In vivo (Athens, Greece) · 2025
A Survey on the Prescribing Orientation Towards Complementary Therapies Among Oncologists in Italy: Symptoms and Unmet Patient Needs.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Valerio Maria Rosaria, Scandurra Giuseppa, Greco Martina, Gebbia Vittorio, Piazza Dario, Sambataro Daniela
Аннотация
BACKGROUND/AIM: A high percentage of cancer patients use complementary therapies (CM) during their disease journey. Several barriers for CM prescription still exist among oncologists. This study explored oncologists' attitudes toward prescribing CM with oral supplements or confirming prescriptions made by others.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study employed a mixed semi-quantitative and qualitative research strategy via a web-based platform interview as a preliminary step for a program of observational studies on the oncologist's prescriptions of oral supplements in cancer management, in Italy.
RESULTS: Out of 95 invited oncologists, 40 participated in the study, mainly working in a general hospital or a cancer center. The deep knowledge of guidelines on integrative medicine was generally poor. The symptoms driving oncologists to initiate discussions on CM with patients were fatigue, anorexia/poor appetite, weight loss, insomnia, distress, neuropathy, or pain. The presence of reliable data in the medical literature on prescribing CM was a significant factor in choosing a supplement.
CONCLUSION: This study reveals that oncologists' limited knowledge and lack of standardized guidelines hinder the prescription of CM, despite recognizing its potential benefits. CM discussions are primarily patient-driven, with prescriptions influenced by reliable scientific data and symptom management. Expanding integrative medicine services and research on CM efficacy could enhance oncologists' confidence, improve patient care, and address unmet needs in oncology.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study employed a mixed semi-quantitative and qualitative research strategy via a web-based platform interview as a preliminary step for a program of observational studies on the oncologist's prescriptions of oral supplements in cancer management, in Italy.
RESULTS: Out of 95 invited oncologists, 40 participated in the study, mainly working in a general hospital or a cancer center. The deep knowledge of guidelines on integrative medicine was generally poor. The symptoms driving oncologists to initiate discussions on CM with patients were fatigue, anorexia/poor appetite, weight loss, insomnia, distress, neuropathy, or pain. The presence of reliable data in the medical literature on prescribing CM was a significant factor in choosing a supplement.
CONCLUSION: This study reveals that oncologists' limited knowledge and lack of standardized guidelines hinder the prescription of CM, despite recognizing its potential benefits. CM discussions are primarily patient-driven, with prescriptions influenced by reliable scientific data and symptom management. Expanding integrative medicine services and research on CM efficacy could enhance oncologists' confidence, improve patient care, and address unmet needs in oncology.