A Case of Liver Injury From Shark Cartilage Supplementation in Patient With Malignancy

Hossain, Samia; Mishra, Avantika; Bhandari, Bhavik

doi:10.14309/00000434-201710001-02144

Cited by 1 publication

(1 citation statement)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…10,17 While most CAM therapies are likely benign, there have been reports of these treatments causing demonstrable harm. [18][19][20] Given that many CAM interventions do not undergo the same approval process as a conventional medical treatment before reaching the market, patients may be at higher risk of potential harm. These potentially dangerous or non-beneficial therapies have previously been referred to as "medical quackery," a term interpreted by many in the CAM field as pejorative.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Off the Beaten Path: Caring for People Engaging in Potentially Unsafe Low Evidence Therapies

Hammond

Schneiderhan

Taylor

et al. 2022

Am J Hosp Palliat Care

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Palliative care clinicians regularly care for patients with serious illnesses, many of whom are engaging in the use of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) either alone or along with conventional medical therapies. A subset of these patients may be engaging in therapies that have little or no evidence for efficacy and carry significant potential risks to their health. These therapies, however, may carry a great deal of significance for the patient and family for whom conventional medicine has failed or is otherwise deemed untenable. Dismissing such therapies as “quackery” risks alienating patients and damaging or even severing a therapeutic relationship. When faced with patients who are engaging in potentially unsafe low-evidence therapies (PULETs), clinicians themselves may experience a great deal of moral distress when deciding how to balance supporting the hope PULETs may represent with the principles of nonmaleficence and autonomy. In this article, we will review the definition of PULETs and distinguish them from most CAM therapies. Drawing upon existing writings in the CAM literature, we will then review a framework to evaluate the relative risk/benefit ratio of such therapies followed by a review of the ethical and legal aspects of care. Finally, utilizing existing principles and tools in emotion-based communication, we present a communication approach to foster continued collaboration and care for patients who engage in PULETs.

show abstract