Differences in perceptions of the benefits and risks of complementary and alternative medicine use among oncology patients and healthcare professionals

Ljerka Armano (), Marijan Benić, Andrea Armano (), Aneta Perak () and Aleksandar Racz ()

International Journal of Innovative Research and Scientific Studies, 2025, vol. 8, issue 6, 3042-3053

Abstract: Complementary and Alternative Medicine (CAM) is increasingly present in oncology care; however, the healthcare perspectives of professionals and patients regarding its efficacy and safety often diverge. This study examined CAM's perceived benefits and potential adverse effects among oncology patients and healthcare professionals. A cross-sectional study was conducted between November 2022 and May 2023 at the University Hospital Sisters of Mercy Center in Zagreb, Croatia. The study included 832 participants, comprising 411 oncology patients and 421 healthcare professionals (100 physicians and 321 nurses). Data was collected using survey questionnaire based on modified versions of the CAM Health Belief Questionnaire (CHBQ) and the Integrative Medicine Attitude Questionnaire (IMAQ). Statistics analyses included descriptive and inferential methods, such as one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and post hoc Tukey tests. Oncology patients were significantly more likely to perceive CAM as beneficial than healthcare professionals. Over 80% of patients believed that CAM contributes to symptom relief, whereas only 60% of healthcare professionals shared this view. The most pronounced differences in perceptions were observed regarding the potential for disease regression, with 43% of patients endorsing this claim compared to only 21% of healthcare professionals. A significant difference was also noted in the perception of adverse effects — physicians expressed more substantial concern about CAM- related side effects, particularly gastrointestinal disturbances (M = 3.69, SD = 1.134) and blood pressure irregularities (M = 3.60, SD = 1.137), while patients were less likely to associate CAM with adverse effects (M = 2.13, SD = 1.029 for gastrointestinal disturbances). The study results underscore the substantial differences in CAM perceptions between oncology patients and healthcare professionals. While patients view CAM as a valuable adjunct to oncology treatment, healthcare professionals—especially physicians—remain more cautious regarding its efficacy and safety. This highlights the need for further research and education initiatives to ensure informed and safe CAM integration into clinical practice.

Keywords: Adverse effects; Alternative therapy; Complementary Therapy; Healthcare workers; Patients; Positive outcomes. (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2025
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://ijirss.com/index.php/ijirss/article/view/10253/2403 (application/pdf)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:aac:ijirss:v:8:y:2025:i:6:p:3042-3053:id:10253

Access Statistics for this article

International Journal of Innovative Research and Scientific Studies is currently edited by Natalie Jean

More articles in International Journal of Innovative Research and Scientific Studies from Innovative Research Publishing
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Natalie Jean ().