ArticleIntegrative cancer therapies
Integrative Nursing Interventions for Cancer-Related Symptoms in Oncology Inpatients: Results of a Descriptive Pilot Study.
Article in Integrative cancer therapies. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Hotspots and Trends in Nursing Interventions for Breast Cancer Patients Undergoing Radiotherapy: A Bibliometric Analysis.Nursing reports (Pavia, Italy) · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIntegrative nursing (IN) is an essential component of integrative medicine and integrative oncology. IN includes a range of external naturopathic, integrative nursing interventions, such as compresses, embrocation, and foot/hand baths, aimed at alleviating symptoms and side effects of conventional treatment. The project IMPLEMENT-UKU ("Implementation of IN at the University Hospital Ulm") was accompanied by a descriptive pilot study on the use of IN interventions on cancer-related symptoms in oncology inpatients, the characterization of these patients and the evaluation of the impact.
methodsA single-arm study was conducted using a paper-based questionnaire administered before the IN interventions (t0) and 24 hours after the IN interventions (t1). Topics included sociodemographic data, symptoms, quality of life, health status, psychological burden, attitudes, and experience and satisfaction with the IN interventions. Analyses were descriptive using absolute and relative frequencies.
resultsDuring the 6-month study period out of 66 patients recommended for IN consultation by medical and nursing staff on 2 wards, 62 (93.9%) accepted the offer. Of those patients who received IN, 21 patients (33.9%) participated in the study. The number of IN interventions received per patient ranged from 1 to 3 during the 24-hour survey period. And a total of 36 IN interventions were performed: The most treated body region was the feet/legs (50.0%), followed by the back (25.0%), using oils such as solum oil (41.7%) and lavender oil (13.9%). Embrocation (77.8%) was the predominant type of IN intervention. For patients, the mean FACIT-F score was 29.2 ± 12.5. The mean PHQ-4 score was 3.0 ± 1.9. Regarding sleep quality in the last 4 weeks, 13 participants (61.9%) described it as rather or very poor. Satisfaction with the IN was high, with a large proportion of participants evaluating the IN interventions very positively.
conclusionThe study's findings suggest that there is a great need for IN among oncology inpatients. These patients are open to and interested in IN interventions and evaluate them positively. IN provides a promising opportunity to provide non-pharmacological support to inpatients. The integration of IN in conventional oncology care settings may enhance patient-centered care and contribute to improved patient wellbeing.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.