Complementary therapies in cancer: Patients’ views on their purposes and value pre and post receipt of complementary therapy—A multi-centre case study

Potential factors that influence usage of complementary and alternative medicine worldwide: a systematic review

OBJECTIVES

To determine similarities and differences in the reasons for using or not using complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) amongst general and condition-specific populations, and amongst populations in each region of the globe.

METHODS

A literature search was performed on Pubmed, ScienceDirect and EMBASE.

KEYWORDS

'herbal medicine' OR 'herbal and dietary supplement' OR 'complementary and alternative medicine' AND 'reason' OR 'attitude'. Quantitative or qualitative original articles in English, published between 2003 and 2018 were reviewed. Conference proceedings, pilot studies, protocols, letters, and reviews were excluded. Papers were appraised using valid tools and a 'risk of bias' assessment was also performed. Thematic analysis was conducted. Reasons were coded in each paper, then codes were grouped into categories. If several categories reported similar reasons, these were combined into a theme. Themes were then analysed using χ2 tests to identify the main factors related to reasons for CAM usage.

RESULTS

231 publications were included. Reasons for CAM use amongst general and condition-specific populations were similar. The top three reasons for CAM use were: (1) having an expectation of benefits of CAM (84% of publications), (2) dissatisfaction with conventional medicine (37%) and (3) the perceived safety of CAM (37%). Internal health locus of control as an influencing factor was more likely to be reported in Western populations, whereas the social networks was a common factor amongst Asian populations (p < 0.05). Affordability, easy access to CAM and tradition were significant factors amongst African populations (p < 0.05). Negative attitudes towards CAM and satisfaction with conventional medicine (CM) were the main reasons for non-use (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Dissatisfaction with CM and positive attitudes toward CAM, motivate people to use CAM. In contrast, satisfaction with CM and negative attitudes towards CAM are the main reasons for non-use.

A Systematic Review of the Safety and Effect of Neurofeedback on Fatigue and Cognition

BACKGROUND

Many cancer survivors continue to experience ongoing symptoms, such as fatigue and cognitive impairment, which are poorly managed and have few effective, evidence-based treatment options. Neurofeedback is a noninvasive, drug-free form of brain training that may alleviate long-term symptoms reported by cancer patients.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this systematic review of the literature was to describe the effectiveness and safety of neurofeedback for managing fatigue and cognitive impairment.

METHODS

A systematic review of the literature was conducted using Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) methodology. A comprehensive search of 5 databases was conducted: Medline, CINAHL, AMED, PsycInfo, and Embase. Randomized and nonrandomized controlled trials, controlled before and after studies, cohort, case control studies, and descriptive studies were included in this review.

RESULTS

Twenty-seven relevant studies were included in the critical appraisals. The quality of most studies was poor to moderate based on the JBI critical appraisal checklists. Seventeen studies were deemed of sufficient quality to be included in the review: 10 experimental studies and 7 descriptive studies. Of these, only 2 were rated as high-quality studies and the remaining were rated as moderate quality. All 17 included studies reported positive results for at least one fatigue or cognitive outcome in a variety of populations, including 1 study with breast cancer survivors. Neurofeedback interventions were well tolerated with only 3 studies reporting any side effects.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite issues with methodological quality, the overall positive findings and few reported side effects suggest neurofeedback could be helpful in alleviating fatigue and cognitive impairment. Currently, there is insufficient evidence that neurofeedback is an effective therapy for management of these symptoms in cancer survivors, however, these promising results support the need for further research with this patient population. More information about which neurofeedback technologies, approaches, and protocols could be successfully used with cancer survivors and with minimal side effects is needed. This research will have significance to nurses and physicians in oncology and primary care settings who provide follow-up care and counseling to cancer survivors experiencing debilitating symptoms in order to provide information and education related to evidence-based therapy options.

Patient-centered care in cancer treatment programs: the future of integrative oncology through psychoeducation

ABSTRACT 

The reciprocal relationship between the mind and body has been a neglected process for improving the psychosocial care of cancer patients. Emotions form an important link between the mind and body. They play a fundamental role in the cognitive functions of decision-making and symptom control. Recognizing this relationship is important for integrative oncology. We define psychoeducation as the teaching of self-evaluation and self-regulation of the mind–body process. A gap exists between research evidence and implementation into clinical practice. The patients’ search for self-empowerment through the pursuit of complementary therapies may be a surrogate for inadequate psychoeducation. Integrative oncology programs should implement psychoeducation that helps patients to improve both emotional and cognitive intelligence, enabling them to better negotiate cancer treatment systems.