PURSUIT AND PRACTICE OF COMPLEMENTARY THERAPIES BY CANCER-PATIENTS RECEIVING CONVENTIONAL TREATMENT

Objectives-To determine what proportion of oncology patients receiving conventional medical treatment also use complementary treatments; to assess which complementary treatments are the most popular and to asse ss patients' motivation for using them; to evaluate associated advanta ges and risks. Design-Postal screening questionnaire followed by semis tructured interview. Setting-Two hospitals in inner London. Subjects-6 00 unselected oncology patients aged 18 or over who had known their di agnosis of cancer for at least three months. Main outcome measures-Pre valence and demography of use of complementary therapies; patients' mo tivation and expectations of complementary therapies; areas of satisfa ction and dissatisfaction associated with conventional and complementa ry therapies. Results-415 (69%) patients returned the questionnaire. 1 6% had used complementary therapies. The most popular were healing, re laxation, visualisation, diets, homoeopathy, vitamins, herbalism, and the Bristol approach. Patients using complementary therapies tended to be younger, of higher social class, and female. Three quarters used t wo or more therapies. Therapies were mostly used for anticipated antit umour effect. Ill effects of diets and herb treatments were described. Satisfaction with both conventional and complementary therapies was h igh, although diets often caused difficulties. Patients using compleme ntary therapies were less satisfied with conventional treatments, larg ely because of side effects and lack of hope of cure. Benefits of comp lementary therapies were mainly psychological. Conclusions-A sizeable percentage of patients receiving conventional treatments for cancer al so use complementary therapies. Patient satisfaction with complementar y therapies, other than dietary therapies, was high even without the h oped for anticancer effect. Patients reported psychological benefits s uch as hope and optimism.