Peppermint Essential Oil for Nausea and Vomiting in Hospitalized Patients: Incorporating Holistic Patient Decision Making Into the Research Design.

AIMS: This study examined nausea and vomiting (N/V) in hospitalized patients following the use of inhaled peppermint essential oil (aromatherapy) compared to combined aromatherapy/antiemetics or antiemetics alone. METHOD AND MATERIALS: A total of 103 hospitalized patients were offered one of three options to control N/V. Patient choice was considered in the holistic trial design so that patients were not denied either the essential oil or antiemetics. Patients rated nausea 0 to 10 on the Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale at symptom onset and within 60 minutes of the intervention. RESULTS: Only three subjects enrolled in the antiemetic arm; thus this arm was eliminated from analysis, resulting in 100 evaluable patients. Mean nausea score improved significantly for the entire sample following the aromatherapy or aromatherapy/antiemetic intervention (p < .0001). Patients in the aromatherapy arm had significant improvement in nausea compared to the combined aromatherapy/antiemetic arm (p < .0001). Patient perception that peppermint oil relieves N/V significantly improved for the entire sample. Notable is that 65% of patients used peppermint essential oil alone. CONCLUSIONS: Peppermint essential oil is an effective independent or complementary modality for relief of N/V in hospitalized patients. Research designs that incorporate patient decision making should be considered for studies in which placebos do not contribute to holistic care.

Clinical Effectiveness of Traditional and Complementary Medicine Interventions in Combination with Nicotine Replacement Therapy on Smoking Cessation: A Randomized Controlled Pilot Trial.

Background: Smoking is associated with many preventable diseases and deaths. Globally, more than 6 million deaths per year are related to smoking. This study aimed to evaluate the pragmatic effectiveness of traditional and complementary medicine (T&CM) interventions for the smoking cessation treatment and to calculate the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of these interventions. Methods: The study design was a pragmatic, open-label randomized trial. The hypothesis of this trial was that the smoking cessation success rate increases with the addition of T&CM methods. The intervention group was provided T&CM interventions in addition to nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) and counseling, whereas the control group was treated with only NRT and counseling. Individuals received treatment for 4 weeks, then follow-up care for 20 weeks. Results: Forty-one participants were enrolled and assigned to either an intervention group or a control group at a ratio of 1:1. The odds ratio values at 4 weeks were 1.96 (0.51-8.51) in intention-to-treat analysis and 3.27 (0.75-17.75) in per-protocol analysis. The amount of smoking (cigarettes) decreased in both groups: from 17.2 ± 10.31 (baseline) to 1.7 ± 3.02 (4 weeks) in the intervention group and from 12.9 ± 5.47 (baseline) to 3.3 ± 5.96 (4 weeks) in the control group. The total medical costs per patient were $212.20 USD in the intervention group and $170.80 in the control group. The adjusted ICER of T&CM interventions was $13,355. Conclusions: This pilot study evaluated the clinical feasibility of T&CM used in conjunction with NRT and counseling for the smoking cessation treatment. However, there was no statistically significant effectiveness of T&CM interventions to raise cessation success rate. This study demonstrates the necessity for further studies based on large-scale randomized controlled trials.

[A French survey on the resort of oral alternative complementary medicines used in children with cancer]. / Évaluation du recours aux médecines alternatives et complémentaires orales dans un service d'onco-hématologie pédiatrique.

INTRODUCTION: The use of oral complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) is widespread among cancer patients, but considerably less known in pediatric cancer patients. Our survey was conducted in a pediatric onco-hematology unit to study the frequency and the circumstances of CAM use. METHODS: This study included 50 children treated for malignant diseases. A questionnaire was used to collect support general data on the child as well as information on the CAM use. One of the child's parents was interviewed. RESULTS: Most of parents (48%) used one or more CAM for their child in the context of cancer. The most used type of CAM was homeopathy, dietary supplements and aromatherapy. The most frequent goal for CAM use was to limit the side effects of conventional treatment (75% of parents). For 87.5% of users, the CAM was effective. Physicians were not aware of this use for 33.3% of users, in spite of the fact that the family physician was the main source of information for this use. Most of parents (48%) needed more information about the CAM and they bought CAM in a pharmacy. CONCLUSIONS: The use of oral CAM in this survey was common. For most parents, this use was effective and appreciated because they generated fewer side effects than conventional treatments. However, doctors were not systematically informed of this use. This is problematic because some CAM such as herbal supplements could potentially cause interactions with cancer treatments. More information about CAM is necessary in pediatric onco-hematology.

A perspective on complementary/alternative medicine use among survivors of hematopoietic stem cell transplant: Benefits and uncertainties.

The widespread use of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) in cancer survivors is well known despite a paucity of scientific evidence to support its use. The number of survivors of hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HCT) is growing rapidly and HCT clinicians are aware that many of their patients use CAM therapies consistently. However, due to a paucity of data regarding the benefits and harms of CAM therapies in these survivors, clinicians are reluctant to provide specific recommendations for or against particular CAM therapies. A systematic literature review was conducted with a search using PubMed, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and Ovid online for each CAM therapy as defined by the National Center of Complementary and Alternative Medicine. The search generated 462 references, of which 26 articles were deemed to be relevant for the review. Due to extensive heterogeneity in data and limited randomized trials, a meta-analysis could not be performed but a comprehensive systematic review was conducted with specified outcomes for each CAM therapy. In randomized controlled trials, certain mind and body interventions such as relaxation were observed to be effective in alleviating psychological symptoms in patients undergoing HCT, whereas the majority of the other CAM treatments were found to have mixed results. CAM use is an understudied area in HCT survivorship and clinicians should convey the benefits and uncertainties concerning the role of CAM therapies to their patients.

Evaluation of aromatherapy in treating postoperative pain: pilot study.

This study compared the analgesic efficacy of postoperative lavender oil aromatherapy in 50 patients undergoing breast biopsy surgery. Twenty-five patients received supplemental oxygen through a face mask with two drops of 2% lavender oil postoperatively. The remainder of the patients received supplemental oxygen through a face mask with no lavender oil. Outcome variables included pain scores (a numeric rating scale from 0 to 10) at 5, 30, and 60 minutes postoperatively, narcotic requirements in the postanesthesia care unit (PACU), patient satisfaction with pain control, as well as time to discharge from the PACU. There were no significant differences in narcotic requirements and recovery room discharge times between the two groups. Postoperative lavender oil aromatherapy did not significantly affect pain scores. However, patients in the lavender group reported a higher satisfaction rate with pain control than patients in the control group (P = 0.0001).