Attitudes of members of the German Society for Palliative Medicine toward complementary and alternative medicine for cancer patients

• Published in: Journal of cancer research and clinical oncology Vol. 140; no. 7; pp. 1229 - 1237
• Main Authors: Conrad, A. C., Muenstedt, K., Micke, O., Prott, F. J., Muecke, R., Huebner, J.
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Berlin/Heidelberg Springer Berlin Heidelberg 01.07.2014; Springer Nature B.V
• Subjects: Adult; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Alternative medicine; Attitude of Health Personnel; Attitude surveys; Cancer; Cancer Research; Complementary Therapies - psychology; Female; Germany; Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice; Hematology; Humans; Internal Medicine; Male; Medical personnel; Medicine; Medicine & Public Health; Middle Aged; Neoplasms - therapy; Nurses - psychology; Nurses - statistics & numerical data; Oncology; Original Article – Clinical Oncology; Palliative care; Palliative Care - manpower; Palliative Care - organization & administration; Perception; Physicians - psychology; Physicians - statistics & numerical data; Societies, Medical; Surveys and Questionnaires; Young Adult; Germany; Attitude of professionals; Palliative care; Complementary medicine; Alternative medicine; Cancer
• ISSN: 0171-5216; 1432-1335
• DOI: 10.1007/s00432-014-1656-9

Background A high proportion of cancer patients use complementary and alternative medicine (CAM). In oncology, risks of CAM are side effects and interactions. Objective Our aim was to conduct a survey on professionals in palliative care regarding attitudes toward CAM. Design and subjects An internet-based survey with a standardized questionnaire was sent to all members of the German Society for Palliative Care. Measurements The questionnaire collected data on attitude toward CAM and experiences. Results Six hundred and ninety questionnaires (19 %) were returned (49 % physicians, 35 % nurses, 3 % psychologists). Acceptance of CAM is high (92 % for complementary and 54 % for alternative medicine). Most participants had already been asked on CAM by patients (95 %) and relatives (89 %). Forty-four percent already had used complementary methods and 5 % alternative methods. Only 21 % think themselves adequately informed. Seventy-four percent would use complementary methods in a patient with advanced tumor, and 62 % would use alternative therapy in patients if there was no other therapy. Even from those who are skeptical 45 % would treat a patient with alternative methods. Conclusions In order to inform patients on CAM and to further patients’ autonomy, evidence on benefits and harms of CAM must be provided. As awareness of risks from CAM is low and critical appraisal especially of alternative medicine missing, but interest on information on CAM is high, experts should provide evidence-based recommendations for CAM in palliative care to members of different professions. This could be done by a curriculum focusing on the most often used CAM methods.