Jeremy Y Ng1, Hosna Sahak2, Stephanie Ka Ching Lau2. 1. Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence, and Impact, Faculty of Health Sciences, Michael G. DeGroote Centre for Learning and Discovery, McMaster University, Room 2112, 1280 Main Street West, Hamilton, Ontario, L8S 4K1, Canada. ngjy2@mcmaster.ca. 2. Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence, and Impact, Faculty of Health Sciences, Michael G. DeGroote Centre for Learning and Discovery, McMaster University, Room 2112, 1280 Main Street West, Hamilton, Ontario, L8S 4K1, Canada.
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Up to 80% of patients with breast cancer are reported to use complementary and alternative medicine (CAM). Despite this high prevalence, many healthcare providers have little knowledge and education surrounding this topic and may be inadequately prepared to discuss such therapies with their patients. Given this knowledge gap, the purpose of this study was to systematically identify the quantity and assess the quality of CAM recommendations in clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) for the treatment and/or management of breast cancer. RECENT FINDINGS: Thirty-four CPGs were deemed eligible, 5 of which mentioned CAM, and 4 of which made CAM recommendations. Eligible CPGs containing CAM recommendations were assessed with the AGREE II instrument. Scaled domain percentages from highest to lowest were (% overall, % CAM) as follows: scope and purpose (100.0%, 100.0%), editorial independence (100.0%, 100.0%), clarity of presentation (97.2%, 80.6%), rigour of development (80.2%, 80.2%), stakeholder involvement (88.9%, 77.8%), and applicability (58.3%, 58.3%). CPGs with favourable scores may provide practitioners with guidance on safe and effective use of CAM therapies. A need exists to improve the quality of CAM recommendations in CPGs.
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Up to 80% of patients with breast cancer are reported to use complementary and alternative medicine (CAM). Despite this high prevalence, many healthcare providers have little knowledge and education surrounding this topic and may be inadequately prepared to discuss such therapies with their patients. Given this knowledge gap, the purpose of this study was to systematically identify the quantity and assess the quality of CAM recommendations in clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) for the treatment and/or management of breast cancer. RECENT FINDINGS: Thirty-four CPGs were deemed eligible, 5 of which mentioned CAM, and 4 of which made CAM recommendations. Eligible CPGs containing CAM recommendations were assessed with the AGREE II instrument. Scaled domain percentages from highest to lowest were (% overall, % CAM) as follows: scope and purpose (100.0%, 100.0%), editorial independence (100.0%, 100.0%), clarity of presentation (97.2%, 80.6%), rigour of development (80.2%, 80.2%), stakeholder involvement (88.9%, 77.8%), and applicability (58.3%, 58.3%). CPGs with favourable scores may provide practitioners with guidance on safe and effective use of CAM therapies. A need exists to improve the quality of CAM recommendations in CPGs.
Authors: Juliann Saquib; Lisa Madlensky; Sheila Kealey; Nazmus Saquib; Loki Natarajan; Vicky A Newman; Ruth E Patterson; John P Pierce Journal: Integr Cancer Ther Date: 2011-03-07 Impact factor: 3.279