Shelly Latte-Naor1, Robert Sidlow2, Lingyun Sun2, Qing S Li2, Jun J Mao2. 1. Integrative Medicine Service, Division of Survivorship and Supportive Care, Bendheim Center for Integrative Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 1429 First Avenue, New York, NY, 10021, USA. lattenas@mskcc.org. 2. Integrative Medicine Service, Division of Survivorship and Supportive Care, Bendheim Center for Integrative Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 1429 First Avenue, New York, NY, 10021, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Cancer patients often use complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) based on recommendations from family. However, the relationship between family endorsement of CAM and the patient's expectation of its benefits has never been quantified. METHODS: Between 2010 and 2011, we conducted a cross-sectional survey study among patients with a diagnosis of cancer recruited from thoracic, breast, and gastrointestinal medical oncology clinics at a single academic cancer center. We performed multivariate linear regression analyses to evaluate the relationship between perceived family endorsement of and expected benefits from CAM, adjusting for covariates. RESULTS: Among the 962 participants, 303 (31.3%) reported family endorsement of CAM use. Younger patients and those who had college or higher education were more likely to report family endorsement (both p < 0.05). Patients with family support had expectation scores that were 15.9 higher than patients without family support (coefficient 15.9, 95% CI 13.5, 18.2, p < 0.001). Participants with family encouragement of CAM use were also more likely to expect CAM to cure their cancer (12 vs. 37%) and prolong their life (24 vs. 61%). These relationships remained highly significant after adjusting for covariates). CONCLUSIONS: Family endorsement of CAM use is strongly associated with patient expectation of its clinical efficacy, including expectations for cure and improved survival. These findings underscore the importance of including family in counseling and education on CAM use in order to achieve realistic patient expectations, maximize benefits, and avoid potential medical adverse effects through herb-drug interactions or rejections of conventional care.
BACKGROUND:Cancerpatients often use complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) based on recommendations from family. However, the relationship between family endorsement of CAM and the patient's expectation of its benefits has never been quantified. METHODS: Between 2010 and 2011, we conducted a cross-sectional survey study among patients with a diagnosis of cancer recruited from thoracic, breast, and gastrointestinal medical oncology clinics at a single academic cancer center. We performed multivariate linear regression analyses to evaluate the relationship between perceived family endorsement of and expected benefits from CAM, adjusting for covariates. RESULTS: Among the 962 participants, 303 (31.3%) reported family endorsement of CAM use. Younger patients and those who had college or higher education were more likely to report family endorsement (both p < 0.05). Patients with family support had expectation scores that were 15.9 higher than patients without family support (coefficient 15.9, 95% CI 13.5, 18.2, p < 0.001). Participants with family encouragement of CAM use were also more likely to expect CAM to cure their cancer (12 vs. 37%) and prolong their life (24 vs. 61%). These relationships remained highly significant after adjusting for covariates). CONCLUSIONS: Family endorsement of CAM use is strongly associated with patient expectation of its clinical efficacy, including expectations for cure and improved survival. These findings underscore the importance of including family in counseling and education on CAM use in order to achieve realistic patient expectations, maximize benefits, and avoid potential medical adverse effects through herb-drug interactions or rejections of conventional care.
Entities:
Keywords:
Alternative; CAM; Cancer; Complementary; Family support
Authors: Julienne E Bower; Alexandra D Crosswell; Annette L Stanton; Catherine M Crespi; Diana Winston; Jesusa Arevalo; Jeffrey Ma; Steve W Cole; Patricia A Ganz Journal: Cancer Date: 2014-12-23 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Markus Horneber; Gerd van Ackeren; Felix Fischer; Herbert Kappauf; Josef Birkmann Journal: Integr Cancer Ther Date: 2018-10-23 Impact factor: 3.279