Vis enkel innførsel

dc.contributor.authorSchjøtt, Janen_US
dc.contributor.authorErdal, Hildeen_US
dc.PublishedBMC Complementary and Alternative Medicine 14:56eng
dc.description.abstractBackground: Provision of clinically relevant information about complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) to health care professionals is not well described. The aim of the study was to assess questions about CAM to the Regional Medicines Information and Pharmacovigilance Centres in Norway (RELIS). Methods: All question-answers pairs (QAPs) in the RELIS database indexed with alternative medicine from 2005-2010 constituted the study material. A randomly selected sample of 100 QAPs was characterized with regard to type of question (category, patient-specific or general), occupation and workplace of enquirer, the type of information search performed (simple or advanced), and if the answers contained information to provide factual or consultative replies (facts about or advice on clinical use of CAM, respectively). Proportions were compared with Fisher’s exact test with significance at the 0.05 level. Results: One thousand and thirty-eight (7.7%) out of 13 482 questions involved CAM. Eighty-two out of 100 questions concerned products containing one or more herbs, vitamins and minerals as well as other substances. Thirty-eight out of 100 questions concerned the category documentation (substance identification and/or literature reports about clinical effects), 36 interactions, 16 adverse effects, 9 pregnancy and lactation, and 1 question concerned contraindications. Sixty-three questions were patient-specific and 37 general. Fifty-four questions came from physicians, 33 from pharmacists and 13 from others (including nurses, midwives, students, CAM practitioners, and the public). Pharmacists asked more frequently about interactions while physicians asked more frequently about adverse effects (p < 0.05). Seventy-six of the questions came from outside hospital, mainly general practice and community pharmacies. Fifty-nine answers were based on a simple and 41 on an advanced information search. Thirty-three factual and 38 consultative answers were provided. In 29 answers, search provided no information. Lack of information to provide an answer was not significantly different between patient-specific (31.7%) and general questions (24.3%). Conclusions: General practice and community pharmacies are the main sources for questions about CAM to RELIS. Physicians are concerned about adverse effects while pharmacists are concerned about interactions. Lack of information to provide answers to patient-specific and general questions about CAM represents a problem.en_US
dc.publisherBioMed Centraleng
dc.rightsAttribution CC BYeng
dc.subjectDrug informationeng
dc.subjectComplementary and alternative medicineeng
dc.subjectDecision supporteng
dc.titleQuestions about complementary and alternative medicine to the Regional Medicines Information and Pharmacovigilance Centres in Norway (RELIS): a descriptive pilot studyen_US
dc.typePeer reviewed
dc.typeJournal article
dc.rights.holderCopyright 2014 Schjøtt and Erdal; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.
dc.rights.holderJan Schjøtt et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.
dc.source.journalBMC Complementary and Alternative Medicine

Tilhørende fil(er)


Denne innførselen finnes i følgende samling(er)

Vis enkel innførsel

Attribution CC BY
Med mindre annet er angitt, så er denne innførselen lisensiert som Attribution CC BY