Loading…

Complementary therapies in cancer patients: prevalence and patients' motives

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. To ascertain the extent of CAM use by cancer patients, what patients' motives are, what methods are used and...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Wiener Klinische Wochenschrift 2003-10, Vol.115 (19-20), p.705-709
Main Authors: Spiegel, Wolfgang, Zidek, Thomas, Vutuc, Christian, Maier, Manfred, Isak, Karin, Micksche, Michael
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
cited_by cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c283t-55a5f5679a7f193eb966eafcd74bbbb76583e7dc4fac976afe5e324760e599c03
cites cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c283t-55a5f5679a7f193eb966eafcd74bbbb76583e7dc4fac976afe5e324760e599c03
container_end_page 709
container_issue 19-20
container_start_page 705
container_title Wiener Klinische Wochenschrift
container_volume 115
creator Spiegel, Wolfgang
Zidek, Thomas
Vutuc, Christian
Maier, Manfred
Isak, Karin
Micksche, Michael
description 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. To ascertain the extent of CAM use by cancer patients, what patients' motives are, what methods are used and who the CAM providers are. Self-administered questionnaire; cross-sectional study. 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. 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. 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.
doi_str_mv 10.1007/BF03040886
format article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_71416804</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>71416804</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c283t-55a5f5679a7f193eb966eafcd74bbbb76583e7dc4fac976afe5e324760e599c03</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpFkEtLA0EQhAdRTIxe_AEyJwVhtSfz2vGmwagQ8KLnpTPbgyv7cmYT8N-7kqB9Kej6KKhi7FzAjQCwtw9LkKAgz80BmwojZGaNFYdsCqBkpuVcT9hJSp8AUisrjtlEKKPBKT1lq0XX9DU11A4Yv_nwQRH7ihKvWu6x9RR5j0M12umO95G2WNP45diWf8YVb7qh2lI6ZUcB60Rne52x9-Xj2-I5W70-vSzuV5mf53LItEYdtLEObRBO0toZQxh8adV6PGt0LsmWXgX0zhoMpEnOlTVA2jkPcsYud7l97L42lIaiqZKnusaWuk0qrFDC5GP5GbvegT52KUUKRR-rZixaCCh-tyv-txvhi33qZt1Q-Y_ux5I_McBp6g</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>71416804</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Complementary therapies in cancer patients: prevalence and patients' motives</title><source>Springer Nature</source><creator>Spiegel, Wolfgang ; Zidek, Thomas ; Vutuc, Christian ; Maier, Manfred ; Isak, Karin ; Micksche, Michael</creator><creatorcontrib>Spiegel, Wolfgang ; Zidek, Thomas ; Vutuc, Christian ; Maier, Manfred ; Isak, Karin ; Micksche, Michael</creatorcontrib><description>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. To ascertain the extent of CAM use by cancer patients, what patients' motives are, what methods are used and who the CAM providers are. Self-administered questionnaire; cross-sectional study. 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. 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. 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.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0043-5325</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1613-7671</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1007/BF03040886</identifier><identifier>PMID: 14650945</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Austria</publisher><subject>Adolescent ; Adult ; Age Factors ; Austria ; Chi-Square Distribution ; Complementary Therapies ; Counseling ; Cross-Sectional Studies ; Data Interpretation, Statistical ; Family Practice ; Female ; Humans ; Male ; Medical Oncology ; Middle Aged ; Motivation ; Neoplasms - therapy ; Prevalence ; Sex Factors ; Surveys and Questionnaires</subject><ispartof>Wiener Klinische Wochenschrift, 2003-10, Vol.115 (19-20), p.705-709</ispartof><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c283t-55a5f5679a7f193eb966eafcd74bbbb76583e7dc4fac976afe5e324760e599c03</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c283t-55a5f5679a7f193eb966eafcd74bbbb76583e7dc4fac976afe5e324760e599c03</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14650945$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Spiegel, Wolfgang</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Zidek, Thomas</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Vutuc, Christian</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Maier, Manfred</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Isak, Karin</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Micksche, Michael</creatorcontrib><title>Complementary therapies in cancer patients: prevalence and patients' motives</title><title>Wiener Klinische Wochenschrift</title><addtitle>Wien Klin Wochenschr</addtitle><description>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. To ascertain the extent of CAM use by cancer patients, what patients' motives are, what methods are used and who the CAM providers are. Self-administered questionnaire; cross-sectional study. 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. 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. 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.</description><subject>Adolescent</subject><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Age Factors</subject><subject>Austria</subject><subject>Chi-Square Distribution</subject><subject>Complementary Therapies</subject><subject>Counseling</subject><subject>Cross-Sectional Studies</subject><subject>Data Interpretation, Statistical</subject><subject>Family Practice</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Medical Oncology</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>Motivation</subject><subject>Neoplasms - therapy</subject><subject>Prevalence</subject><subject>Sex Factors</subject><subject>Surveys and Questionnaires</subject><issn>0043-5325</issn><issn>1613-7671</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2003</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNpFkEtLA0EQhAdRTIxe_AEyJwVhtSfz2vGmwagQ8KLnpTPbgyv7cmYT8N-7kqB9Kej6KKhi7FzAjQCwtw9LkKAgz80BmwojZGaNFYdsCqBkpuVcT9hJSp8AUisrjtlEKKPBKT1lq0XX9DU11A4Yv_nwQRH7ihKvWu6x9RR5j0M12umO95G2WNP45diWf8YVb7qh2lI6ZUcB60Rne52x9-Xj2-I5W70-vSzuV5mf53LItEYdtLEObRBO0toZQxh8adV6PGt0LsmWXgX0zhoMpEnOlTVA2jkPcsYud7l97L42lIaiqZKnusaWuk0qrFDC5GP5GbvegT52KUUKRR-rZixaCCh-tyv-txvhi33qZt1Q-Y_ux5I_McBp6g</recordid><startdate>20031031</startdate><enddate>20031031</enddate><creator>Spiegel, Wolfgang</creator><creator>Zidek, Thomas</creator><creator>Vutuc, Christian</creator><creator>Maier, Manfred</creator><creator>Isak, Karin</creator><creator>Micksche, Michael</creator><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20031031</creationdate><title>Complementary therapies in cancer patients: prevalence and patients' motives</title><author>Spiegel, Wolfgang ; Zidek, Thomas ; Vutuc, Christian ; Maier, Manfred ; Isak, Karin ; Micksche, Michael</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c283t-55a5f5679a7f193eb966eafcd74bbbb76583e7dc4fac976afe5e324760e599c03</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2003</creationdate><topic>Adolescent</topic><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Age Factors</topic><topic>Austria</topic><topic>Chi-Square Distribution</topic><topic>Complementary Therapies</topic><topic>Counseling</topic><topic>Cross-Sectional Studies</topic><topic>Data Interpretation, Statistical</topic><topic>Family Practice</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Medical Oncology</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>Motivation</topic><topic>Neoplasms - therapy</topic><topic>Prevalence</topic><topic>Sex Factors</topic><topic>Surveys and Questionnaires</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Spiegel, Wolfgang</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Zidek, Thomas</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Vutuc, Christian</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Maier, Manfred</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Isak, Karin</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Micksche, Michael</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Wiener Klinische Wochenschrift</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Spiegel, Wolfgang</au><au>Zidek, Thomas</au><au>Vutuc, Christian</au><au>Maier, Manfred</au><au>Isak, Karin</au><au>Micksche, Michael</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Complementary therapies in cancer patients: prevalence and patients' motives</atitle><jtitle>Wiener Klinische Wochenschrift</jtitle><addtitle>Wien Klin Wochenschr</addtitle><date>2003-10-31</date><risdate>2003</risdate><volume>115</volume><issue>19-20</issue><spage>705</spage><epage>709</epage><pages>705-709</pages><issn>0043-5325</issn><eissn>1613-7671</eissn><abstract>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. To ascertain the extent of CAM use by cancer patients, what patients' motives are, what methods are used and who the CAM providers are. Self-administered questionnaire; cross-sectional study. 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. 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. 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.</abstract><cop>Austria</cop><pmid>14650945</pmid><doi>10.1007/BF03040886</doi><tpages>5</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0043-5325
ispartof Wiener Klinische Wochenschrift, 2003-10, Vol.115 (19-20), p.705-709
issn 0043-5325
1613-7671
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_71416804
source Springer Nature
subjects Adolescent
Adult
Age Factors
Austria
Chi-Square Distribution
Complementary Therapies
Counseling
Cross-Sectional Studies
Data Interpretation, Statistical
Family Practice
Female
Humans
Male
Medical Oncology
Middle Aged
Motivation
Neoplasms - therapy
Prevalence
Sex Factors
Surveys and Questionnaires
title Complementary therapies in cancer patients: prevalence and patients' motives
url http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-04T23%3A10%3A47IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Complementary%20therapies%20in%20cancer%20patients:%20prevalence%20and%20patients'%20motives&rft.jtitle=Wiener%20Klinische%20Wochenschrift&rft.au=Spiegel,%20Wolfgang&rft.date=2003-10-31&rft.volume=115&rft.issue=19-20&rft.spage=705&rft.epage=709&rft.pages=705-709&rft.issn=0043-5325&rft.eissn=1613-7671&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007/BF03040886&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E71416804%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c283t-55a5f5679a7f193eb966eafcd74bbbb76583e7dc4fac976afe5e324760e599c03%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=71416804&rft_id=info:pmid/14650945&rfr_iscdi=true