Complementary and alternative medicine in multiple sclerosis: a questionnaire-based study.

AIM OF THE STUDY

To assess the prevalence and characteristics of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) use among multiple sclerosis (MS) patients in Poland.

CLINICAL RATIONALE FOR THE STUDY

Multiple sclerosis (MS) is a chronic, progressive and disabling neurological disease with significant impact on quality of life. Although the efficacy and safety of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) has not been scientifically confirmed, many patients use CAM as a complement or an alternative to conventional therapy.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Data was collected via a self-designed survey consisting of 33 questions. The questionnaire was distributed among MS patients hospitalised during 2016 in the MS Unit at the Department of Neurology, Medical University of Warsaw, Poland. The study group consisted of 75 patients (47 females, 28 males, mean age 44.6 ± 12.5 years) with clinically defined MS.

RESULTS

According to the questionnaire, 48 patients (64%) had used CAM at least once. Most of the patients declared that CAM had a possible (58%) or a marked (43.7%) positive effect. 61.4% of CAM users reported reduced fatigue and 33.3% improved mood. There were significant correlations between CAM use and lower social and professional status (p < 0.04), disease progression (p < 0.03), and lack of efficacy of disease-modifying therapies (p < 0.04). There were no significant correlations between CAM usage and sex, habitation, education, marital or professional status. The most frequently used CAMs were vitamins (48%), and polyunsaturated fatty acids (36%); psychophysical methods (44%) included manual therapies (24%) and relaxation techniques (17.3%) as well as herbal medicine (29.3%). Physicians were considered to be the most reliable authority in both conventional treatment (97.3%) and CAM (67%). Complementary and alternative medicine users significantly more often discussed this issue with their doctors (56%) compared to patients who did not use alternative medicine (p < 0.05). However, 54% of patients did not inform their physician about CAM use. Responders said that physicians did not initiate discussion about it (55.9%), but 44% of patients would like to have the possibility of talking to a doctor about CAM.

CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS

Although CAM efficacy and safety is not confirmed, one should keep in mind that most MS patients use alternative methods, especially those individuals with a more severe phenotype. Physicians are mostly perceived as reliable authorities and therefore they should discuss this issue with patients in order to eliminate drug interactions and to improve compliance.