Ayfer Bayindir Cevik1, Ayse Cil Akinci2, Sevgin Samancioglu Baglama3. 1. Bartın University, Faculty of Health Sciences, Ağdacı Mahallesi, Ağdacı Köyü Yolu, 74110, Merkez/Bartın, Turkey. Electronic address: ayferbayindir@bartin.edu.tr. 2. Istanbul Medeniyet University, Faculty of Health Sciences, Dumlupınar Mahallesi, D-100 Karayolu No:98, 34000, Kadıköy/İstanbul, Turkey. 3. Gaziantep University, Faculty of Health Sciences, Yamaçtepe Mahallesi, 56161. Cd., 27410, Şahinbey/Gaziantep, Turkey.
Abstract
PURPOSE: This study aimed to determine the prevalence and predictors of the use of Complementary and Alternative Medicine (CAM) and to examine the differences between patients who used CAM and those who did not among those who were being treated in oncology clinics in the northern and southern regions of Turkey. In order to collect the relevant data, 288 outpatients receiving chemotherapy were selected to participate in the study. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The research was designed as a descriptive, relational and cross-sectional study. Data was collected by the researchers using a form which had already been developed in the literature. RESULTS: As a result of our study, we found that 33.2% of the patients had stage 4 cancer and 22.9% of them had respiratory system cancer. The most commonly used form of CAM was herbal preparations, which were used by 48.4% and around 31 species of herbs were employed. 59.1% of the patients used CAM to support their conventional treatment. The prevalence of the CAM usage was determined as 32.3%. CONCLUSION: Even though a wide range of different forms of CAM are currently used by oncology patients in the northern and southern regions of Turkey, further cooperation with health professionals is needed to obtain better information about both CAM usage and medical treatment. Better informing patients about how best to use CAM in conjunction with medical treatment is also crucial.
PURPOSE: This study aimed to determine the prevalence and predictors of the use of Complementary and Alternative Medicine (CAM) and to examine the differences between patients who used CAM and those who did not among those who were being treated in oncology clinics in the northern and southern regions of Turkey. In order to collect the relevant data, 288 outpatients receiving chemotherapy were selected to participate in the study. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The research was designed as a descriptive, relational and cross-sectional study. Data was collected by the researchers using a form which had already been developed in the literature. RESULTS: As a result of our study, we found that 33.2% of the patients had stage 4 cancer and 22.9% of them had respiratory system cancer. The most commonly used form of CAM was herbal preparations, which were used by 48.4% and around 31 species of herbs were employed. 59.1% of the patients used CAM to support their conventional treatment. The prevalence of the CAM usage was determined as 32.3%. CONCLUSION: Even though a wide range of different forms of CAM are currently used by oncology patients in the northern and southern regions of Turkey, further cooperation with health professionals is needed to obtain better information about both CAM usage and medical treatment. Better informing patients about how best to use CAM in conjunction with medical treatment is also crucial.