BACKGROUND: Data relating to the use of complementary/alternative medicine (CAM) in cancer patients have been published for a number of European countries. No recent data are available for Austria. AIM: To ascertain the extent of CAM use by cancer patients, what patients' motives are, what methods are used and who the CAM providers are. DESIGN: Self-administered questionnaire; cross-sectional study. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A sample of 231 cancer patients who had consulted the Viennese Cancer League. Chi-square and Mantel-Haenszel tests were used for the statistical evaluation. RESULTS: 27.3% of the cancer patients had received CAM therapy: 33.1% of the female and 20.5% of the male participants (p = 0.045). Those who were below the median of the age categories (53.8 years) had used CAM to a statistically higher degree (35.5% vs. 21.1%; p = 0.023). The most important motives were the enhancement of "nature" and the GPs' recommendation. CAM was administered in 44.4% of cases by the family doctor, in 39.7% by patients themselves, in 6.3% by a hospital doctor, in 6.3% by a lay-practitioner or "non-medical practitioner against payment" and in 4.8% of cases by a practising oncologist. CONCLUSION: From the high percentage of patients who use CAM without consulting a physician or who follow the advice of others, it would seem highly probable that conventional and complementary methods are rarely effectively coordinated. To rectify this we conclude that oncologists and GPs should have a basic knowledge of CAM and address the issue when counselling their cancer patients.
BACKGROUND: Data relating to the use of complementary/alternative medicine (CAM) in cancerpatients have been published for a number of European countries. No recent data are available for Austria. AIM: To ascertain the extent of CAM use by cancerpatients, what patients' motives are, what methods are used and who the CAM providers are. DESIGN: Self-administered questionnaire; cross-sectional study. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A sample of 231 cancerpatients who had consulted the Viennese Cancer League. Chi-square and Mantel-Haenszel tests were used for the statistical evaluation. RESULTS: 27.3% of the cancerpatients had received CAM therapy: 33.1% of the female and 20.5% of the male participants (p = 0.045). Those who were below the median of the age categories (53.8 years) had used CAM to a statistically higher degree (35.5% vs. 21.1%; p = 0.023). The most important motives were the enhancement of "nature" and the GPs' recommendation. CAM was administered in 44.4% of cases by the family doctor, in 39.7% by patients themselves, in 6.3% by a hospital doctor, in 6.3% by a lay-practitioner or "non-medical practitioner against payment" and in 4.8% of cases by a practising oncologist. CONCLUSION: From the high percentage of patients who use CAM without consulting a physician or who follow the advice of others, it would seem highly probable that conventional and complementary methods are rarely effectively coordinated. To rectify this we conclude that oncologists and GPs should have a basic knowledge of CAM and address the issue when counselling their cancerpatients.
Authors: Suzanne C Tough; David W Johnston; Marja J Verhoef; Keith Arthur; Heather Bryant Journal: Altern Ther Health Med Date: 2002 Mar-Apr Impact factor: 1.305
Authors: Catalina Lawsin; Katherine DuHamel; Steven H Itzkowitz; Karen Brown; Helen Lim; Linda Thelemaque; Lina Jandorf Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2007-01-05 Impact factor: 3.603