Cancer Res Treat.  2008 Jun;40(2):87-92.

Discrepant Views of Korean Medical Oncologists and Cancer Patients on Complementary and Alternative Medicine

Affiliations
  • 1Division of Hematology-Oncology, Department of Internal Medicine, Dongguk University, Goyang, Korea. smdkdy@duih.org
  • 2Division of Hematology-Oncology, Department of Internal Medicine, Seoul Veterans Hospital, Seoul, Korea.
  • 3Division of Hematology-Oncology, Department of Internal Medicine, Yeungnam University, Daegu, Korea.
  • 4Division of Hematology-Oncology, Department of Internal Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea, Seoul, Korea.
  • 5Division of Hematology-Oncology, Department of Internal Medicine, Korea University, Seoul, Korea.
  • 6Division of Hematology-Oncology, Department of Internal Medicine, Ewha Womans University, Seoul, Korea.

Abstract

PURPOSE: This study was designed to evaluate the communication gap between Korean medical oncologists and cancer patients on complementary and alternative medicine (CAM).
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Cross sectional studies utilized the responses of 59 medical oncologists and 211 patients. To understand the communication gap, perceived reasons and nondisclosure of CAM use, reactions of physicians to disclosure, and expectations for CAM were analyzed. Data were compared with use of the chi- squared test.
RESULTS
Both medical oncologists and patients were in accord that CAM use would privde the patients with a feeling of hope. The medical oncologists believed more often than patients to attribute CAM use for control over medical care decisions, for the treatment of an incurable disease or as a nontoxic approach (p<0.05). Regarding reasons for nondisclosure, medical oncologists were morelikely to think that physicians would not understand the use of CAM, discontinue treatment or disapprove of the use of CAM (p<0.0001). Patients attributed nondisclosure mainly to the lack of questioning about CAM. Medical oncologists were more likely to warn of the risks with CAM use and less likely to encourage the use of CAM than perceived by patients (p=0.01). Patients expected that CAM could cure disease, extend survival, relieve symptoms and improve the immune system or quality of life more often than medical oncologists (p<0.05).
CONCLUSION
Given the discrepant views of medical oncologists and patients on the use of CAM, medical oncologists should be aware of the discrepancies and attempt to resolve any differences.

Keyword

Medical oncologists; Alternative medicine; Attitude

MeSH Terms

Complementary Therapies
Cross-Sectional Studies
Disclosure
Humans
Immune System
Quality of Life

Reference

1. Expanding horizons of healthcare: The five-year NCCAM strategic plan 2001-2005. National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine. Cited October 24, 2007. http://nccam.nih.gov/about/plans/fiveyear/index.htm.
2. Maskarinec G, Shumay DM, Kakai H, Gotay CC. Ethnic differences in complementary and alternative medicine use among cancer patients. J Altern Complement Med. 2000; 6:531–538. PMID: 11152058.
Article
3. Morris KT, Johnson N, Homer L, Walts D. A comparison of complementary use between breast cancer patients and patients with other primary tumor sites. Am J Surg. 2000; 179:407–411. PMID: 10930491.
4. Brustein HJ, Gelber S, Guadagnoli E, Weeks JC. Use of alternative medicine by women with early stage breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 1999; 340:1733–1739. PMID: 10352166.
5. Richardon MA, Sanders T, Palmer JL, Greisinger A, Singletary SE. Complementary/alternative medicine use in a comprehensive cancer center and the implications for oncology. J Clin Oncol. 2000; 18:2505–2514. PMID: 10893280.
6. Patterson RE, Neuhouser ML, Hedderson MM, Schwartz SM, Standish LJ, Bowen DJ, et al. Types of alternative medicine used by patients with breast, colon, or prostate cancer: predictors, motives, and costs. J Altern Complement Med. 2002; 8:477–485. PMID: 12230908.
Article
7. Adler SR, Rosket JR. Disclosing complementary and alternative medicine use in the medical encounter: a qualitative study in women with breast cancer. J Fam Pract. 1999; 48:453–458. PMID: 10386489.
8. Ernst E, Cassileth BR. The prevalence of complementary/alternative medicine in cancer A systematic review. Cancer. 1998; 83:777–782. PMID: 9708945.
9. Hyodo I, Amano N, Equchi K, Narabayashi M, Imanishi J, Hirai M, et al. Nationwide survey on complementary and alternative medicine in cancer patients in Japan. J Clin Oncol. 2005; 23:2645–2654. PMID: 15728227.
Article
10. Lee KS, Ahn HS, Hwang LI, Lee YS, Koo BH. Utilization of alternative therapies in cancer patients. J Korean Cancer Assoc. 1998; 30:203–213.
11. Kim MJ, Lee SD, Kim DR, Kong YH, Sohn WS, Ki SS, et al. Use of complementary and alternative medicine among Korean cancer patients. Korean J Intern Med. 2004; 19:250–256. PMID: 15683114.
Article
12. Lee MM, Lin SS, Wrensch MR, Adler SR, Eisenberg DM. Alternative therapies used by women with breast cancer in four ethnic populations. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2000; 92:42–47. PMID: 10620632.
Article
13. Tasaki K, Maskarinec G, Shumay D, Tatsumura Y, Kakai H. Communication between physicians and cancer patients about complementary and alternative medicine: exploring patients perspectives. Psychooncology. 2002; 11:212–220. PMID: 12112481.
Article
14. Hyodo I, Eguchi K, Nishina T, Endo H, Tanimizu M, Mikami I, et al. Perception and attitudes of clinical oncologists on complementary and alternative medicine: A nationwide survey in Japan. Cancer. 2003; 97:2861–2868. PMID: 12767101.
15. Risberg T, Kolstad A, Bremnes Y, Holte H, Wist EA, Mella O, et al. Knowledge of and attitudes toward complementary and alternative therapies a national multicentre study of oncology professionals in Norway. Eur J Cancer. 2004; 40:529–535. PMID: 14962719.
16. Samano ES, Ribeiro LM, Campos AS, Lewin F, Filho ES, Goldenstein PT, et al. Use of complementary and alternative medicine by Brazilian oncologists. Eur J Cancer Care (Engl). 2005; 14:143–148. PMID: 15842462.
Article
17. Richardson MA, Masse LC, Nanny K, Sanders C. Discrepant views of oncologists and cancer patients on complementary/alternative medicine. Support Care Cancer. 2004; 12:797–804. PMID: 15378417.
Article
18. Cauffield JS. The psychosocial aspects of complementary and alternative medicine. Pharmacotherapy. 2000; 20:1289–1294. PMID: 11079276.
Article
19. Schmidt K, Ernst E. Assessing websites on complementary and alternative medicine for cancer. Ann Oncol. 2004; 15:733–742. PMID: 15111340.
Article
20. Morris CA, Avorn J. Internet marketing of herbal products. JAMA. 2003; 290:1505–1509. PMID: 13129992.
Article
21. Lerner IJ, Kennedy BJ. The prevalence of questionable methods of cancer treatment in the United States. CA Cancer J Clin. 1992; 42:181–191. PMID: 1568137.
Article
22. Lee SI, Khang YH, Lee MS, Kang W. Knowledge of, attitudes toward, and experience of complementary and alternative medicine in Western medicine- and oriental medicine-trained physicians in Korea. Am J Public Health. 2002; 92:1994–2000. PMID: 12453822.
Article
Full Text Links
  • CRT
Actions
Cited
CITED
export Copy
Close
Share
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
Similar articles
Copyright © 2024 by Korean Association of Medical Journal Editors. All rights reserved.     E-mail: koreamed@kamje.or.kr