Skip Navigation



eCAM Advance Access published online on June 27, 2006
eCAM, doi:10.1093/ecam/nel042
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrowOA All Versions of this Article:
3/4/523    most recent
nel042v1
Right arrow E-letters: Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when E-letters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Carlsson, M.
Right arrow Articles by Hamrin, E.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Carlsson, M.
Right arrow Articles by Hamrin, E.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© 2006 The Author(s).
Received December 15, 2005
Accepted May 31, 2006

Original Article

A Five-year Follow-up of Quality of Life in Women with Breast Cancer in Anthroposophic and Conventional Care

Marianne Carlsson 1 *, Maria Arman 2, Marie Backman 3, Ursula Flatters 4, Thomas Hatschek 5, and Elisabeth Hamrin 6

1 Department of Public Health and Caring Sciences, Caring Sciences, Uppsala University, Sweden
2 Department of Welfare and Care, Faculty of Health Sciences, Linköping University, Sweden
3 The Swedish Red Cross University College of Nursing, Stockholm, Sweden
4 The Vidar Clinic, Järna, Sweden
5 Department of Oncology, Karolinska Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden
6 Department of Medicine and Care, Clinical Pharmacology, Faculty of Health Sciences, Linköping University, Sweden

* To whom correspondence should be addressed.
Marianne Carlsson, E-mail: Marianne.Carlsson{at}pubcare.uu.se


  Abstract

Complementary and alternative medicine is used by many cancer patients in most parts of the world, and its use is increasing. The aim of the present study was to examine, over 5 years, the perceived quality of life/life satisfaction in two samples of women with breast cancer who were treated with anthroposophic care or conventional medical treatment only. Data from admission, after 1 year and after 5 years are used for the comparisons. On admission to the study the women in anthroposophic care perceived their quality of life to be lower than that of the women in the conventional treatment group, especially for emotional, cognitive and social functioning and overall quality of life. Sixty women who actively chose treatment with anthroposophic medicine and 60 individually matched women treated with conventional medicine participated. Quality of life was measured by the EORTC QLQ-C30 and the Life Satisfaction Questionnaire. Twenty-six women within anthroposophic care and 31 women within conventional medicine survived the 5 years. Effect size (ES) estimation favored the anthroposophic group in seven of the subscales mostly measuring emotional functioning. The ES for four of the subscales favored the conventional treatment group, mostly concerning physical functioning. After 5 years there were improvements in overall quality of life and in emotional and social functioning compared to admission for the women in anthroposophic care. The improvements took place between admission and 1 year, but not further on. Only minor improvements were found in the matching group.

Keywords: complementary and alternative medicine; EORTC QLQ-C30; Life Satisfaction Questionnaire.
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Evid Based Complement Alternat MedHome page
R. Ziegler
Mistletoe Preparation Iscador: Are there Methodological Concerns with Respect to Controlled Clinical Trials?
Evid. Based Complement. Altern. Med., March 1, 2009; 6(1): 19 - 30.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.