Effectiveness of Complementary Therapies in Cancer Patients: A Systematic Review

María Dolores Guerra-Martín, María Sandra Tejedor-Bueno and Matías Correa-Casado
Additional contact information
María Dolores Guerra-Martín: Department of Nursing, University of Seville, 41009 Seville, Spain
María Sandra Tejedor-Bueno: Faculty of Nursing, Physiotherapy and Podiatry, University of Seville, 41009 Seville, Spain
Matías Correa-Casado: Department of Nursing, Physiotherapy and Medicine, University of Almería, 04120 Almería, Spain

IJERPH, 2021, vol. 18, issue 3, 1-10

Abstract: According to the World Health Organization, cancer is the second leading cause of death in the world. In Spain, about a quarter of a million cases were diagnosed in 2017, and 81% of the Spanish population has used, at least once, some kind of complementary therapy. Said therapies are increasingly being used by cancer patients. The purpose of the study is to analyse the effectiveness of complementary therapies among cancer patients. A systematic peer review was conducted following the PRISMA-ScR guide in four databases (PubMed, CINAHL, Scopus and WOS). The inclusion criteria were Randomised Clinical Trials, published between 2013 and 2018, with a value of 3 or more on the Jadad Scale. The protocol was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42019127593). The study sample amounted to 1845 patients (64.55% women), the most common being breast cancer patients (794), followed by lung cancer patients (341). Fifteen complementary therapies were identified. We found two studies for each of the following: electroacupuncture, phytotherapy, hypnotherapy, guided imagery and progressive muscle relaxation. From the remaining ones, we identified a study on each therapy. The findings reveal some effective complementary therapies: auriculotherapy and acupuncture, laser moxibustion, hypnosis, Ayurveda, electroacupuncture, progressive muscle relaxation and guided imagery, yoga, phytotherapy, music therapy and traditional Chinese medicine. On the other hand, electroacupuncture, laser moxibustion and traditional Chinese medicine presented adverse effects, and kinesiology did not show effectiveness.

Keywords: complementary therapies; effectiveness; neoplasms; Randomised Controlled Trial; systematic review; treatment outcome (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: I I1 I3 Q Q5 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2021
References: View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/3/1017/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/3/1017/ (text/html)

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:gam:jijerp:v:18:y:2021:i:3:p:1017-:d:486088

Access Statistics for this article

IJERPH is currently edited by Ms. Jenna Liu

More articles in IJERPH from MDPI
Bibliographic data for series maintained by MDPI Indexing Manager ().