Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27472271›Full record

Trial reportEuropean journal of gastroenterology & hepatology2016

Use of complementary and alternative medicine in Swedish patients with inflammatory bowel disease: a controlled study.

Lena Oxelmark, Annelie Lindberg, Robert Löfberg, Berit Sternby, Anders Eriksson, Sven Almer, Ragnar Befrits, Bjöörn Fossum, Per Karlén, Olle Broström and 2 more

Abstract readMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in European journal of gastroenterology & hepatology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Observational
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Mediators of inflammation · 2017
    Article
  12. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors.

Lena OxelmarkaDepartment of Neurobiology, Care Sciences and Society, Division of Nursing bDepartment of Clinical Sciences, Danderyd Hospital cCenter for Digestive Diseases, Karolinska University Hospital dDepartment of Medicine, Solna, Karolinska Institutet eDepartment of Clinical Science and Education, Södersjukhuset, Karolinska Institutet fStockholm GastroCenter gSophiahemmet University, Stockholm hInstitute of Health and Care Sciences, the Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg iDepartment of Medicine, Geriatrics and Emergency, Sahlgrenska University Hospital/East Hospital, Gothenburg jDepartment of Gastroenterology, Skane University Hospital, Lund kFaculty of Medicine and Health, School of Health and Medical Sciences, Örebro University and Department of Medicine, Division of Gastroenterology, Örebro University Hospital, Örebro, Sweden.
Annelie Lindberg
Robert Löfberg
Berit Sternby
Anders Eriksson
Sven Almer
Ragnar Befrits
Bjöörn Fossum
Per Karlén
Olle Broström
Curt Tysk
SOIBD, the Swedish Organization for the study of Inflammatory Bowel Disease

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThere is an increasing interest in complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) in patients with chronic diseases, including those with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). Patients may turn to CAM when conventional therapies are inadequate or associated with side effects for symptomatic relief or to regain control over their disease. The objectives were to explore CAM use and perceived effects in IBD patients in comparison with a control group.

methodsA cross-sectional, multicenter, controlled study was carried out. IBD patients were invited from 12 IBD clinics in Sweden. Controls were selected randomly from a residence registry. A study-specific questionnaire was used for data collection.

resultsOverall, 48.3% of patients with IBD had used some kind of CAM during the past year compared with 53.5% in controls (P=0.025, adjusted for age, sex, geographic residence, and diet). The most frequently used CAM among IBD patients was massage (21.3%), versus controls (31.4%) (adjusted P=0.0003). The second most used CAM was natural products, 18.7% in IBD patients versus 22.3% of the controls (unadjusted P=0.018). In all, 83.1% of the patients experienced positive effects from CAM and 14.4% experienced negative effects.

conclusionOverall, 48.3% of Swedish IBD patients used some kind of CAM and controls used CAM significantly more. Natural products were used by one-fifth of the patients and even more by controls. This is notable from a patient safety perspective considering the possible risks of interactions with conventional medication. In all, 40% of the patients reported adverse events from conventional medicine. Patients experienced predominantly positive effects from CAM, and so did controls.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overCase-Control StudiesComplementary TherapiesConsumer Health InformationCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHumansInflammatory Bowel DiseasesMaleMiddle AgedPatient SatisfactionSocioeconomic FactorsSweden

Identifiers

PMID27472271
PMCPMC5051534

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.