Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-fscjk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T07:20:01.136Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Perception of naturopathy for female patients with metastatic gynecological cancer: A qualitative study

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 May 2015

Myriam Legenne ,
Anne Chirac ,
Murielle Ruer ,
Fanny Reix  and
Marilène Filbet
Myriam Legenne
Affiliation:
Equipe Mobile de Soins Palliatifs de la Croix-Rousse, Hospices Civils de Lyon, Lyon, France
Anne Chirac
Affiliation:
Centre de Soins Palliatifs de Lyon Sud, Hospices Civils de Lyon, Lyon, France Institut de Psychologie, Université Lyon 2, Bron, Lyon, France
Murielle Ruer
Affiliation:
Centre de Soins Palliatifs de Lyon Sud, Hospices Civils de Lyon, Lyon, France
Fanny Reix
Affiliation:
Equipe Mobile de Soins Palliatifs de l'hôpital de Vienne, Vienne, France
Marilène Filbet*
Affiliation:
Centre de Soins Palliatifs de Lyon Sud, Hospices Civils de Lyon, Lyon, France
*
Address correspondence and reprint requests to: Marilène Filbet, Centre de soins palliatifs Pavillon 1K, Centre Hospitalier Lyon-Sud, Hospices civils de Lyon, 165, chemin du Grand-Revoyet, 69495 Pierre-Bénite cedex, France. E-mail: marilene.filbet@chu-lyon.fr
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Objective:

Women with gynecological cancer have been reported as very high users of complementary medicine. The goal of our study was to explore the perceptions of patients with an advanced gynecological cancer who use naturopathy as complementary medicine. We were looking more specifically at patients' opinions on the effect of naturopathy on their quality of life and its relation to conventional oncological treatments.

Method:

This pilot qualitative study used semistructured interviews, and data were analyzed using grounded theory and qualitative methods. The main criterion for inclusion in the study was the use of naturopathy as a treatment complementary to conventional cancer treatment for gynecological metastatic cancer on the oncology day care unit.

Results:

Six patients were included until data saturation. They express the physical and psychological impact of treatments and disease. Usually, chemotherapy is perceived as something that may be curative or may at least lead to remission. Unlike conventional treatments, naturopathy is not perceived as drugs, and it is seen as a way to relieve symptoms, improve well-being, and as a way of enabling them to take an active decision-making role in their care journey. Patients want to have more information about naturopathy.

Significance of Results:

This study suggests that patients are aware of the benefits of a specific cancer treatment as chemotherapy, but they resort to naturopathy for symptom control, and also to take a more active role during treatment.

Keywords

NaturopathyGynecological cancerQualitative study
Type
Original Articles
Information
Palliative & Supportive Care , Volume 13 , Issue 6 , December 2015 , pp. 1663 - 1668
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2015 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Anderson, J.G. & Taylor, A.G. (2012). Use of complementary therapies for cancer symptom management: Results of the 2007 national health interview survey. Journal of Alternative and Complementary Medicine, 18(3), 235–241.Google Scholar
Beuth, J. (2010). Evidence-based complementary oncology: Innovative approaches to optimise standard therapy strategies. Anticancer Research, 30, 1767–1772.Google Scholar
Boon, H.S., Olatunde, F. & Zick, S.M. (2007). Trends in complementary/alternative medicine use by breast cancer survivors: Comparing survey data from 1998 and 2005. BMC Women's Health, 7(4). doi: 10.1186/1472-6874-7-4.Google Scholar
Buettner, C., Kroenke, C., Phillips, R., et al. (2006). Correlates of use of different types of complementary and alternative medicine by breast cancer survivors in the nurses' health study. Breast Cancer Research and Treatment, 100, 219–227.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cassileth, B.R. (2009). The public health impact of herbs and nutritional supplements. Pharmaceutical Biology, 47(8), 761–767.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chesebro, J.W. & Borisoff, D.J. (2007). What makes qualitative research qualitative? Qualitative Research Reports in Communication, 8(1), 3–14.Google Scholar
de Ridder, D., Geenen, R., Kuijer, R. & van Middendorp, H. (2008). Psychological adjustment to chronical disease, Lancet, 372, 246–255.Google Scholar
Dilhuydy, J.-M. (2003). L'attrait pour les médecines complémentaires et alternatives en cancérologie: Une réalité que les médecins ne peuvent ni ignorer, ni réfuter. Bulletin du Cancer, 90(7), 623–628.Google Scholar
Dolbeault, S. & Brédart, A. (2010). Difficultés de l'annonce du côté des professionnelset de leurs patients: Quels obstacles à la communication et quelsrecourspossibles? Bulletin du Cancer, 97(10), 1183–1194.Google Scholar
Eisenberg, L. (2002). Complementary and alternative medicine: What is its role? Harvard Review of Psychiatry, 10(4), 221–230.Google Scholar
Eisenberg, D.M., Kessler, R.C., van Rompay, M.I., et al. (2001). Perceptions about complementary therapies relative to conventional therapies among adults who use both: Results from a national survey. Annals of Internal Medicine, 15, 344–351.Google Scholar
Ernst, E. & Cassileth, B.R. (1998). The prevalence of complementary/alternative medicine in cancer: A systematic review. Cancer, 83, 777–782.Google Scholar
Ernst, E. (2000). The role of complementary and alternative medicine. BMJ, 231, 1133–1135.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fasching, P.A., Thiel, F., Nicolaisen-Murmann, K., et al. (2007). Association of complementary methods with quality of life and life satisfaction in patients with gynecologic and breast malignancies. Supportive Care in Cancer, 15(11), 1277–1284.Google Scholar
Fouladbakhsh, J.M. & Stommel, M. (2010). Gender, symptom experience, and use of complementary and alternative medicine practices among cancer survivors in the U.S. cancer population. Oncology Nursing Forum, 37(1), E7–E15.Google Scholar
Girgis, A., Adams, J. & Sibbritt, D. (2005). The use of complementary and alternatives therapies by patients with cancer. Oncology Research, 15, 281–289.Google Scholar
Lafferty, W.E., Bellas, A., Corage Baden, A., et al. (2004). The use of complementary and alternative medical providers by insured cancer patients in Washington state. American Cancer Society, 100(7), 1522–1534.Google Scholar
Laplantine, F. (1978). La médecine populaire des campagnes françaises d'aujourd'hui. Paris: Delarge.Google Scholar
Laplantine, F. (1997). Anthropologie de la maladie. Paris: Payot.Google Scholar
le Breton, D. (2005). Anthropologie du corps et modernité. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.Google Scholar
Leis, A. & Millard, J. (2007). Complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) and supportive care in cancer: A synopsis of research perspectives and contributions by an interdisciplinary team. Supportive Care in Cancer, 15, 909–912.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Marcelin-Benazech, B. (2010). Aux limites de l'approche allopathique—Médecines complémentaires en soins palliatifs: Quelles sont les attentes des patients. Revue Internationale de Soins Palliatifs, 25(2), 69–76.Google Scholar
Mills, M.E. & Sullivan, K. (1999). The importance of information giving for patients newly diagnosed with cancer: A review of the literature. Journal of Clinical Nursing, 8, 631–642.Google Scholar
Nazik, E., Nazik, H., Api, M., et al. (2012). Complementary and alternative medicine use by gynecologic oncology patients in Turkey. Asian Pacific Journal of Cancer Prevention, 13(1), 21–25.Google Scholar
Novak, K.L. & Chapman, G.E. (2001). Oncologists' and naturopaths' nutrition beliefs and practices. Cancer Practice, 9(3), 141–146.Google Scholar
O'Connor, M. & Payne, S. (2006). Discourse analysis: Examining the potential for research in palliative care. Palliative Medicine, 20(8), 829–834.Google Scholar
Olivier de Sardan, J.P. (1995). Anthropologie et développement: Essai en socio-anthropologie du changement social. Paris: APAD-KARTHALA.Google Scholar
Poulain, J.P. (2001). Manger aujourd'hui: Attitudes, normes et pratiques. Paris: Privat.Google Scholar
Rakovitch, E., Pignol, J.-P., Chartier, C., et al. (2005). Complementary and alternative medicine use is associated with an increased perception of breast cancer risk and death. Breast Cancer Research and Treatment, 90, 139–148.Google Scholar
Shockney, L. & Back, A. (2013). Communicating with patients on treatment options for advanced disease. Journal of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network, 11(5), 684–686.Google Scholar
Simon, L., Prebay, D., Beretz, A., et al. (2007). Médecines complémentaires et alternatives suivies par les patients cancéreux en France. Bulletin du Cancer, 494(5), 483–488.Google Scholar
Träger-Maury, S., Tournigand, C., Maindrault-Goebel, F., et al. (2007). Utilisation de médecine complémentaire chez les patients atteints de cancer dans un service de cancérologie français. Bulletin du Cancer, 94(11), 1017–1025.Google Scholar