Why physicians need to look more closely at the use of complementary and alternative medicine by multiple sclerosis patients

Abstract

With the aim of contributing to the knowledge of attitudes, patterns and motivations for the use of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) for multiple sclerosis (MS), 109 MS outpatients, or their close relative in cases of mental status impairment, were interviewed using a semi-structured questionnaire. The main results are: (i). 35.7% used at least one CAM at least once; (ii). homeopathy and diets were the most common; (iii). 39.4% showed a positive attitude towards CAM; (iv). a perceived benefit was recorded in 61.5% of cases; (v). the referral source was a physician in only 12.8% of cases; (vi). caring neurologist was not consulted in 82% and generalist was not consulted in 67% of cases; (vii). of 61 CAM interventions, 21 were expected to be disease-modifying and 40 symptomatic; (viii). CAM negatively influenced compliance with conventional medical management in very few cases (2/39); (ix). a higher expanded disability status scale (EDSS) was observed in CAM users; and (x). in those who used CAM during last 3 years (21.1%), the approximate mean cost per year per person was 483 euro. In Italy, the use of CAM in MS is widespread but costly. This study has provided further baseline data on which to assess trends in CAM use and has highlighted issues for patients and conventional doctors about the use of CAM to deal with health problems. More research into the implications of concurrent use of CAM with conventional medicine on public health care is required.

Relationship Between Complementary/Alternative Treatment Use and Illicit Drug Use Among a Cohort of Women with, or at Risk for, HIV Infection

“…[31][32][33][34][35] Furthermore, it is difficult to combine different CAM modalities in one analysis. This issue was addressed by using various CAM categories; nonetheless, many different types of CAM exist within each category, and may have different effects on drug use.…”

Mind the Gap! Lay and Medical Perceptions of Risks Associated with the Use of Alternative Treatment and Conventional Medicine

“…In this study, patients with cancer or MS were included because both patient groups are large, and their use of CAM is widespread and considered as potentially risky [12,13,[20][21][22][23][24]. Exceptional cases are deviant cases that can illustrate unusual and typical aspects of a phenomenon and be perceived as illuminative and rich in information [33][34][35].…”

“…' Approximately 50% of Norwegian cancer and MS patients use CAM [12,13]. Despite the widespread use, studies on risks associated with the use of CAM still remain sparse, and a need for more research that enables patients to make informed treatment decisions has been emphasized by several authors [14][15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23][24]. The existing literature shows that benefits and low risk are associated with some specific CAM treatments used by MS and cancer patients when implemented properly [e.g., 14-16, 19, 25-27], while other treatments are considered unsafe or ineffective [e.g., [14][15][16]18].…”

Assessing and analyzing change in attitudes in the classroom

“…With the exception of clinical research into the efficacy of CAM techniques or products, CAM evaluations tend to be surveys of what clinicians know about methods (e.g., Hyodo et al, 2003;Lie & Boker, 2004;Kurtz et al, 2003;Dooley et al, 2004), of how comfortable patients are with CAM (Sharples et al, 2003;Lafferty et al, 2004;Pucci et al, 2004), or of how interested students or faculty would be in learning more about CAM (Brokaw et al, 2002;Kreitzer et al, 2002;Dutta et al 2003;Wetzel et al, 2003). In the present study, the impact of integrating CAM-based elements into a medical school curriculum, as reflected in self-reported attitudes towards CAM, was the outcome of interest.…”