Cargando…
Introducing a standardized assessment of patients’ interest in and usage of CAM in routine cancer care: chances and risks from patients’ and physicians’ point of view
BACKGROUND: Cancer patients often use complementary and alternative medicine (CAM), however, standardized assessment in clinical routine is missing. The aim of this study was to evaluate a screening questionnaire on CAM usage that was published in the S3 Guideline Complementary Medicine in the Treat...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10645655/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37715831 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00432-023-05182-3 |
_version_ | 1785147398750732288 |
---|---|
author | Shalgouny, M. Bertz-Lepel, J. Fischer v. Weikersthal, L. Herbin, J. Meier-Höfig, M. Mücke, R. Rohe, U. Stauch, T. Stoll, C. Troeltzsch, D. Wittmann, S. Kurz, O. Naumann, R. Huebner, J. |
author_facet | Shalgouny, M. Bertz-Lepel, J. Fischer v. Weikersthal, L. Herbin, J. Meier-Höfig, M. Mücke, R. Rohe, U. Stauch, T. Stoll, C. Troeltzsch, D. Wittmann, S. Kurz, O. Naumann, R. Huebner, J. |
author_sort | Shalgouny, M. |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Cancer patients often use complementary and alternative medicine (CAM), however, standardized assessment in clinical routine is missing. The aim of this study was to evaluate a screening questionnaire on CAM usage that was published in the S3 Guideline Complementary Medicine in the Treatment of Oncological Patients. METHODS: We developed a survey questionnaire to assess the practicability of the guideline questionnaire and communication on CAM between health care providers (HCPs) and patients. We collected 258 guideline questionnaires and 116 survey questionnaires from ten clinics and held twelve semi-structured interviews with HCPs. RESULTS: 85% used at least one of the listed CAM methods, 54 participants (N = 77) never disclosed usage to a physician. The most frequently used CAM methods were physical activity (76.4%) and vitamin D (46.4%). 25.2% used at least one method, that was labeled risky by the guideline. 53.4% did not know of CAM’s risk of interactions and side effects. Introducing the guideline questionnaire in routine cancer care increased the rate of patients talking to an HCP regarding CAM significantly from 35.5 to 87.3%. The HCPs stated positive effects as an initiation of conversation, increased safety within CAM usage and patients feeling thankful and taken seriously. However, due to the limited amount of time available for discussions on CAM, generalized distribution to all patients was not feasible. CONCLUSION: Institutions should focus on implementing standard procedures and resources that help HCPs discuss CAM on a regular basis. HCPs should meet the patient’s demands for CAM counseling and make sure they are equipped professionally. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-10645655 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2023 |
publisher | Springer Berlin Heidelberg |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-106456552023-11-14 Introducing a standardized assessment of patients’ interest in and usage of CAM in routine cancer care: chances and risks from patients’ and physicians’ point of view Shalgouny, M. Bertz-Lepel, J. Fischer v. Weikersthal, L. Herbin, J. Meier-Höfig, M. Mücke, R. Rohe, U. Stauch, T. Stoll, C. Troeltzsch, D. Wittmann, S. Kurz, O. Naumann, R. Huebner, J. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol Research BACKGROUND: Cancer patients often use complementary and alternative medicine (CAM), however, standardized assessment in clinical routine is missing. The aim of this study was to evaluate a screening questionnaire on CAM usage that was published in the S3 Guideline Complementary Medicine in the Treatment of Oncological Patients. METHODS: We developed a survey questionnaire to assess the practicability of the guideline questionnaire and communication on CAM between health care providers (HCPs) and patients. We collected 258 guideline questionnaires and 116 survey questionnaires from ten clinics and held twelve semi-structured interviews with HCPs. RESULTS: 85% used at least one of the listed CAM methods, 54 participants (N = 77) never disclosed usage to a physician. The most frequently used CAM methods were physical activity (76.4%) and vitamin D (46.4%). 25.2% used at least one method, that was labeled risky by the guideline. 53.4% did not know of CAM’s risk of interactions and side effects. Introducing the guideline questionnaire in routine cancer care increased the rate of patients talking to an HCP regarding CAM significantly from 35.5 to 87.3%. The HCPs stated positive effects as an initiation of conversation, increased safety within CAM usage and patients feeling thankful and taken seriously. However, due to the limited amount of time available for discussions on CAM, generalized distribution to all patients was not feasible. CONCLUSION: Institutions should focus on implementing standard procedures and resources that help HCPs discuss CAM on a regular basis. HCPs should meet the patient’s demands for CAM counseling and make sure they are equipped professionally. Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2023-09-16 2023 /pmc/articles/PMC10645655/ /pubmed/37715831 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00432-023-05182-3 Text en © The Author(s) 2023 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . |
spellingShingle | Research Shalgouny, M. Bertz-Lepel, J. Fischer v. Weikersthal, L. Herbin, J. Meier-Höfig, M. Mücke, R. Rohe, U. Stauch, T. Stoll, C. Troeltzsch, D. Wittmann, S. Kurz, O. Naumann, R. Huebner, J. Introducing a standardized assessment of patients’ interest in and usage of CAM in routine cancer care: chances and risks from patients’ and physicians’ point of view |
title | Introducing a standardized assessment of patients’ interest in and usage of CAM in routine cancer care: chances and risks from patients’ and physicians’ point of view |
title_full | Introducing a standardized assessment of patients’ interest in and usage of CAM in routine cancer care: chances and risks from patients’ and physicians’ point of view |
title_fullStr | Introducing a standardized assessment of patients’ interest in and usage of CAM in routine cancer care: chances and risks from patients’ and physicians’ point of view |
title_full_unstemmed | Introducing a standardized assessment of patients’ interest in and usage of CAM in routine cancer care: chances and risks from patients’ and physicians’ point of view |
title_short | Introducing a standardized assessment of patients’ interest in and usage of CAM in routine cancer care: chances and risks from patients’ and physicians’ point of view |
title_sort | introducing a standardized assessment of patients’ interest in and usage of cam in routine cancer care: chances and risks from patients’ and physicians’ point of view |
topic | Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10645655/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37715831 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00432-023-05182-3 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT shalgounym introducingastandardizedassessmentofpatientsinterestinandusageofcaminroutinecancercarechancesandrisksfrompatientsandphysicianspointofview AT bertzlepelj introducingastandardizedassessmentofpatientsinterestinandusageofcaminroutinecancercarechancesandrisksfrompatientsandphysicianspointofview AT fischervweikersthall introducingastandardizedassessmentofpatientsinterestinandusageofcaminroutinecancercarechancesandrisksfrompatientsandphysicianspointofview AT herbinj introducingastandardizedassessmentofpatientsinterestinandusageofcaminroutinecancercarechancesandrisksfrompatientsandphysicianspointofview AT meierhofigm introducingastandardizedassessmentofpatientsinterestinandusageofcaminroutinecancercarechancesandrisksfrompatientsandphysicianspointofview AT mucker introducingastandardizedassessmentofpatientsinterestinandusageofcaminroutinecancercarechancesandrisksfrompatientsandphysicianspointofview AT roheu introducingastandardizedassessmentofpatientsinterestinandusageofcaminroutinecancercarechancesandrisksfrompatientsandphysicianspointofview AT staucht introducingastandardizedassessmentofpatientsinterestinandusageofcaminroutinecancercarechancesandrisksfrompatientsandphysicianspointofview AT stollc introducingastandardizedassessmentofpatientsinterestinandusageofcaminroutinecancercarechancesandrisksfrompatientsandphysicianspointofview AT troeltzschd introducingastandardizedassessmentofpatientsinterestinandusageofcaminroutinecancercarechancesandrisksfrompatientsandphysicianspointofview AT wittmanns introducingastandardizedassessmentofpatientsinterestinandusageofcaminroutinecancercarechancesandrisksfrompatientsandphysicianspointofview AT kurzo introducingastandardizedassessmentofpatientsinterestinandusageofcaminroutinecancercarechancesandrisksfrompatientsandphysicianspointofview AT naumannr introducingastandardizedassessmentofpatientsinterestinandusageofcaminroutinecancercarechancesandrisksfrompatientsandphysicianspointofview AT huebnerj introducingastandardizedassessmentofpatientsinterestinandusageofcaminroutinecancercarechancesandrisksfrompatientsandphysicianspointofview |