These difficulties notwithstanding, it is apparent that CAM use continues to be significant. Within the epidemiological literature on CAM use, variations in the definition of CAM, study populations and methodologies make it very difficult to compare studies and reach firm conclusions. Alternative methods are defined as unproved or disproved methods, rather than evidence-based or proven methods to prevent, diagnose, and treat cancer. Rather, they control symptoms and improve well-being and quality of life. Complementary therapies do not replace mainstream cancer treatment and are not promoted to cure disease. The American Cancer Society separately defines "complementary" and "alternative." "Complementary" methods are supportive methods used to complement evidence-based treatment. This definition, arrived at after much debate, demonstrates that the scope of CAM can be quite large and dynamic.
The National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine (NCCAM) defines Complementary and Alternative Medicine (CAM) as "a group of diverse medical and health care systems, practices, and products that are not presently considered to be part of conventional medicine". CAM is emerging as an important form of care.
By 2001, hospitals that offered CAM services were citing patient demand as a primary motivating factor. A large-scale follow-up study showed that CAM use among the general public increased from 34% in 1990 to 42% in 1997. A national assessment of veteran interest in CAM may assist VA leaders to respond to patients' needs.Įisenberg and colleagues estimated that Americans made approximately 425 million visits to CAM practitioners in 1990, more than the total number of visits to primary care physicians during that period. A large majority of veterans reported interest in using CAM modalities if they were offered at the VA. Use of 6 common CAM treatments among these veterans is lower than among the general population, but still substantial. Seventy-six percent of CAM non-users reported that they would use it if offered at the VA. The diagnosis of chronic pain versus cancer was not associated with differential CAM use (p = 0.15). CAM use was associated with more education (p = 0.02), higher income (p = 0.006), non-VA insurance (p = 0.003), additional care outside the VA (p = 0.01) and the belief that lifestyle contributes to illness (p = 0.015). Seventy-two patients (27.3%) reported CAM use within the past 12 months.
We used the chi-square test to examine bivariate associations between our predictor variables and CAM use. The self-administered, mail-in survey included questions on demographics, health beliefs, medical problems and 6 common CAM treatments (herbs, dietary supplements, chiropractic care, massage therapy, acupuncture and homeopathy) use. We sought to measure the prevalence of selected CAM use among veterans attending oncology and chronic pain clinics and to describe the characteristics of CAM use in this population. Complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) is emerging as an important form of care in the United States.