Search

Objective: Cancer patients often use complementary and alternative medicine (CAM). The aim of this study was to assess the expectations of cancer patients towards their general practitioner (GP) regarding information on and offers of CAM procedures. Methods: A standardised anonymous questionnaire was developed and handed out to cancer patients in GP practices and oncology clinics in Germany. Results: One hundred and eighty questionnaires were evaluable. For 88.1% of the patients, it was important that their GP regularly receives information on cancer therapy. Only a minority consulted with the GP regarding diagnosis and therapy of the cancer (32.4%) or approached him about side effects of the therapy (46.9%). About one fifth of the GPs offered CAM. Before the cancer diagnosis, only 7% of the patients received a CAM offer from the GP; after the diagnosis, it was 14%. A large majority wanted the GP to offer more complementary (70.9%) and alternative (54.3%) medicine. Conclusion: Our survey points to a clear mismatch of supply and demand regarding CAM for cancer patients in the primary care sector. Training for GPs on scientific evidence of as well as communication skills on CAM will be indispensable in the future to optimise the care of cancer patients by GPs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Germany's new medical licensure act has increased the importance of general practice in academic medical education. This study gives an overview of complementary and alternative medicine in general teaching practices in Germany and their adherence to evidence-based criteria which is required in order to qualify as a teaching practice., Methods: After a systematic search for German teaching practices, we assessed their diagnostic and therapeutic offers via their websites. We calculated the various frequencies of treatments and differentiated between evidence-based complementary medicine and alternative medicine with little to no evidence., Results: Of 4102 practices, more than half offered complementary and/or alternative treatment. Most of those were treatments approved of by the German medical association. Alternative medicine was offered by 18.2% of the practices., Conclusion: Collective terms and conflicting evidence complicate the classification of treatments. Teaching practices offering non-evidence-based treatment raise the question whether recruitment of additional teaching practices stands at odds with the quality of medical education. Explicit offers of alternative treatment should disqualify a teaching practice as such. Controversial treatment may be taught academically and during residency with a focus on evidence-based guidelines and communication skills in order to prepare young medical practitioners for talks with their patients about the subject., Competing Interests: Die Autorinnen/Autoren geben an, dass kein Interessenkonflikt besteht., (Thieme. All rights reserved.)