Use of Complementary and Alternative Medicine in patients with organ transplantation in Switzerland

Frei-Erb, Martin; Torchetti, Loredana; von Ammon, Klaus (21 September 2015). Use of Complementary and Alternative Medicine in patients with organ transplantation in Switzerland. European journal of integrative medicine, 7(7s), p. 37. Elsevier 10.1016/j.eujim.2015.09.093

	Text 2015_Frei-Erb, Torchetti, von Ammon_Use of Complementary and Alternative Medicine in patients with organ transplantation in Switzerland Kopie.pdf - Published Version Restricted to registered users only Available under License Publisher holds Copyright. Download (43kB)
Preview	Text Abstract%20Transplant_ECIM_23.06.2015.pdf - Accepted Version Available under License Creative Commons: Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works (CC-BY-NC-ND). Download (17kB) | Preview

Introduction: The aim was to investigate retrospectively
use of Complementary and Alternative Medicine (CAM) in the
treatment of patients with organ transplantation in Switzerland.
Methods: Members of the Swiss transplant association completed
a questionnaire about CAM use retrospectively. Five
different stages were differentiated: CAM usage (1) during
underlying disease, (2) before transplant, (3) during hospitalisation/
rehabilitation from transplant, (4) for transplant
complications and (5) after transplant for other diseases.
Results: Of the 267 patients contacted, 124 (46%) completed
the questionnaire, and data of 118 (44%) participants could be
analyzed: 55 women (47%), mean age 56 years. Overall, 64
(54%) indicated CAM use, with about 30% usage at every stage
(except during hospitalization with only 10%).
Different methods were most common: during underlying
disease classical homeopathy (15% of all participants), before
transplant dietary supplements (13%), during hospitalization
meditation (3%), for transplantation complications dietary supplements
(10%), and after transplant for other diseases massage
(11%).
Among the 64 CAM-users, the most important reasons for the
usage were improvement of general condition (36%) and abatement
of adverse effects of conventional treatment (25%). Among
the 54 non-CAM-users, most frequent reasons for not choosing
CAM were insecurity about interactions with conventional
treatment (46%), and ignorance of this option (28%). About
35% of the CAM-users reported an improved general condition,
while 30% noticed an abatement of side effects of conventional
treatment.
Conclusions: To prevent dangerous interactions with conventional
treatment, more information on possibilities of CAM
in the treatment of patients with transplantations is needed for
doctors and patients.

Interest & Impact

Downloads

208 since deposited on 14 Oct 2015
10 in the past 12 months

Citations

5 Citations in Web of Science ®
6 Citations in Scopus

Search

in Google Scholar™

Services

Actions (login required)

Edit item

Actions (login required)

Edit item