How many cancer patients use complementary and alternative medicine: a systematic review and metaanalysis

Background. No comprehensive systematic review has been published since 1998 about the frequency with which cancer patients use complementary and alternative medicine (CAM). Methods. MEDLINE, AMED, and Embase databases were searched for surveys published until January 2009. Surveys conducted in Australia, Canada, Europe, New Zealand, and the United States with at least 100 adult cancer patients were included. Detailed information on methods and results was independently extracted by 2 reviewers. Methodological quality was assessed using a criteria list developed according to the STROBE guideline. Exploratory random effects metaanalysis and metaregression were applied. Results. Studies from 18 countries (152; >65 000 cancer patients) were included. Heterogeneity of CAM use was high and to some extent explained by differences in survey methods. The combined prevalence for “current use” of CAM across all studies was 40%. The highest was in the United States and the lowest in Italy and the Netherlands. Metaanalysis suggested an increase in CAM use from an estimated 25% in the 1970s and 1980s to more than 32% in the 1990s and to 49% after 2000. Conclusions. The overall prevalence of CAM use found was lower than often claimed. However, there was some evidence that the use has increased considerably over the past years. Therefore, the health care systems ought to implement clear strategies of how to deal with this. To improve the validity and reporting of future surveys, the authors suggest criteria for methodological quality that should be fulfilled and reporting standards that should be required.

Mind the gap: Do proportional electoral systems foster a more equal representation of women and men, poor and rich?

Female gender and low income are two markers for groups that have been historically disadvantaged within most societies. The study explores two research questions related to their political representation: (1) ‘Are parties biased towards the ideological preferences of male and rich citizens?’; and (2) ‘Does the proportionality of the electoral system moderate the degree of under-representation of women and poor citizens in the party system?’ A multilevel analysis of survey data from 24 parliamentary democracies indicates that there is some bias against those with low income and, at a much smaller rate, women. This has systemic consequences for the quality of representation, as the preferences of the complementary groups differ. The proportionality of the electoral system influences the degree of under-representation: specifically, larger district magnitudes help in closing the considerable gap between rich and poor.

A Research Roadmap for Complementary and Alternative Medicine – What We Need to Know by 2020

Background: The CAMbrella coordination action was funded within the Framework Programme 7. Its aim is to provide a research roadmap for clinical and epidemiological research for complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) that is appropriate for the health needs of European citizens and acceptable to their national research institutes and healthcare providers in both public and private sectors. One major issue in the European research agenda is the demographic change and its impact on health care. Our vision for 2020 is that there is an evidence base that enables European citizens to make informed decisions about CAM, both positive and negative. This roadmap proposes a strategic research agenda for the field of CAM designed to address future European health care challenges. This roadmap is based on the results of CAMbrella’s several work packages, literature reviews and expert discussions including a consensus meeting. Methods: We first conducted a systematic literature review on key issues in clinical and epidemiological research in CAM to identify the general concepts, methods and the strengths and weaknesses of current CAM research. These findings were discussed in a workshop (Castellaro, Italy, September 7–9th 2011) with international CAM experts and strategic and methodological recommendations were defined in order to improve the rigor and relevance of CAM research. These recommendations provide the basis for the research roadmap, which was subsequently discussed in a consensus conference (Järna, Sweden, May 9–11th 2012) with all CAMbrella members and the CAMbrella advisory board. The roadmap was revised after this discussion in CAMbrella Work Package (WP) 7 and finally approved by CAMbrella’s scientific steering committee on September 26th 2012. Results: Our main findings show that CAM is very heterogenous in terms of definitions and legal regulations between the European countries. In addition, citizens’ needs and attitudes towards CAM as well as the use and provision of CAM differ significantly between countries. In terms of research methodology, there was consensus that CAM researchers should make use of all the commonly accepted scientific research methods and employ those with utmost diligence combined in a mixed methods framework. Conclusions: We propose 6 core areas of research that should be investigated to achieve a robust knowledge base and to allow stakeholders to make informed decisions. These are: Research into the prevalence of CAM in Europe: Reviews show that we do not know enough about the circumstances in which CAM is used by Europeans. To enable a common European strategic approach, a clear picture of current use is of the utmost importance. Research into differences regarding citizens’ attitudes and needs towards CAM: Citizens are the driver for CAM utilization. Their needs and views on CAM are a key priority, and their interests must be investigated and addressed in future CAM research. Research into safety of CAM: Safety is a key issue for European citizens. CAM is considered safe, but reliable data is scarce although urgently needed in order to assess the risk and cost-benefit ratio of CAM. Research into the comparative effectiveness of CAM: Everybody needs to know in what situation CAM is a reasonable choice. Therefore, we recommend a clear emphasis on concurrent evaluation of the overall effectiveness of CAM as an additional or alternative treatment strategy in real-world settings. Research into effects of context and meaning: The impact of effects of context and meaning on the outcome of CAM treatments must be investigated; it is likely that they are significant. Research into different models of CAM health care integration: There are different models of CAM being integrated into conventional medicine throughout Europe, each with their respective strengths and limitations. These models should be described and concurrently evaluated; innovative models of CAM provision in health care systems should be one focus for CAM research. We also propose a methodological framework for CAM research. We consider that a framework of mixed methodological approaches is likely to yield the most useful information. In this model, all available research strategies including comparative effectiveness research utilising quantitative and qualitative methods should be considered to enable us to secure the greatest density of knowledge possible. Stakeholders, such as citizens, patients and providers, should be involved in every stage of developing the specific and relevant research questions, study design and the assurance of real-world relevance for the research. Furthermore, structural and sufficient financial support for research into CAM is needed to strengthen CAM research capacity if we wish to understand why it remains so popular within the EU. In order to consider employing CAM as part of the solution to the health care, health creation and self-care challenges we face by 2020, it is vital to obtain a robust picture of CAM use and reliable information about its cost, safety and effectiveness in real-world settings. We need to consider the availability, accessibility and affordability of CAM. We need to engage in research excellence and utilise comparative effectiveness approaches and mixed methods to obtain this data. Our recommendations are both strategic and methodological. They are presented for the consideration of researchers and funders while being designed to answer the important and implicit questions posed by EU citizens currently using CAM in apparently increasing numbers. We propose that the EU actively supports an EUwide strategic approach that facilitates the development of CAM research. This could be achieved in the first instance through funding a European CAM coordinating research office dedicated to foster systematic communication between EU governments, public, charitable and industry funders as well as researchers, citizens and other stakeholders. The aim of this office would be to coordinate research strategy developments and research funding opportunities, as well as to document and disseminate international research activities in this field. With the aim to develop sustainability as second step, a European Centre for CAM should be established that takes over the monitoring and further development of a coordinated research strategy for CAM, as well as it should have funds that can be awarded to foster high quality and robust independent research with a focus on citizens health needs and pan-European collaboration. We wish to establish a solid funding for CAM research to adequately inform health care and health creation decision-making throughout the EU. This centre would ensure that our vision of a common, strategic and scientifically rigorous approach to CAM research becomes our legacy and Europe’s reality. We are confident that our recommendations will serve these essential goals for EU citizens.

High prevalence but limited evidence in complementary and alternative medicine: guidelines for future research

The use of complementary and alternative Medicine (CAM) has increased over the past two decades in Europe. Nonetheless, research investigating the evidence to support its use remains limited. The CAMbrella project funded by the European Commission aimed to develop a strategic research agenda starting by systematically evaluating the state of CAM in the EU. CAMbrella involved 9 work packages covering issues such as the definition of CAM; its legal status, provision and use in the EU; and a synthesis of international research perspectives. Based on the work package reports, we developed a strategic and methodologically robust research roadmap based on expert workshops, a systematic Delphi-based process and a final consensus conference. The CAMbrella project suggests six core areas for research to examine the potential contribution of CAM to the health care challenges faced by the EU. These areas include evaluating the prevalence of CAM use in Europe; the EU cititzens’ needs and attitudes regarding CAM; the safety of CAM; the comparative effectiveness of CAM; the effects of meaning and context on CAM outcomes; and different models for integrating CAM into existing health care systems. CAM research should use methods generally accepted in the evaluation of health services, including comparative effectiveness studies and mixed-methods designs. A research strategy is urgently needed, ideally led by a European CAM coordinating research office dedicated to fostering systematic communication between EU governments, the public, charitable and industry funders, researchers and other stakeholders. A European Centre for CAM should also be established to monitor and further a coordinated research strategy with sufficient funds to commission and promote high quality, independent research focusing on the public’s health needs and pan-European collaboration. There is a disparity between highly prevalent use of CAM in Europe and solid knowledge about it. A strategic approach on CAM research should be established to investigate the identified gaps of knowledge and to address upcoming health care challenges.

Grazing behaviour, physical activity and metabolic profile of two Holstein strains in an organic grazing system

The challenge for sustainable organic dairy farming is identification of cows that are well adapted to forage-based production systems. Therefore, the aim of this study was to compare the grazing behaviour, physical activity and metabolic profile of two different Holstein strains kept in an organic grazing system without concentrate supplementation. Twelve Swiss (HCH ; 566 kg body weight (BW) and 12 New Zealand Holstein-Friesian (HNZ ; 530 kg BW) cows in mid-lactation were kept in a rotational grazing system. After an adaptation period, the milk yield, nutrient intake, physical activity and grazing behaviour were recorded for each cow for 7 days. On three consecutive days, blood was sampled at 07:00, 12:00 and 17:00 h from each cow by jugular vein puncture. Data were analysed using linear mixed models. No differences were found in milk yield, but milk fat (3.69 vs. 4.05%, P = 0.05) and milk protein percentage (2.92 vs. 3.20%, P < 0.01) were lower in HCH than in HNZ cows. Herbage intake did not differ between strains, but organic matter digestibility was greater (P = 0.01) in HCH compared to HNZ cows. The HCH cows spent less (P = 0.04) time ruminating (439 vs. 469 min/day) and had a lower (P = 0.02) number of ruminating boli when compared to the HNZ cows. The time spent eating and physical activity did not differ between strains. Concentrations of IGF-1 and T3 were lower (P ≤ 0.05) in HCH than HNZ cows. In conclusion, HCH cows were not able to increase dry matter intake in order to express their full genetic potential for milk production when kept in an organic grazing system without concentrate supplementation. On the other hand, HNZ cows seem to compensate for the reduced nutrient availability better than HCH cows but could not use that advantage for increased production efficiency

The energy expenditure of 2 Holstein cow strains in an organic grazing system

Until recently, measurements of energy expenditure (EE; herein defined as heat production) in respiration chambers did not account for the extra energy requirements of grazing dairy cows on pasture. As energy is first limiting in most pasture-based milk production systems, its efficient use is important. Therefore, the aim of the present study was to compare EE, which can be affected by differences in body weight (BW), body composition, grazing behavior, physical activity, and milk production level, in 2 Holstein cow strains. Twelve Swiss Holstein-Friesian (HCH; 616 kg of BW) and 12 New Zealand Holstein-Friesian (HNZ; 570 kg of BW) cows in the third stage of lactation were paired according to their stage of lactation and kept in a rotational, full-time grazing system without concentrate supplementation. After adaption, the daily milk yield, grass intake using the alkane double-indicator technique, nutrient digestibility, physical activity, and grazing behavior recorded by an automatic jaw movement recorder were investigated over 7d. Using the (13)C bicarbonate dilution technique in combination with an automatic blood sampling system, EE based on measured carbon dioxide production was determined in 1 cow pair per day between 0800 to 1400 h. The HCH were heavier and had a lower body condition score compared with HNZ, but the difference in BW was smaller compared with former studies. Milk production, grass intake, and nutrient digestibility did not differ between the 2 cow strains, but HCH grazed for a longer time during the 6-h measurement period and performed more grazing mastication compared with the HNZ. No difference was found between the 2 cow strains with regard to EE (291 ± 15.6 kJ) per kilogram of metabolic BW, mainly due to a high between-animal variation in EE. As efficiency and energy use are important in sustainable, pasture-based, organic milk production systems, the determining factors for EE, such as methodology, genetics, physical activity, grazing behavior, and pasture quality, should be investigated and quantified in more detail in future studies.