eigenvalues of 4.79, 2.37, and 1.43, and together explained over 57.2% of the variance. The 4-item expected benefits, 7-item perceived barriers, and 4-item subjective norms domain scores, each had an acceptable internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha) of 0.91, 0.76, and 0.75, respectively. As expected, CAM users had higher expected benefits, lower perceived barriers, and more positive subjective norms (all P < 0.001) than those who did not use CAM. Our study provides the initial evidence that the ABCAM instrument produced reliable and valid scores that measured attitudes and beliefs related to CAM use among cancer patients.

  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background. Mixed methods research uses qualitative and quantitative methods together in a single study or a series of related studies. Objectives. To review the prevalence and quality of mixed methods studies in complementary medicine. Methods. All studies published in the top 10 integrative and complementary medicine journals in 2012 were screened. The quality of mixed methods studies was appraised using a published tool designed for mixed methods studies. Results. 4% of papers (95 out of 2349) reported mixed methods studies, 80 of which met criteria for applying the quality appraisal tool. The most popular formal mixed methods design was triangulation (used by 74% of studies), followed by embedded (14%), sequential explanatory (8%), and finally sequential exploratory (5%). Quantitative components were generally of higher quality than qualitative components; when quantitative components involved RCTs they were of particularly high quality. Common methodological limitations were identified. Most strikingly, none of the 80 mixed methods studies addressed the philosophical tensions inherent in mixing qualitative and quantitative methods. Conclusions and Implications. The quality of mixed methods research in CAM can be enhanced by addressing philosophical tensions and improving reporting of (a) analytic methods and reflexivity (in qualitative components) and (b) sampling and recruitment-related procedures (in all components).
    Full-text · Article · Dec 2013 · Evidence-based Complementary and Alternative Medicine
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) incorporates treatments used by cancer survivors in an attempt to improve their quality of life. Although population studies have identified factors associated with its use, to the best of the authors knowledge, assessment of why patients use CAM or the barriers against its use have not been examined to date. The authors conducted a cross-sectional survey study in the thoracic, breast, and gastrointestinal medical oncology clinics at an academic cancer center. Clinical and demographic variables were collected by self-report and chart abstraction. Attitudes and beliefs were measured using the validated Attitudes and Beliefs about CAM (ABCAM) instrument. This instrument divides attitudes and beliefs into 3 domains: expected benefits, perceived barriers, and subjective norms. Among 969 participants (response rate, 82.7%) surveyed between June 2010 and September 2011, patient age ≤65 years, female sex, and college education were associated with a significantly greater expected benefit from CAM (P<.0001 for all). Nonwhite patients reported more perceived barriers to CAM use compared with white patients (P<.0001), but had a similar degree of expected benefit (P = .76). In a multivariate logistic regression analysis, all domains of the ABCAM instrument were found to be significantly associated with CAM use (P<.01 for all) among patients with cancer. Attitudes and beliefs regarding CAM explained much more variance in CAM use than clinical and demographic variables alone. Attitudes and beliefs varied by key clinical and demographic characteristics, and predicted CAM use. By developing CAM programs based upon attitudes and beliefs, barriers among underserved patient populations may be removed and more patient centered care may be provided. Cancer 2015. © 2015 American Cancer Society. © 2015 American Cancer Society.
    No preview · Article · May 2015 · Cancer
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Objective To investigate the prevalence and determinants of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) interest level among a racially diverse cohort of inner city veterans who receive primary care at the VA Medical Center.DesignCross-sectional survey studySettingPhiladelphia VA Medical CenterSubjectsPrimary care patients (n = 258)Methods Interest in CAM was measured using a single item question. Patient treatment beliefs were assessed using validated instruments. We evaluated factors associated with patient interest in CAM using a multivariate logistic regression model.ResultsIn this sample of 258 inner city primary care VA patients, interest in CAM was high 80% (n = 206). Interest in CAM was strongly associated with African American race [adjusted odds ratio (AOR) 2.19, 95% Confidence Interval (CI) 1.05-4.60, P = 0.037], higher levels of education (AOR 4.33, 95% CI 1.80-10.40, P = 0.001), presence of moderate to severe pain (AOR 2.02, 95% CI 1.02-4.78, P = 0.043), and expectations of benefit from CAM use (AOR 1.21, 95% CI 1.06-1.36, P = 0.004).ConclusionsCAM approaches have broad appeal within this inner city cohort of veterans, particularly among African Americans, those that experience pain and those that expect greater benefit from CAM. These findings may inform the development of patient-centered integrative pain management for veterans.
    No preview · Article · Jun 2015 · Pain Medicine
Show more