Publication: The Use of Complementary and Alternative Medicine in Thai Gynecologic Oncology Patients: Influencing Factors
Issued Date
2021-01-01
Resource Type
ISSN
17414288
1741427X
1741427X
Other identifier(s)
2-s2.0-85119985302
Rights
Mahidol University
Rights Holder(s)
SCOPUS
Bibliographic Citation
Evidence-based Complementary and Alternative Medicine. Vol.2021, (2021)
Suggested Citation
Nuntorn Chukasemrat, Chuenkamon Charakorn, Arb Aroon Lertkhachonsuk The Use of Complementary and Alternative Medicine in Thai Gynecologic Oncology Patients: Influencing Factors. Evidence-based Complementary and Alternative Medicine. Vol.2021, (2021). doi:10.1155/2021/1322390 Retrieved from: https://repository.li.mahidol.ac.th/handle/20.500.14594/78552
Research Projects
Organizational Units
Authors
Journal Issue
Thesis
Title
The Use of Complementary and Alternative Medicine in Thai Gynecologic Oncology Patients: Influencing Factors
Other Contributor(s)
Abstract
Background. To determine the factors influencing the use of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) in gynecologic cancer patients and the prevalence and pattern of CAM use. Methods. This was a cross-sectional study of 370 gynecologic cancer patients conducted at the outpatient clinic, Ramathibodi Hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand. After obtaining informed consent, participants were asked to complete a standardized questionnaire including sociodemographic and clinical characteristics, detail of CAM use, attitude of CAM use, and quality of life using EORTC-QLQ-C30. Results. The prevalence of CAM use was 25.13%. The most common type was herbal medicine (55.90%). The participants who resided or had a birthplace in rural areas presented with a higher proportion of CAM use than those in urban areas (P=0.470 and P=0.004, respectively). Participants who received multiple modalities of cancer treatment reported a significantly higher proportion of CAM use (P=0.024). Most CAM users agreed that the CAM could be used in combination with standard treatment, and some rather disagreed that CAM could interrupt the treatment effect of the conventional treatment. CAM users had significantly higher role functioning in quality-of-life scores. Conclusion. Factors influencing CAM use in gynecologic cancer patients were rural area birthplace or residency, receiving multiple modalities of cancer treatment, having positive attitude toward CAM use. CAM users had better performance in role functioning in the quality-of-life score. Therefore, gynecologic oncologists should pay attention to these factors in order to communicate with gynecologic cancer patients about CAM use.