Background
In the era of digital and improved conventional medicine, many continue to use traditional and complementary medicine (TCM). The prevalence of its usage is not well reported, especially in patients with end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) receiving haemodialysis, thus its benefits and adverse effects are not widely known. This study determines the prevalence, types, perceptions and factors associated with TCM use by chronic haemodialysis patients in Malaysia.
Methods
This is a multi-centre cross-sectional study involving patients undergoing haemodialysis treatment in Malaysia. A validated face-to-face questionnaire-based interview was conducted. Sociodemographic and clinical profiles of the patients, factors associated with TCM use, perceptions, sources of information, and disclosures to treating doctors were obtained. Data were analysed using SPSS software.
Results
A total of n = 329 participants were recruited. The mean age of the participants was 54.9 ± 12.5 years. The majority were Malays (72%) and females (54.7%). A total of 64.7% (n = 213) reported TCM use; n = 132 used TCM before the initiation of dialysis, while n = 81 used TCM after initiation. In the post-hoc analysis, patients who had never used TCM had a higher mean age (56.7 ± 12.3 years) than the patients who used TCM (51.1 ± 13.1) (p = 0.015) and were likely to have received primary education (p = 0.011). Unemployment was more likely to be associated with non-TCM use; with odds ratio 1.85 (95% CI: 1.15, 2.98). Biologically based therapy was found to be the most popular (97.2%) type of TCM, including herbal medicine (67.6%) and supplements (58.0%). Most respondents did not disclose their TCM use to their doctors (72.3%), and 41.8% had the perception that they felt better.
Conclusions
TCM is widely used among chronic haemodialysis patients in Malaysia, mainly herbal medicine and supplements. Non-disclosure to healthcare professionals and a poor monitoring and regulation of its use in ESKD patients could be detrimental. Awareness needs to be raised among healthcare professionals and the general population.
Trial registration
The Ethics Committee for Research, University Putra Malaysia (13th March 2019). Reference: UPM/TNCPI/RMC/1.4.18.2 (JKEUPM).
Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is a widely used therapy for coronary artery disease (CAD), but it carries risks and complications. Adhering to evidence-based practice guidelines is crucial for optimal outcomes. This review compares the recommendations of the 2021 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association/Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions (ACC/AHA/SCAI) and 2018 European Society of Cardiology (ESC) guidelines for coronary artery revascularization and discusses emerging trends and novel devices in PCI. A comprehensive literature review of mixed studies, clinical trials, and guidelines was conducted. Intravascular imaging, including intravascular ultrasound and optical coherence tomography, for stent optimization, is also recommended when feasible. However, differences reflecting variations in evidence quality interpretation and applicability were identified. Furthermore, novel devices and technologies with the potential for improving outcomes were highlighted, but their safety and efficacy compared to standard-of-care techniques require further evaluation through extensive randomized trials. Clinicians should stay updated on advancements and personalize treatment decisions based on individual patient factors. Future research should address evidence gaps and barriers to adopting innovative devices and techniques. This review provides recommendations for clinical practice, emphasizing the need to remain current with the evolving landscape of PCI to optimize patient outcomes. The discoveries provide valuable counsel for the deliberation of clinical interventions and prospective inquiries within the realm of interventional cardiology. Overall, the review underscores the importance of evidence-based practice and ongoing advancements in PCI for CAD management.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.