Focus on Alternative and Complementary Therapies
www.pharmpress.com/fact
Focus Alternat Complement Ther©2005 Pharmaceutical Press
Focus Altern Complement Ther 2004; 9: 12–3
To investigate how male cancer patients’ preferences for or against CAM are determined.
This was a longitudinal qualitative project, purposefully sampling men across cancer types, illness stages, CAM use and non-use. Men were interviewed twice over 6 months. Data analysis followed the constant comparative method, coding for key themes, categories and concepts, assisted by ATLAS.ti software.
Forty-five participants were recruited from several conventional and complementary settings. Some men used CAM, such as mineral supplements, before having cancer and continued. For others, cancer triggered CAM use, with men overcoming their initial scepticism, often encouraged by partners, hoping for a cure or prolonging life by immune system boosting. Others valued CAM as a space to talk, relax, develop a positive attitude and receive dietary advice, components missing from their conventional consultations. Trust in oncologists was essential and all participants disclosed their CAM use. Men had a practical ‘toolkit’ approach to treatment, trying anything that might help, rather than embracing a ‘holistic’ lifestyle. All trusted CAM as ‘safe’ or based on ancient traditions and not requiring scientific proof. They wished for a more sympathetic, holistic consultation style within oncology. Non-use of CAM related to lack of information and availability from conventional sources.
Greater information and availability of CAM within conventional medicine would be welcomed by the men in this study, and the adoption of a more holistic shared consultation style.
This study was funded by the Department of Health’s Role of CAM in the Care of Patients with Cancer programme.
