Availability of complementary and alternative medicine for people with cancer in the British National Health Service: Results of a national survey

Integrative Oncology: International Perspectives

Interest in integrative oncology (IO) is growing globally. Patients with cancer are actively using traditional complementary and integrative medicine (TCIM) as part of their cancer and survivorship care. Published studies from around the world report increasing use of TCIM by people living with cancer. This article summarizes the presentations that took place during a symposium titled, "Integrative Oncology: International Perspectives" at the International Research Congress on Integrative Medicine and Health in Baltimore, 2018. The purpose of the presentations was to examine whether cancer services across a variety of geographical regions, including Australia, Canada, the United States, and the European Union, were actively responding to cancer survivors' demand for TCIM. The presenters highlighted utilization rates and both facilitators and barriers to the provision of IO services in their respective countries and regions. The audience discussion following the presentations drew out many noteworthy perspectives.

Integrative oncology and complementary medicine cancer services in Australia: findings from a national cross-sectional survey

Background

Individuals living with and beyond a cancer diagnosis are increasingly using complementary therapies and medicines (CM) to enhance the effectiveness of cancer treatment, manage treatment-related side effects, improve quality-of-life, and promote self-efficacy. In response to the increasing use and demand for CM by cancer patients, interest in the implementation of Integrative Oncology (IO) services that provide CM alongside conventional cancer care in Australia and abroad has developed. The extent that cancer services in Australia are integrating CM is uncertain. Thus, the aim of this study was to identify IO services in Australia and explore barriers and facilitators to IO service provision.

Methods

A national, cross-sectional survey of healthcare organisations was conducted in 2016. Organisations in the public and private sectors, including not-for-profit organisations that provided cancer care in hospital or community setting, were included.

Results

A response rate of 93.2% was achieved (n = 275/295). Seventy-one organisations (25.8%) across all states/territories, except the Northern Territory, offered IO albeit in a limited amount by many. Most common IO services included massage, psychological-wellbeing, and movement modalities in hospital outpatient or inpatient settings. There were only a few instances where biological-based complementary medicine (CM) therapies were prescribed. Funding was often mixed, including patient contributions, philanthropy, funding by the organisation, and volunteer practitioners.

Of the 204 non-IO providers, 80.9% had never provided any IO service. Overwhelmingly, the most common barrier to IO was a lack of funding, followed by uncertainty about patient demand, choice of services, and establishing such services. Less-common barriers were a lack of evidence, and support from oncologists or management. More funding, education and training, and building the evidence-base for CM were the most commonly suggested solutions.

Conclusion

IO is increasingly being provided in Australia, although service provision remains limited or non-existent in many areas. Mismatches appear to exist between low IO service provision, CM evidence, and high CM use by cancer patients. Greater strategic planning and policy guidance is indicated to ensure the appropriate provision of, and equitable access to IO services for all Australian cancer survivors.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12906-018-2357-8) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Use of Complementary Traditional Chinese Medicines by Adult Cancer Patients in Taiwan: A Nationwide Population-Based Study

BACKGROUND

Many patients with cancer seek complementary and alternative medicine treatments. We investigated the use of traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) by adult cancer patients in Taiwan.

METHODS

We reviewed the Registry for Catastrophic Illness Patients Database of Taiwan, and included all adult patients diagnosed cancer, based on the International Classification of Diseases (ninth revision), from 2001 to 2009 and followed until 2011. This database allowed categorization of patients as TCM users (n = 74 620) or non-TCM users (n = 508 179). All demographic and clinical claims data were analyzed.

RESULTS

Compared with non-TCM users, TCM users were younger and more likely to be female, white-collar workers, and reside in highly urbanized areas. The average interval between cancer diagnosis and TCM consultation was 15.3 months. The most common cancer type was breast cancer in TCM users (19.4%), and intrahepatic bile duct cancer in non-TCM users (13.6%). The major condition for which TCM users visited clinics were endocrine, nutritional and metabolic diseases, and immunity disorders (23.2%). A total of 33.1% of TCM users visited TCM clinics more than 9 times per year and their time from diagnosis to first TCM consultation was 5.14 months. The most common TCM treatment was Chinese herbal medicine. The common diseases for which cancer patients sought TCM treatment were insomnia, malaise and fatigue, dizziness and headache, gastrointestinal disorders, myalgia and fasciitis, anxiety, and depression. Overall, TCM users had a lower adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) for mortality (aHR = 0.69, 95% CI = 0.68-0.70) after adjustment for age, sex, urbanization of residence, occupation, annual medical center visits, and annual non-medical center visits.

CONCLUSIONS

This study provides an overview of TCM usage among adult cancer patients in Taiwan. TCM use varied among patients with different types of cancer. Physicians caring for cancer patients should pay more attention to their patients' use of complementary TCM.

Australian integrative oncology services: a mixed-method study exploring the views of cancer survivors

Background

The significant use of traditional and complementary medicine (T&CM) by cancer survivors is well documented. The aim of this study was to explore cancer survivors’ views on integrating T&CM services with conventional cancer care.

Method

A mixed-method study design with an emphasis on qualitative methodology was used to conduct and analyse four focus group interviews and an on-line survey. Purposive sampling recruited 33 cancer survivors and caregivers from Arabic, Vietnamese, Chinese and Anglo-European Australian backgrounds who participated in one of four focus group interviews, and 121 cancer survivors who responded to an on-line survey. The inductive thematic analysis was augmented with a descriptive statistical analysis.

Results

Most participants had used T&CM therapies or consulted T&CM practitioners as an adjuvant during and/or after their initial cancer treatment. Two themes emerged: ‘positive perceptions and experiences’ and ‘barriers and unmet needs’. Participants emphasised that T&CM was not a ‘luxury item’, rather it was considered important for managing side effects and comorbidities, rehabilitation and quality of life. A wide range of complex, interrelated barriers and solutions to IO service provision and access were identified. Structural barriers included inadequate service provision, medical practitioner attitudes, logistical constraints and funding. Personal barriers were influenced by the severity of impairment and disability; attitudes, beliefs and knowledge about T&CM; and available resources (e.g. finances, time, transport). Unmet need and inequitable access was exacerbated by geographical location, ethnicity and ability to pay. There was a mismatch between where participants were accessing T&CM services and their preference for IO service delivery. Participants perceived hospital-based IO services availability to have several benefits, including the T&CM practitioners having more expert knowledge about cancer care, the convenience of co-locating oncology services, and potentially lower out-of-pocket costs.

Conclusion

Patients’ use, preferences and needs for T&CM services in the oncology setting are important for informing service provision. Inequitable, unmet need reflected the increasing demand and expectation from patients for their oncology teams to be well informed about the benefits, risks and indications for T&CM use, and for the public and private health sectors to formally integrate and fund IO services.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12906-018-2209-6) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

The effect of complementary and alternative medicine on quality of life, depression, anxiety, and fatigue levels among cancer patients during active oncology treatment: phase II study

BACKGROUND

During the past decade, there has been growing interest in complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) among cancer patients and it is being integrated more frequently within conventional cancer centers. The long-term effect of mind-body therapies on quality of life (QoL), depression, anxiety, and fatigue was tested prospectively in this study.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Cancer patients who received six weekly sessions of CAM during their oncological treatments participated in the study. The Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), Brief Fatigue Inventory (BFI) and QoL-EORTC-C30 were completed during the intervention and follow-up period.

RESULTS

Over a two-year period, 163 patients entered the study, 135 of whom completed all six CAM sessions. An improvement was demonstrated in the median of BFI from 4.8 to 3.9 (p < 0.001), HADS-Anxiety from 8 to 7 (p < 0.001) and HADS-Depression from 7 to 6 (p < 0.001) after 12 weeks. In addition, the median of global QoL improved from 50 to 67 (p < 0.001), and a significant improvement was noticed in several parameters on the functioning and symptoms scales of the QoL-EORTC-C30.

CONCLUSION

Cancer patients who completed six weekly sessions of CAM improved significantly on measured outcomes, regardless of their demographic characteristics.

Is reflexology as effective as aromatherapy massage for symptom relief in an adult outpatient oncology population?

AIM

To test whether reflexology was inferior to aromatherapy massage for ameliorating self-selected problems or concerns.

DESIGN

Non-blinded, randomised study with a 1:1 allocation. Adult outpatients recruited from a UK cancer centre, randomised by the minimisation method to either four aromatherapy massage or four reflexology sessions.

OUTCOME MEASURES

MYCaW scores at baseline and completion; VAS (relaxation) pre and post-sessions.

ANALYSIS

Unpaired t-test for the primary outcome; analysis of variance tests for repeated measures for VAS (relaxation); descriptive statistics (means and 95% confidence intervals) and content analysis for patient comments.

RESULTS

115 subjects (58 aromatherapy massage, 57 reflexology) recruited. Reflexology was found to be no less effective than aromatherapy massage for MYCaW first concerns (p = 0.046). There was no statistical difference between groups for MYCaW second concerns or overall well-being scores, proportions of patients gaining clinical benefit, VAS scores over time (p = 0.489) or between groups (p = 0.408) or in the written responses.