Disclosure and adverse effects of complementary and alternative medicine used by hospitalized patients in the North East of England / Advertencias y efectos adversos de las medicinas alternativas y complementarias usadas por pacientes hospitalizados en el noreste de Inglaterra

Objectives: This study aimed to investigate the prevalence, disclosure and adverse effects of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) use in hospitalised patients, and to explore the associations between patients’ perceived sideeffects and relevant factors. Methods: Patients who were admitted to a district general hospital and met the eligibility criteria were interviewed using a semi-structured questionnaire. Their medications and pertinent details were verified from the medical notes. All quantitative and qualitative data were collated and analysed. A chisquared test was performed to test the associations of the perceived CAM side-effects with the significance level determined at α=0.05. Results: A total of 240 in-patients completed the study. They were mostly white British (98.8%). The prevalence of CAM use within two years was 74.6% and one month 37.9%. Only 19 of 91 patients (20.9%) using CAM within one month disclosed their current CAM applications. Nearly half of patients (45.8%) who used CAM within two years experienced various CAM side-effects that tended to resolve after discontinuation. Slightly more than half (57.6%) perceived CAM side-effects and their perceptions were significantly associated with gender (P=0.048) and consideration for future CAM use (P=0.033). Potential interactions between herbal remedies/dietary supplements and prescribed drugs, such as garlic with lisinopril or aspirin, were assessed in 82 patients (45.8%). Conclusion: Most in-patients used CAM and experienced some adverse effects. The disclosure of CAM use and its adverse outcomes should be encouraged by healthcare professionals (AU)

Objetivos: Este estudio trató de investigar la prevalencia, advertencia y efectos adversos de las medicinas alternativas y complementarias (CAM) usadas por pacientes hospitalizados, y explorar las asociaciones entre los efectos adversos percibidos por los pacientes y factores relevantes. Métodos: Se entrevistó usando un cuestionario semi-estructurado a los pacientes que fueron admitidos en un hospital general distrital y que cumplían los criterios de elegibilidad. Se comprobaron los medicamentos y otros detalles pertinentes en la historia clínica de los pacientes. Se recogieron y analizaron todos los datos cuantitativos y cualitativos. Para comprobar las asociaciones de los efectos adversos percibidos de las CAM se realizó un test chi-cuadrado con un nivel de significación de α=0,05. Resultados: Un total de 240 pacientes hospitalizados completó el estudio. Eran mayoritariamente británicos (98,8%). La prevalencia de uso de CAM en dos años fue del 74,6% y en un mes del 37,9%. Sólo 19 de los 91 pacientes (20,9%) que usaron CAM en el último mes reveló su uso actual. Casi la mitad de los pacientes (45,8%) que usaron CAM en los dos últimos años sufrió algunos efectos adversos de las CAM que tendieron a resolverse después de abandonarlas. Ligeramente más de la mitad (57,6%) percibieron efectos adversos de las CAM y su percepción estaba significativamente asociada con el género (P=0,048) y con la consideración sobre el futuro uso de CAM (P=0,033). En 82 pacientes (45,8%) se encontró interacciones potenciales entre plantas medicinales/suplementos dietéticos y medicamentos prescritos, tales como ajo con lisinoprilo o aspirina. Concusión: La mayoría de los pacientes hospitalizados usó CAM y percibió algunos efectos adversos. La advertencia del uso de CAM y sus efectos adversos debería ser incentivada por los profesionales de la salud (AU)

Disclosure and adverse effects of complementary and alternative medicine used by hospitalized patients in the North East of England.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to investigate the prevalence, disclosure and adverse effects of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) use in hospitalised patients, and to explore the associations between patients' perceived side-effects and relevant factors. METHODS: Patients who were admitted to a district general hospital and met the eligibility criteria were interviewed using a semi-structured questionnaire. Their medications and pertinent details were verified from the medical notes. All quantitative and qualitative data were collated and analysed. A chi-squared test was performed to test the associations of the perceived CAM side-effects with the significance level determined at α=0.05. RESULTS: A total of 240 in-patients completed the study. They were mostly white British (98.8%). The prevalence of CAM use within two years was 74.6% and one month 37.9%. Only 19 of 91 patients (20.9%) using CAM within one month disclosed their current CAM applications. Nearly half of patients (45.8%) who used CAM within two years experienced various CAM side-effects that tended to resolve after discontinuation. Slightly more than half (57.6%) perceived CAM side-effects and their perceptions were significantly associated with gender (P=0.048) and consideration for future CAM use (P=0.033). Potential interactions between herbal remedies/dietary supplements and prescribed drugs, such as garlic with lisinopril or aspirin, were assessed in 82 patients (45.8%). CONCLUSIONS: Most in-patients used CAM and experienced some adverse effects. The disclosure of CAM use and its adverse outcomes should be encouraged by healthcare professionals.