Use of Complementary and Alternative Medicine (CAM) as Part of the Oncological Treatment: Survey about Patients' Attitude towards CAM in a University-Based Oncology Center in Germany

• Published in: PloS one 2016-11, Vol.11 (11), p.e0165801-e0165801
• Main Authors: Kessel, Kerstin A, Lettner, Sabrina, Kessel, Carmen, Bier, Henning, Biedermann, Tilo, Friess, Helmut, Herrschbach, Peter, Gschwend, Jürgen E, Meyer, Bernhard, Peschel, Christian, Schmid, Roland, Schwaiger, Markus, Wolff, Klaus-Dietrich, Combs, Stephanie E
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Adolescent; Adult; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Alternative medicine; Antioxidants; Attitude of Health Personnel; Attitude to Health; Biology and Life Sciences; Cancer therapies; Chemotherapy; Clinical trials; Colleges & universities; Complementary Therapies - methods; Computer aided manufacturing; Correlation analysis; Dietary Supplements; Evidence-based medicine; Female; Humans; Immune system; Internal medicine; Internal Medicine - methods; Male; Massage - methods; Medical care utilization; Medical diagnosis; Medicine; Medicine and Health Sciences; Middle Aged; Minerals; Neoplasms - therapy; Oncology; Oncology Service, Hospital; Otolaryngology; Patients; Radiation therapy; Reduction; Surveys; Surveys and Questionnaires; Therapy; Vitamins; Vitamins - therapeutic use; Womens health; Young Adult
• ISSN: 1932-6203; 1932-6203
• DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0165801

To understand if and which patients would be open-minded to Complementary and Alternative Medicine (CAM) use parallel to their oncological treatment. Moreover, we sought to determine which methods are most accepted and which are the primary motivators to use CAM. We developed and anonymously conducted a questionnaire for patients in the oncology center (TU Munich). Questions focus on different CAM methods, previous experiences, and willingness to apply or use CAM when offered in a university-based setting. A total of 171 of 376 patients (37.4% women, 62.0% men, 0.6% unknown) participated. This corresponds to a return rate of 45%. Median age was 64 years (17-87 years). Of all participants, 15.2% used CAM during their oncological therapy; 32.7% have used it in the past. The majority (81.9%) was not using CAM during therapy; 55.5% have not used CAM in the past respectively. The analysis revealed a significant correlation between education and CAM use during therapy (r = 0.18; p = 0.02), and CAM use in the past (r = 0.17; p = 0.04). Of all patients using CAM during therapy, favored methods were food supplements (42.3%), vitamins/minerals (42.3%), massage (34.6%). Motivations are especially the reduction of side effect and stress, the positive effect of certain CAM-treatments on the immune system and tumor therapy. Results showed no difference between women and men. Most patients not having had any experience with CAM complain about the deficiency of information by their treating oncologist (31.4%) as well as missing treatment possibilities (54.3%). Since many patients believe in study results demonstrating the efficacy of CAM, it stresses our task to develop innovative study protocols to investigate the outcomes of certain CAM on symptom reduction or other endpoints. Thus, prospective trials and innovative evidence-based treatment concepts to include CAM into high-end oncology is what patients demand and what a modern oncology center should offer.