Search PubMed⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

B R Cassileth

Publications and source records attributed to B R Cassileth.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed2001

Alternative medicine use worldwide: the International Union Against Cancer survey.

BACKGROUND: In the current study, the authors attempted to surmount the deficiencies of previous surveys and elicit information regarding the use of alternative treatments of cancer worldwide. METHODS: The International Union Against Cancer (UICC), an international, nongovernment volunteer organization, E-mailed a questionnaire concerning alternative therapy use to its members. RESULTS: A total of 83 responses from 33 countries were received. Descriptive analyses of this dataset were conducted, indicating the existence of a large and heterogeneous group of unproved remedies used to treat cancer in both developed and developing countries around the world. CONCLUSIONS: Improved public education concerning the importance of early medical attention and the value of documented cancer therapies, the wider availability of useful cancer treatments, and public policies that are sensitive to the patient's need to play a meaningful role in his or her own care are required.

Complementary Therapies↗
PubMed2000

Complementary therapies: the American experience.

This article explains the difference between complementary and alternative medicine and describes the current levels of use of such therapies in the United States of America, particularly among cancer patients. The complementary therapies that can help cancer patients during treatment for their disease and during rehabilitation are treated in greater depth.

Complementary Therapies↗
PubMed1999

How useful are unconventional cancer treatments?

Unconventional cancer treatments are used frequently. Therefore, oncologists need to know about them. This article gives an overview of current knowledge on the most prevalent complementary or alternative cancer therapies. A distinction is made between alleged cures, preventive and adjunctive measures. Shark cartilage, mistletoe, thymus therapy, essiac, hydrazine sulphate, 714-X, dietary regimens, green tea and Panax ginseng are all covered specifically. None of these treatments offer reasonable hope for a cure. Some strategies are promising in terms of cancer prevention. The true potential of unconventional therapies might lie in adjunctive and palliative care. It is concluded that good evidence in this area is scarce. Vis-à-vis the high prevalence of unconventional cancer treatments, rigorous investigations are mandatory, not least for increasing the safety of future patients.

Complementary Therapies↗
PubMed1999

Complementary therapies: overview and state of the art.

Studies to determine the prevalence of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) use among cancer patients show international interest in a wide collection of therapies and a broad span of use, ranging from 7% to 64% of patients sampled. The absence of consistent results across studies is due primarily to differing definitions of unconventional cancer therapies from study to study. Treatments promoted as alternatives to mainstream cancer cures (e.g., the recently disproved "cancer cure" of Italy's Dr. Di Bella) should be distinguished from complementary therapies, which are applied as adjuncts to mainstream care in an integrated fashion. The latter include mind-body techniques and herbal remedies, among many other remedies, all aimed at symptom control and enhanced quality of life. This differentiation provides a clearer understanding of CAM activity and enables selective evaluation of CAM's clinical effects. It permits us to avoid accepting or rejecting all of CAM out of hand. Health care professionals as well as patients and their families have become increasingly knowledgeable about complementary therapies that can be helpful to patients with cancer. Many such therapies have been well studied (meditation, tai chi), and others remain highly questionable (homeopathy, electromagnetics). Their benefits and potential problems are reviewed.

Complementary Therapies↗
PubMed1998

The prevalence of complementary/alternative medicine in cancer: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Complementary/alternative cancer treatments are believed to be prevalent. However, reliable prevalence rates do not exist. The aim of this review was to summarize the existing data on this topic. METHODS: A series of computerized literature searches was performed to locate all published studies documenting the prevalence of complementary and/or alternative therapy (CAM) use among patients with cancer. RESULTS: A total of 26 surveys from 13 countries, including 4 studies of pediatric patients, was retrieved. The use of CAM therapies in adult populations ranged from 7-64%. The average prevalence across all adult studies was 31.4%. CONCLUSIONS: This large degree of variability most likely is due to different understandings of "complementary/alternative medicine" on the part of both investigators and patients. It is likely that the results of the current study reflect the primarily adjunctive use of CAM treatments. Future studies should use a standardized protocol to determine the true prevalence of these therapies more closely.

Adult↗
PubMed1995

The aim of psychotherapeutic intervention in cancer patients.

Two main groups of goals in psychotherapeutic interventions in cancer patients are identified. First, process goals, which include the provision of information and instrumental support, assistance in expressing emotions, dealing with the the meaning of the disease, increasing patients' sense of coherence, enhancing personal resources, improving communication, gaining control and improving the ability to cope. Second, primary goals, which are aimed at decreasing somatic symptoms and psychosocial sequelae of cancer and its treatment, and enhancing adjustment, acceptance, and quality of life.

Adaptation, Psychological↗
PubMed1993

Psychosocial factors in gastrointestinal illness.

Gastrointestinal (GI) illnesses represent a paradigm of psychosomatic medicine. Nearly half of patients seen in GI practice present with functional illnesses, and patients commonly complain of symptoms that have coexisting organic and functional etiologies. This chapter addresses the connected nature of psychosocial factors and GI function, disease and outcome in the context of the biopsychosocial model, which allows illness to be examined from the encompassing perspective of interacting system, from the cellular to the environmental. This perspective also helps explain why biologic events such as oncogene alteration can produce heterogeneous clinical and biological responses. Links between gut and brain, involving neuroendocrine associations of the enteric nervous system and its connections with the spinal, autonomic and central nervous systems, are well documented. Neural connections allow information to affect GI secretion and motility. Disturbances in one component of the system can lead to brain-gut effects, such as dysmotility and mood disturbance. Appropriate diagnosis and treatment require clear understanding of biologic, psychologic, and social contributory events. In chronic unexplained GI illnesses, the appropriate clinical approach may be to suspend the search for structural disease, and work instead to assess and treat the physical symptoms and psychosocial problems at hand.

Gastrointestinal Diseases↗