Complementary-alternative medicine among cancer patients in the western region of Turkey

Loading...

Date

Authors

Tarhan, O.
Alacacioglu, A.
Somali, I.
Sipahi, H.
Zencir, Mehmet
Oztop, I.
Dirioz, M.

Journal Title

Journal ISSN

Volume Title

Publisher

Open Access Color

GOLD

Green Open Access

No

OpenAIRE Downloads

OpenAIRE Views

Publicly Funded

No
Impulse
Top 10%
Influence
Top 10%
Popularity
Top 10%

relationships.isProjectOf

relationships.isJournalIssueOf

Abstract

Purpose: To investigate the complementary/alternative medicine (CAM) applications and factors affecting its use among cancer patients in the western region of Turkey. Patients and methods: Face-to-face interview technique was used. Patients were asked to answer a questionnaire about their socio-demographic features, their level of knowledge about the disease and CAM application features. Results: 220 adult cancer patients (79 male) were evaluated. Ninety-three (42.3%) were using at least one CAM method, the most common being herbal products which were preferred by 81 (36.3%) patients. Stinging nettle (Urtica dioica) was the most commonly used herbal product. Next was nutritional support, preferred by 45 (20.3%) patients. Eighty- nine (44.5%) of 200 patients who knew the diagnosis and 4 of 20 (20%) who did not were using CAM. In the patient group with awareness of the diagnosis, CAM application was significantly higher (p=0.034). CAM applications were detected in 34 of 70 (48.5%) patients with recurrent disease while 54 of 150 (36%) patients without recurrent disease were using CAM. The CAM applications were significantly higher in the group with recurrent disease (p=0.006). Fifty-three of 103 (51.4%) patients who had advanced disease were using CAM, while only 40 of 117 (34.1%) patients with local or locally advanced disease were using it. CAM applications were significantly higher in the group with advanced disease (p=0.030). Besides, knowing the diagnosis and disease recurrence were also independent risk factors for CAM usage [odds ratio (OR): 3.1; 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.0-9.8 and OR: 2.2; 95% CI: 1.2-4.0 respectively]. As a result, nearly half of the patients (42.3%) in this region were using at least one of the CAM methods. Conclusion: The severity of the disease (recurrence and dissemination) and patients 'awareness of the diagnosis were the most important factors affecting the CAM applications. © 2009 Zerbinis Medical Publications.

Description

Keywords

Cancer, Complementary treatment, Complementary-alternative, Medicine, herbaceous agent, alternative medicine, article, cancer patient, controlled study, human, interview, major clinical study, nutritional support, recurrent disease, Turkey (republic), Urtica dioica, Adult, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Complementary Therapies, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Neoplasms, Patient Satisfaction, Phytotherapy, Prognosis, Questionnaires, Turkey, Young Adult, Questionnaires, Adult, Complementary Therapies, Male, Complementary-alternative, cancer patient, medicine, Turkey, recurrent disease, nutritional support, Turkey (republic), Young Adult, Neoplasms, Surveys and Questionnaires, cancer, Humans, controlled study, human, complementary-alternative, Cancer, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, complementary treatment, alternative medicine, article, interview, Urtica dioica, Middle Aged, Prognosis, major clinical study, herbaceous agent, Complementary treatment, Patient Satisfaction, Medicine, Female, Phytotherapy

Fields of Science

03 medical and health sciences, 0302 clinical medicine

Citation

WoS Q

Scopus Q

OpenCitations Logo
OpenCitations Citation Count
26

Volume

14

Issue

2

Start Page

265

End Page

269
PlumX Metrics
Citations

Scopus : 39

PubMed : 14

Captures

Mendeley Readers : 12

SCOPUS™ Citations

39

checked on Jun 13, 2026

Web of Science™ Citations

33

checked on Jun 13, 2026

Page Views

95

checked on Jun 13, 2026

Google Scholar Logo
Google Scholar™
OpenAlex Logo
OpenAlex FWCI
12.86

Sustainable Development Goals

GOOD HEALTH AND WELL-BEING3
GOOD HEALTH AND WELL-BEING