aot2022v55i2

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Acta Oncologica Turcica 2022; 55: 139-146142Table 4. Awareness, Sources of information, Concerns and thoughts about complementary andalternative drugsAspectsN(%)AwarenessHave you ever heard of alternative and complementary 184 (77,3)medicine?Sources ofFamily and friends 98(41.2)informationTelevision 73 (30.7)Internet 84 (35.3)Others 14 (5.9)Concerns I don't think it's beneficial 33 (13.9)I believe that it would have a detrimental effect on my 37 (15,5)treatmentUnable to access accurate and reliable information 85 (34,3)Others concerns 194 (81,5)SuggestionsDo you prefer your doctor to provide you information about 144 (60,5)it?Do you prefer to receive alternative therapies under the 30 (12,6)doctor's supervision?Art Therapy Have you ever joined? 16 (6,7%)Would you like to join? 76 (31,9%)Spiritual Support/Care Have you ever received? 38 (16%)Would you like to receive? 115(48,3%)Table 5: Alternative Medicine awareness and usage in patientsParametersAwareness, Usage, N(%) P valueN(%)Gender Male 100 (74,1) 40 (29,6%) 0,121;0,93Female 85 (82,5%) 30 (29,1%)Age <40 year 83 (76,1%) 28 (25,7%) 0,774; 0,45240-60 year 59 (77,6%) 26 (34,2%)>60 year 43 (81,1%) 16 (30,2%)Educational Level Primary education 95 (70,9%) 33 (24,6%) 0,01*; 0,134High school 42 (82,4%) 20(39,2%)University 48 (90,6%) 17(32,1%)Occupation Civil servant 13 (86,7%) 4(26,7%) 0,745; 0,474Private sector 27 (84,4%) 9(28,1%)Worker 24 (70,6%) 9(26,5%)Housewives 36 (76,6%) 12(25,5%)Retired 20 (83,3%) 12(50%)Student 9 (81,8%) 3(27,3%)Not employed/not 56 (74,7%) 21(28%)disclosedPlace of residence City center 105 (82,7) 41 (32,3%) 0,044*;0,467District center 47(75,8%) 15 (24,2%)Village and towns 27(64,3%) 11 (26,2%)The analyses were made by chi-square. *p value<0,05The questionnaire also included questionsabout the patients’ awareness about CAM,sources of information, and concerns. Theanswers given by the patients to thesequestions are summarized in Table 4. Thedistribution of CAM awareness and useaccording to the demographic data of thepatients was evaluated and the results aresummarized in Table 5. A higher rate of CAMuse was observed in those with a low educa-www.actaoncologicaturcica.comCopyright©Ankara Onkoloji Hastanesi
Acta Oncologica Turcica 2022; 55: 139-146143tion level. It was found that those living in theprovincial centers also used these treatmentsat a higher rate.While 16 (6,7%) of the patients stated thatthey participated in the art therapy for patientswith hematological cancer in the hospital, 76(31,9%) stated that they wanted to participate.Again, while 38 (16%) of the patients statedthat they benefited from the spiritual supportservice for patients with hematologicalcancer, 115 (48,3%) stated that they viewedthe spiritual support service positively.DiscussionStudies show that cancer patients use CAMtreatments more frequently[12]. It is morecommon especially in patient groups whohave had their illnesses for a long time andtraditional medical treatment failed[13].Complications due to severe chemotherapeuticdrugs are common in patients withmalignant hematological diseases. Patientscan apply different CAM methods to reducethe discomfort caused by thesecomplications[14].In contrast to higher rates in the literature withabout 30–60% of the oncology patients usingCAM[15], we found CAM use only in 29,41%(70/238) of the patient sample. In anotherstudy, Perlman et al. reported that CAM usewas even higher (75.2%) in patientsdiagnosed with cancer in the USA[16]. Theprevalence of any CAM use in pediatriccancer patients based on 20 articles reportedon 2871 children studied, prevalence ratesranged from 12% to 91%, while 14 articlesreported prevalence rates between 20% and60%[17].The use of CAM in cancer patients may alsobe related to ethnicity[18]. The prevalence ofCAM use in Asian countries appears to behigher than in western countries. For example,the CAM prevalence of use, some studies 61%in Turkey[19], 60% in Palestine[20], 55% inSingapore[21] and 93.4% in China[22].www.actaoncologicaturcica.comAlthough the literature suggests that CAMusers are mostly women and younger, in ourstudy it was observed that there was nodifference in the use of CAM according togender and age groups[23]. While CAM usersin the same study had higher education levels,our study found higher usage rates in patientswith lower education levels[23].It was seen that phytotherapy was widely usedsimilar to the literature[24]. In a studyconducted in Malaysia, the prevalence ofCAM use was 70.2%. The most commonCAM therapies used were bio-basedtreatments (90.2%) containing vitaminsupplements (68.6%) followed by herbs andfolk remedies (58%)[25]. The use of CAMtreatments such as acupuncture andhomeopathy seems to be more popular inwestern societies[26]. In this study conductedin Malaysia, the most common reason forusing CAM was to improve the immunesystem (57%), then heal the underlying cancer(24%), reduce treatment-related side effects(14.0%), and prolong survival (10%)[25].Most of the patients (65%) felt they hadenough information about CAM treatmentsand 94% felt that CAM use did not have anyside effects[25]. In our study, the patientswere not asked questions about why they usedCAM.The patients stated that similar to other studiesin the literature, they obtained the informationabout CAM with their family members andfriends through media products such astelevision and the internet[27]. Gan et al. intheir study, most of the patients (83%) statedthat they received information about CAMtreatments from their family and friends, and11% from the media, including the internet.Most of the patients (65%) agreed that CAMwas effective. Only 2.3% of the total patientsusing CAM thought it to be ineffective[25]. Inour study, while 13.9% of the patients thoughtthat CAM treatments would not be beneficial,15.5% had concerns that they would affecttheir treatment negatively. While 34.3% of theCopyright©Ankara Onkoloji Hastanesi
Page 2 and 3:
Acta Oncologica Turcica 2022EDITORI
Page 4 and 5:
Acta Oncologica Turcica 20222should
Page 6 and 7:
Acta Oncologica Turcica 20224KEYWOR
Page 8 and 9:
Acta Oncologica Turcica 20226found
Page 10 and 11:
Quality of Life Assessment with EOR
Page 12 and 13:
Acta Oncologica Turcica 2022; 55: 7
Page 14 and 15:
Page 17:
Page 20 and 21:
Page 22 and 23:
Page 24 and 25:
Page 26 and 27:
Page 28 and 29: Acta Oncologica Turcica 2022; 55: 8
Page 88: Acta Oncologica Turcica 2022; 55: 1
show all

aot2022v55i2

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?