Exploring dietary changes and supplement use among cancer patients in Norway: prevalence, motivations, disclosure, information, and perceived risks and benefits: a cross sectional study.

BACKGROUND: Cancer is the leading cause of death in Norway, with prostate, breast, lung, and colon cancers being the most prevalent types. Adopting a healthy and varied diet can help reduce cancer risk and recurrence. However, access to dietary counselling remains limited for cancer patients in Norway. This study aimed to investigate the prevalence of dietary supplement use and dietary changes made by cancer patients and survivors. Additionally, it sought to explore the reason(s) for such practices, communication with healthcare providers, sources of information, and reported benefits and potential harms resulting from these changes and supplement use. METHODS: Conducted in collaboration with the Norwegian Cancer Society (NCS), this online cross-sectional study targeted members of their user panel who had either current or previous cancer (n = 706). The study took place in September/October 2021, utilizing a modified cancer-specific version of the International Questionnaire to Measure Use of Complementary and Alternative Medicine (I-CAM-Q). Out of 468 participants (315 women and 153 men), 67.2% consented to participate. Between-group analyses were conducted using Pearson chi-square tests and Fisher exact tests for categorical variables, while independent sample t-tests were applied for continuous variables. RESULTS: The majority of the participants (97%) reported making changes to their diet (78%) and/or incorporating dietary supplements (73%) in response to their cancer diagnosis. The primary goal of these changes was to strengthen their body and immune system. Almost half of the participants (49%) reported that they found these changes beneficial and discussed them openly with their healthcare providers, with family physicians being the most common point of discussion (25%). Adverse effects were reported by only a few participants, mostly mild. Information about dietary changes and supplements was primarily sourced from the internet or healthcare providers. CONCLUSIONS: This study highlights that most individuals affected by cancer attribute to dietary adjustment. It also emphasizes the importance of addressing adherence to dietary recommendations and using reliable sources of information. Additionally, the study highlights the potential, yet currently underutilized, role of healthcare professionals in initiating dialogues about dietary interventions to address any unmet needs of patients. Such proactive engagement may contribute to the promotion of reliable sources of information and the prevention of non-evidence-based and potentially harmful diets or supplement adoption.

A Qualitative Study Among Healthcare Providers on Risks Associated With the Use of Supportive Care for Cancer Treatment-Related Symptoms in Children and Adolescents.

INTRODUCTION: Although more than 300 000 children and adolescents worldwide are diagnosed with cancer yearly, little research has been conducted investigating how healthcare providers consider risk and patient safety connected with supportive care (including complementary and alternative medicine [CAM]) in this age group. This study aimed to explore how different healthcare providers perceive and evaluate risk when patients combine supportive care and conventional medicine in clinical practice and how they communicate and inform parents about the use of these modalities. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In-depth semi-structured interviews were conducted with 22 healthcare providers with expertise in treating pediatric oncology patients from 5 countries. Systematic content analysis was conducted using Nvivo 1.61. RESULTS: The analysis resulted in 3 themes and 8 subthemes. Generally, participants were cautious about implementing unproven new modalities or therapies when recommending supporting care modalities to parents of children and adolescents with cancer. The most important criterion when recommending a modality was evidence for safety based on a risk/benefit evaluation. Negative interactions with conventional medicine were avoided by using the half-life of a drug approach (the time it takes for the amount of a drug's active substance in the body to reduce by half). For patients with severe symptoms, less invasive modalities were used (ear seeds instead of ear needling). To enhance safety, participants practiced open and egalitarian communication with parents. CONCLUSION: Healthcare providers reported using a variety of approaches to achieve a safe practice when parents wanted to combine supportive care and conventional cancer treatment. They emphasized that these modalities should be foremost safe and not become an extra burden for the patients. Providers highlighted patient-centered care to meet the individual's specific health needs and desired health outcomes. A lack of national and regional standardized training programs for supportive care in pediatric oncology was considered a hazard to patient safety.

Adherence to lifestyle recommendations among Norwegian cancer survivors and the impact of traditional and complementary medicine use: the Tromsø Study 2015-2016.

INTRODUCTION: Adherence to healthy lifestyle recommendations has positive effects on cancer outcomes yet adherence is low among cancer survivors. Differences in adherence between women and men, phase of survivorship, and other factors that might increase adherence, like the use of traditional and complementary medicine (T&CM), need to be explored. We aimed to study the adherence to national recommendations for a healthy diet (daily intake of ≥ 5 portions of fruit/vegetables), physical activity (150 min of moderate-intensity or 75 min of high-intensity/week), normal body mass index (BMI) (18.5-24.9 kg/m2), non-smoking, and low-risk alcohol consumption (women ≤ 10 g/day, men ≤ 20 g/day) among Norwegian cancer survivors and their associations with sex, the use of T&CM, and survivorship phase. METHODS: We used logistic regression, independent sample t-test, and chi-square test to study self-reported (diet, physical activity, smoking, alcohol consumption) and measured (BMI) adherence in 1530 cancer survivors (40 years and above, participating in the population-based Tromsø Study conducted in 2015-2016 (65% attendance). We dichotomized all assessed lifestyle recommendations (adherence = 1 point, non-adherence = 0 points), and created a score for every recommendation (0-5 points). Adherence to individual lifestyle recommendations and the use of T&CM as well as the phase of survivorship was adjusted for sex, age, income, and living with a partner. RESULTS: Adherence to recommendations was 7.5% for diet, 85.3% for physical activity, 30.5% for BMI, 89.3% for non-smoking, and 87.6% for alcohol consumption. In total 2.3% adhered to all five recommendations concurrently (mean score 2.96 [SD = 0.86]). Women adhered to more recommendations concurrently compared to men (3.03 [SD = 0.90] vs. 2.89 [SD = 0.80] points respectively, [p = .012]). In total, 31% reported the use of T&CM and there were no differences in adherence to individual lifestyle recommendations or concurrent adherence in overall T&CM use compared to non-use. Users of self-help techniques were more likely to adhere to the recommendations of diet (aOR 2.69, 95% CI 1.45-4.98) and physical activity (aOR 6.26, 95% CI 1.51-25.92). Users of traditional healers and users of more than one T&CM modality were less likely to adhere to the low-risk alcohol consumption recommendation, (aOR 0.32, 95% CI 0.13-0.77, and aOR 0.53, 95% CI 1.08-2.17, respectively) compared to T&CM non-users. Survivors with cancer previously (1162) had higher odds of adhering to the recommendation of diet (aOR 2.66, 95% CI 1.36-5.19) than survivors with cancer presently (n = 368), but not to other recommendations. CONCLUSION: The health of cancer survivors can be improved through adherence to lifestyle recommendations, yet our study found partial adherence among survivors in Norway, in accordance with findings from other countries. Although overall T&CM use was not associated with higher adherence to lifestyle recommendations, differences in adherence were seen among individual modalities like the use of self-help techniques and traditional healers. Our results suggest the need for intensified follow-up of lifestyle with attention to male survivors and diet among all survivors throughout the cancer survivorship continuum.

Supportive care for cancer-related symptoms in pediatric oncology: a qualitative study among healthcare providers.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study is to gain insight into the clinical experiences and perceptions that pediatric oncology experts, conventional healthcare providers, and complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) providers in Norway, Canada, Germany, the Netherlands, and the United States have with the use of supportive care, including CAM among children and adolescents with cancer. METHODS: A qualitative study was conducted using semi-structured in-depth interviews (n = 22) with healthcare providers with clinical experience working with CAM and/or other supportive care among children and adolescents with cancer from five different countries. Participants were recruited through professional associations and personal networks. Systematic content analysis was used to delineate the main themes. The analysis resulted in three themes and six subthemes. RESULTS: Most participants had over 10 years of professional practice. They mostly treated children and adolescents with leukemia who suffered from adverse effects of cancer treatment, such as nausea and poor appetite. Their priorities were to identify the parents' treatment goals and help the children with their daily complaints. Some modalities frequently used were acupuncture, massage, music, and play therapy. Parents received information about supplements and diets in line with their treatment philosophies. They received education from the providers to mitigate symptoms and improve the well-being of the child. CONCLUSIONS: Clinical experiences of pediatric oncology experts, conventional health care providers, and CAM providers give an understanding of how supportive care modalities, including CAM, are perceived in the field and how they can be implemented as adaptational tools to manage adverse effects and to improve the quality of life of children diagnosed with cancer and the families.

Clinical associations for traditional and complementary medicine use among norwegian cancer survivors in the seventh survey of the Tromsø study: a cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: Cancer survivors are a diverse group with varying needs that are patient-, disease-, and/or treatment-specific. Cancer survivors have reported supplementing conventional anti-cancer treatment with Traditional and Complementary Medicine (T&CM). Although female cancer survivors are reported to have more severe anticancer adverse effects, little is known about the association between anticancer treatment and T&CM use among Norwegian cancer survivors. The aims of this study are therefore to investigate (1) associations between cancer diagnosis characteristics and T&CM utilization and (2) associations between anticancer treatment and T&CM utilization among cancer survivors in the seventh survey of the Tromsø study. METHODS: Data was collected from the seventh survey of the Tromsø Study conducted in 2015-16 among all inhabitants of Tromsø municipality aged 40 and above (response rate 65%), where inhabitants received online and paper form questionnaires. Data from the data linkage to the Cancer Registry of Norway for cancer diagnosis characteristics was also used. The final study sample was made up of 1307 participants with a cancer diagnosis. Categorical variables were compared using Pearson's Chi-square test or Fisher's exact test while independent sample t-test was used to compare continuous variables. RESULTS: The use of T&CM the preceding 12 months was reported by 31.2% of the participants with natural remedies as the most reported modality of T&CM (18.2%, n = 238), followed by self-help practices of meditation, yoga, qigong, or tai chi, which was reported by 8.7% (n = 114). Users of T&CM were significantly younger (p = .001) and more likely to be female (p < .001) than the non-users, with higher use of T&CM among female survivors with poor self-reported health and being 1-5 years post-diagnosis. Lower use of T&CM was found among female survivors who received a combination of surgery with hormone therapy and those who received a combination of surgery with hormone therapy and radiotherapy. Similar usage was seen in male survivors, but not at a significant level. For both male and female survivors, T&CM was most frequently used by those with only one cancer diagnosis (p = .046). CONCLUSION: Our results indicate that the profile of the Norwegian cancer survivor who uses T&M is slightly changing compared to previous findings. Additionally, compared to male survivors, more clinical factors are associated with use of T&CM among female cancer survivors. These results should serve as a reminder to conventional health care providers to discuss the use of T&CM with patients across the entire cancer survivorship continuum to promote safe use, especially among female survivors.

Prevalence of late and long-term effects of cancer (treatment) and use of complementary and alternative medicine in Norway.

BACKGROUND: The increasing number of patients surviving cancer leads to more people experiencing late and long term-effects from the disease and its treatment. Fatigue, sleep disorders, early menopause, pain, and nerve damage are commonly reported. Methods helping people to recover after cancer treatment are therefore essential. The aims of this study were threefold; (1) to determine the level of cancer patients suffering from late and long-term effects of cancer diagnosis and treatment in Norway, (2) explore complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) modalities used for managing these adversities, and (3) describe self-perceived benefits and harms of the CAM interventions. METHODS: The study was conducted in cooperation with the Norwegian Cancer Society (NCS) and consisted of an online cross-sectional study among members of the NCS user panel with present or previous cancer (n = 706). The study was carried out in September/October 2021 using a modified cancer-specific version of the International Questionnaire to Measure Use of Complementary and Alternative Medicine (I-CAM-Q). A total of 315 women and 153 men agreed to participate, resulting in a response rate of 67%. RESULTS: Most of the participants (83%) suffered from late and long-term effects of cancer treatment; mostly fatigue (59.2%), sleep disorder (41.5%), hot flashes (39.2%), nerve damage (polyneuropathy, 38.0%), and pain (36.6%) with a mean number of 5.1 different late and long-term effects. Late and long-term effects were positively associated with younger age and college/university education. Nearly half of the participants experiencing late and long-term effects (43%) reported having used CAM to treat these complaints. Most frequently used were self-help practices (26%) such as relaxation therapy (19%), yoga (14%) and meditation (13%), but also visits to CAM providers were reported by 22%. Herbal- and other natural remedies to treat late and long-term effects were used by 13%. A high percentage of CAM users reported self-perceived improvements of their symptoms (86% for self-help practices, 90% for visits to CAM providers). Few experienced adverse effects of the CAM treatment. CONCLUSION: A large proportion of cancer patients suffered from a wide range of late and long-term effects of cancer diagnosis and treatment, and they use CAM to treat these complaints to a rather high degree. Relaxation therapy, yoga, meditation, massage, and acupuncture were the most frequently used therapies regardless of complaint. The therapies used are generally considered to be both safe and beneficial for the respective complaint, indicating that the participants seem to be well informed about the choices they make.

Use of Complementary and Alternative Medicine in the context of cancer; prevalence, reasons for use, disclosure, information received, risks and benefits reported by people with cancer in Norway.

BACKGROUND: Research exploring the use of specific Complementary and Alternative Medicine (CAM) modalities by Norwegian cancer patients is sparse. The aims of this study were therefor to map the different CAM modalities cancer patients use and further investigate their rationale for use, communication about use, self-reported benefits and harms, and their sources of information about the different modalities. METHODS: In cooperation with the Norwegian Cancer Society (NCS), we conducted an online cross-sectional study among members of their user panel with present or previously cancer (n = 706). The study was carried out in September/October 2021 using a modified cancer-specific version of the International Questionnaire to Measure Use of Complementary and Alternative Medicine (I-CAM-Q). In total, 468 members, 315 women and 153 men, agreed to participate resulting in a response rate of 67.2%. The study was reported in accordance with the National Research Center in Complementary and Alternative Medicine's (NAFKAM) model of reporting CAM use. RESULTS: A large proportion of the participants (79%, n = 346) had used some form of CAM with a mean of 3.8 modalities each (range 1-17); 33% (n = 143) had seen a CAM provider, 52% (n = 230) had used natural remedies, while 58% (n = 253) had used self-help practices. Most of the participants used CAM to increase their quality of life, cope with the cancer disease or for relaxation/well-being (64%-94%), mostly with high satisfaction and low rates of adverse effects. Few used CAM to treat cancer or prevent it from spreading (16%, n = 55). The main information sources were health care providers (47%), the internet (47%), and family and friends (39%). More than half (59%) of the cancer patients discussed their use of at least one CAM modality with a physician. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this survey will provide health professionals with more in-depth insight into the patterns of CAM use by cancer patients and facilitate better-informed discussions with their patients. Considering the high use of CAM, reliable information provision supporting cancer care providers' knowledge and health literacy among patients as well as good communication are crucial. The cooperation between the NCS and NAFKAM provides an example of how to address these issues.

Safety of Complementary and Alternative Medicine (CAM) treatment among children and young adults who suffer from adverse effects of conventional cancer treatment: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Complementary and Alternative Medicine (CAM) is widely used around the world to treat adverse effects derived from cancer treatment among children and young adults. Parents often seek CAM to restore and maintain the child's physical and emotional condition during and after cancer treatment. OBJECTIVES: The objectives of this review were (i) to identify literature that investigates CAM use for treating adverse effects of conventional cancer treatment, (ii) to investigate the safety of the included CAM modalities, and (iii) to evaluate the quality of included studies. METHODS: Five scientific research databases were used to identify observational, quasi-experimental, and qualitative studies from January 1990 to May 2021. Included studies investigated the use of CAM to treat adverse effects of cancer treatment in childhood cancer. RESULTS: Fifteen studies were included in this review. Ten quasi-experimental, 3 observational studies (longitudinal/prospective), 2 qualitative studies, and 1 study with a quasi-experimental and qualitative arm were identified. Less than half (n = 6; 40%) of the studies included reported adverse effects for the CAM modality being studied. Among the studies that reported adverse effects, they were mostly considered as direct risk, as 13% reported mainly bleeding and bruising upon acupuncture treatment, and dizziness with yoga treatment. All adverse effects were assessed as minor and transient. CAM modalities identified for treating adverse effects of cancer treatment were alternative medical systems, manipulative and body-based therapies, biologically-based therapies, and mind-body therapies. CAM modalities were used to alleviate anxiety, pain, toxicity, prevent trauma, and improve health-related quality of life, functional mobility, and physical activity levels. All studies assessed scored 70% or above according to the Joanna Briggs Institute critical appraisal for study quality checklists. CONCLUSION: Most of the studies (58.3%) included in this review did not report adverse effects from CAM modalities used to treat adverse effects of cancer treatment in children and young adults. This lack of safety information is of concern because parents need to know whether the modality represents an extra burden or harm to the child. To improve awareness about safety in the field, a universal and uniform reporting system for adverse effects in CAM research is needed.

Protocol of a mixed-method randomised controlled pilot study evaluating a wilderness programme for adolescent and young adult cancer survivors: the WAYA study.

INTRODUCTION: The majority of childhood, adolescent and young adult (AYA) cancer survivors suffer from long-term and late effects such as fatigue, psychological distress or comorbid diseases. Effective health promotion strategies are needed to support the health of this vulnerable group. This protocol provides a methodological description of a study that aims to examine the feasibility and safety of performing a randomised clinical trial (RCT) on a wilderness programme that is developed to support the health of AYA cancer survivors. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The pilot RCT study has a mixed-method design, including quantitative and qualitative evaluations. Participants are AYAs, aged 16-39 years, that have been diagnosed with cancer during childhood, adolescence or young adulthood. A total of 40 participants will be randomly assigned to a wilderness programme (n=20) or a holiday programme (n=20). Both arms include participation in an 8-day summer programme, followed by a 4-day programme 3 months later. Primary outcomes are feasibility and safety parameters such as time to recruitment, willingness to be randomised, programme adherence and adverse effects. Secondary outcomes include self-reported health such as self-esteem, quality of life, self-efficacy and lived experiences. Descriptive statistics will be used to analyse outcomes and explore indications of differences between the programmes. Interviews are analysed by directed content analysis and hermeneutic phenomenology. A convergent parallel mixed-method analysis design will be applied to integrate quantitative and qualitative data. Results of this feasibility study will inform the preparation for a larger RCT with AYA cancer survivors. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study protocol is approved by the Swedish Ethical Review Authority (reference: 2020-00239). This study will be performed between January 2021 and December 2023. Results will be published in international peer-reviewed journals, presented at conferences and disseminated to participants, cancer societies, healthcare professionals and outdoor instructors. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04761042.

Complementary and alternative medicine modalities used to treat adverse effects of anti-cancer treatment among children and young adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

BACKGROUND: Dealing with the symptom burden of cancer diagnosis and treatment has led parents to seek different self-management strategies including Alternative and Complementary Medicine (CAM). The aim of this study was to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis about the use and effect of CAM modalities to treat adverse effects of conventional cancer treatment among children and young adults. METHODS: Six scientific research databases were used to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) from 1990 to September 2020. Included studies investigated the use of CAM to treat cancer treatment related adverse effects in children and young adults compared to controls. RESULTS: Twenty RCTs comprising 1,069 participants were included in this review. The included studies investigated acupuncture, mind-body therapies, supplements, and vitamins for chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV), oral mucositis, and anxiety among children and young adults who underwent conventional cancer treatment. Seven studies (315 participants) were included in the meta-analysis. The overall effect of CAM (including acupuncture and hypnosis only) on chemotherapy-induced nausea and/or vomiting and controls was statistically significant with a standard mean difference of -0.54, 95% CI [-0.77, -0.31] I2 = 0% (p < 0.00001). There was a significant difference between acupuncture and controls (n = 5) for intensity and/or episodes of CINV with an SMD -0.59, 95% CI [-0.85, -0.33] (p < 0.00001). No significant difference was found between hypnosis and controls (n = 2) for severity or episodes of CINV with an SMD -0.41, 95% CI [-1.09, 0.27] I2 = 41% (p = 0.19). CONCLUSION: Current evidence from this meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials shows that CAM, including acupuncture and hypnosis only, is effective in reducing chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in children and young adults. More rigorous trials and long-term effects should be investigated if acupuncture and hypnosis are to be recommended for clinical use.

Conventional health care service utilization among cancer survivors that visit traditional and complementary providers in the Tromsø study: a cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: Traditional and complementary medicine (T&CM) is commonly used among cancer patients worldwide. Cancer patients in Norway mainly visit T&CM providers in addition to conventional health care services. It is not known how their utilization of T&CM providers influences their use of conventional health care services. The aim of this study was to investigate the difference between the utilization of conventional health care services among cancer survivors that visit T&CM providers and those that do not, and their associated factors. METHOD: Health care service utilization data were obtained from cancer survivors 40 years and above participating in the Tromsø Study: Tromsø 7 conducted in 2015-2016. Data were collected from self-administered questionnaires. Pearson chi-square tests, Fisher exact tests, t-test, and logistic regression were used, with the significance level considered at p < 0.05. RESULTS: Of 1553 individuals, 10% (n = 155) reported visiting T&CM providers in the past 12 months. As both cancer survivors visiting and not visiting T&CM providers were frequent users of conventional health care, no significant differences were found in the overall use of conventional health care (98.1vs.94.5%, p = .056). Users of T&CM providers were however more likely to visit physiotherapists (40.1% vs 25%, p < .001), emergency rooms (29.2% vs 16.5%, p < .001), chiropractors (17% vs 6%, p < .001), and psychologist/psychiatrist (8.9% vs 3.4%, p < .001). They also had more frequent visits to conventional health care (11.45 vs 8.31 yearly visits, p = 0.014), particularly to general practitioners (5.21 visits vs. 3.94 visits, p = .002). CONCLUSION: Results from this study show that visits to T&CM providers are associated with more visits to conventional health care services among cancer survivors. Further studies are needed to investigate the reasons for this high use behavior.

Communication and information needs about complementary and alternative medicine: a qualitative study of parents of children with cancer.

BACKGROUND: Many parents choose support such as Complementary and Alternative Medicine (CAM) for themselves and their children who have cancer. The aim of this paper is to describe, how parents who have children with cancer communicated with conventional health care providers about CAM, and what types and sources of information they would like to receive about CAM when the child was ill. METHOD: This focused ethnography draws from in-depth, semi-structured interviews conducted with 22 families in Norway with 24 adult participants (two couples), including two individuals who had had cancer themselves. Four domains were explored in the data analysis: the use of CAM, advice from laypeople about CAM, communication with conventional health care providers about CAM, and parents' information needs about CAM. RESULTS: Many of the participants had personal experiences with CAM before the child received the cancer diagnosis. The health care providers did not raise the question about CAM in the consultations. However, when the parents raised the question, they were mostly met in a positive way. The participants did not receive any information about CAM at the hospital, which they would have appreciated. Instead, they received recommendations about CAM from laypersons, which were mostly rejected, as the advice was not in line with their health values/philosophy. CONCLUSION: The reason participants did not disclose CAM use is that physicians did not ask them about it. However, positive communication about conventional treatment facilitated fruitful conversations about CAM. The participants wanted information about CAM from authoritative sources, primary from health care providers at the hospital and the Children's Cancer Society. They demand information about risks and benefits when using CAM as well as whether CAM can improve the immune system, fight the cancer, and improve the quality of life of the family. An evidence-based decision aid is warranted to enable health care providers and parents of children with cancer to make well-informed decisions about CAM.

An integrative review on the information and communication needs of parents of children with cancer regarding the use of complementary and alternative medicine.

BACKGROUND: Parents often choose Complementary and Alternative Medicine (CAM) as a supportive agent with the aim to reduce cancer treatment-related symptoms in their children. Therefore, it is necessary to understand parents´ information and communication needs regarding CAM. The aim of the present study was to review the research literature as to identify the information and communication needs of parents of children with cancer, and the children themselves, regarding the use of CAM. METHODS: An integrative systematic review design was chosen. Searches were performed in AMED, CAMbase, CINAHL (Ebsco), EMBASE, PubMed and PsycInfo, Theme eJournals and Karger. The search was limited to studies published in English, German, Dutch, and the Scandinavian languages. Using predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria, two reviewers independently screened the title and abstracts of the relevant papers. A data extraction form and critical appraisal checklists were used to extract data for analysis, and a mixed methods synthesis was applied. RESULTS: Out of 24 studies included, 67% were of quantitative and 33% of qualitative study design. Five main themes emerged from the analysis of 21 studies: Information on CAM, sources of CAM information, communication about CAM, informed decision-making on CAM, and Risk/benefit of CAM. The majority of the parents did not disclose the CAM use of their children because they feared negative reactions from the attending oncologist. To make informed treatment decisions for their children, parents wanted unbiased information about CAM and would act accordingly. They demand open communication about these modalities and respect for the family's autonomy when choosing CAM for their children. CONCLUSION: There is an urgent need for parents of children with cancer for high quality information on CAM from reliable and scientific sources. Development of authoritative evidence-based decision tools is thus warranted to enable health care professionals and parents of children with cancer to make well informed, individual decisions concerning CAM.

Conventional and complementary cancer treatments: where do conventional and complementary providers seek information about these modalities?

BACKGROUND: Both conventional health care providers and complementary therapists treat cancer patients. To provide effective treatment, both types of providers should to be familiar with their own as well as alternative types of treatment. Our aim was to compare how conventional health care providers (oncology doctors, oncology nurses, family physicians) and complementary therapists (acupuncturists, reflexologists, massage therapists) seek information about conventional and complementary cancer treatments. METHOD: This analysis was conducted on the basis of feedback from 466 participants. We used self-administered questionnaires in a cross-sectional study. RESULTS: The majority of the medical doctors (96%) searched for evidence-based information regarding conventional cancer treatments. They gathered this information mostly from guidelines, which is considered best practice and is expected from Norwegian health personnel. Eighty-one percent of the nurses gather this information from evidence based resources such as UpToDate. Colleagues were asked for information by 58% of the medical doctors and 64% of the nurses. Moreover, 50% of the medical doctors and 57% of the nurses searched for evidence-based information about complementary cancer modalities. The acupuncturists gathered evidence-based information for both conventional (79%) and complementary (77%) modalities, followed by the reflexologists (54 and 54%, respectively) and massage therapists (54 and 52%, respectively). Nearly half of the acupuncturist (49%) asked a colleague for information. CONCLUSION: To provide safe cancer care, it is important that advice about complementary modalities is based on current and evidence-based evaluations. The majority of the medical doctors and nurses in this study sought information according to evidence-based medicine regarding conventional cancer treatments, and about half of them gathered evidence-based information about complementary cancer modalities. This was also true for the complementary therapists as they gathered information about complementary and conventional treatments from evidence-based evaluations. This demonstrates that since the term evidence-based medicine was first introduced in 1991, the approach has grown extensively and both conventional and complementary providers use this approach to seek information.

Attitudes and knowledge about direct and indirect risks among conventional and complementary health care providers in cancer care.

BACKGROUND: Many complementary therapies offer benefits for patients with cancer. Others may be risky for patients due to negative interactions with conventional treatment and adverse effects. Therefore, cancer patients need guidance from health care providers to assess complementary modalities appropriately to receive benefits and avoid harm. METHOD: In a self-administered questionnaire-based cross-sectional study, we compared knowledge and attitudes of health care providers with no training in complementary modalities to that of health care providers with training in complementary modalities about the risks for patients who combine complementary modalities with conventional treatment in cancer care. The analysis was based on responses from 466 participants. RESULTS: The attitudes and knowledge about direct risk followed provider specialty. Ninety-four percent of the medical doctors, 93% of the nurses, and 87% of the providers with dual training, but 70% of the complementary therapists, believed that complementary modalities can cause adverse effects (p < 0.001). The majority of the medical doctors and nurses believed that it is risky to combine complementary and conventional cancer treatments (78% and 93%, respectively), compared to 58% of the providers with dual training and 43% of the complementary therapists (p < 0.001). Eighty-nine percent of the medical doctors and nurses believed that complementary modalities should be subjected to more scientific testing before being accepted by conventional health care providers, in contrast to 56% of the dually trained and 57% of the complementary therapists (p < 0.001). The majority of the medical doctors (61%) and nurses (55%) would have neither discouraged nor encouraged the use of complementary modalities if patients asked them for advice. Moreover, less than 1% of the complementary therapists would have discouraged the use of conventional cancer treatments. The study participants believed that the most important factor to recommend a complementary cancer modality to patients is evidence for safety. CONCLUSION: The health care providers in this study believed that complementary modalities are associated with direct risk and can cause adverse effects, and that it is risky to combine conventional and complementary treatments due to potential harmful interactions.

Complementary and conventional providers in cancer care: experience of communication with patients and steps to improve communication with other providers.

BACKGROUND: Effective interdisciplinary communication is important to achieve better quality in health care. The aims of this study were to compare conventional and complementary providers' experience of communication about complementary therapies and conventional medicine with their cancer patients, and to investigate how they experience interdisciplinary communication and cooperation. METHOD: This study analyzed data from a self-administrated questionnaire. A total of 606 different health care providers, from four counties in Norway, completed the questionnaire. The survey was developed to describe aspects of the communication pattern among oncology doctors, nurses, family physicians and complementary therapists (acupuncturists, massage therapists and reflexologists/zone-therapists). Between-group differences were analyzed using chi-square, ANOVA and Fisher's exact tests. Significance level was defined as p < 0.05 without adjustment for multiple comparisons. RESULT: Conventional providers and complementary therapists had different patterns of communication with their cancer patients regarding complementary therapies. While complementary therapists advised their patients to apply both complementary and conventional modalities, medical doctors were less supportive of their patients' use of complementary therapies. Of conventional providers, nurses expressed more positive attitudes toward complementary therapies. Opportunities to improve communication between conventional and complementary providers were most strongly supported by complementary providers and nurses; medical doctors were less supportive of such attempts. A number of doctors showed lack of respect for complementary therapists, but asked for more research, guidelines for complementary modalities and training in conventional medicine for complementary therapists. CONCLUSION: For better quality of care, greater communication about complementary therapy use is needed between cancer patients and their conventional and complementary providers. In addition, more communication between conventional and complementary providers is needed. Nurses may have a crucial role in facilitating communication, as they are positive toward complementary therapies and they have more direct communication with patients about their treatment preferences.

Perception of risk and communication among conventional and complementary health care providers involving cancer patients' use of complementary therapies: a literature review.

BACKGROUND: Communication between different health care providers (conventional and complementary) and cancer patients about their use of complementary therapies affects the health and safety of the patients. The aim of this study was to examine the qualitative research literature on the perception of and communication about the risk of complementary therapies between different health care providers and cancer patients. METHODS: Systematic searches in six medical databases covering literature from 2000 to 2015 were performed. The studies were accessed according to the level of evidence and summarized into different risk situations. Qualitative content analysis was used to analyze the text data, and the codes were defined before and during the data analysis. RESULTS: Twenty-nine papers were included in the primary analysis and five main themes were identified and discussed. The main risk situations identified were 1. Differences in treatment concepts and philosophical values among complementary and conventional health care providers. 2. Adverse effects from complementary products and herbs due to their contamination/toxicity and interactions with conventional cancer treatment. 3. Health care physicians and oncologists find it difficult to recommend many complementary modalities due to the lack of scientific evidence for their effect. 4. Lack of knowledge and information about complementary and conventional cancer treatments among different health care providers. CONCLUSION: The risk of consuming herbs and products containing high level of toxins is a considerable threat to patient safety (direct risk). At the same time, the lack of scientific evidence of effect for many complementary therapies and differences in treatment philosophy among complementary and conventional health care providers potentially hinder effective communication about these threats with mutual patients (indirect risk). As such, indirect risk may pose an additional risk to patients who want to combine complementary therapies with conventional treatment in cancer care. Health care providers who care for cancer patients should be aware of these risks.

Complementary and Alternative Medicine Use among Norwegian Cancer Survivors: Gender-Specific Prevalence and Associations for Use.

The associations for CAM use are only occasionally differentiated by gender in populations where both male and female cancer survivors occur. The aim of this study is to describe the prevalence of CAM use in individuals with a previous cancer diagnosis and to investigate gender differences regard to factors associated with use. A total of 12982 men and women filled in a questionnaire with questions about life style and health issues. Eight hundred of those had a previous cancer diagnosis of whom 630 answered three questions concerning CAM use in the last 12 months. A total of 33.8% of all cancer survivors reported CAM use, 39.4% of the women and 27.9% of the men (P < 0.01). The relationship between the demographic variables and being a CAM user differed significantly between men and women with regard to age (P = 0.03), education (P = 0.04), and income (P < 0.01). Female CAM users were more likely to have a university degree than the nonusers, while male CAM users were more likely to have a lower income than the nonusers. According to this study, prevalence and factors associated with CAM use differ significantly between male and female survivors of cancer.

Any difference? Use of a CAM provider among cancer patients, coronary heart disease (CHD) patients and individuals with no cancer/CHD.

BACKGROUND: Although use of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) among cancer patients has been described previously, prevalence of use has not commonly been compared to other disease groups in a true population sample where CAM use or cancer is not the main focus. The aims of the present study are to (1) examine how CAM use in cancer patients differs from people with a previous CHD diagnosis and people with no cancer or CHD diagnosis in an unselected general population and (2), investigate the use of a CAM provider among individuals with a previous cancer diagnosis. METHODS: A total of 8040 men and women aged 29 to 87 in the city of Tromsø, Norway filled in a questionnaire developed specifically for the Tromsø V study with questions on life style and health issues. Visits to a CAM provider within the last 12 months and information on cancer, heart attack and angina pectoris (heart cramp) were among the questions. 1449 respondents were excluded from the analyses. RESULTS: Among the 6591 analysed respondents 331 had a prior cancer diagnosis, of whom 7.9% reported to have seen a CAM provider within the last 12 months. This did not differ significantly from neither the CHD group (6.4%, p = 0.402) nor the no cancer/CHD group (9.5%, p = 0.325). CONCLUSION: According to this study, the proportion of cancer patients seeing a CAM provider was not statistically significantly different from patients with CHD or individuals without cancer or CHD.