Caregivers’ views on taraditional and complementary medicine practices in palliative care

Introduction and Aim: The goal of palliative care is to enhance the quality of life for patients and caregivers, focusing on symptom management for patients with conditions where treatment may not be possible. The burden of common symptoms in patients with incurable diseases is increasing, and traditional and complementary medicine (GETAT) practices are being used as a part of palliative care in many countries around the world. The aim of this study is to determine caregivers’ perceptions of traditional and complementary medicine practices and to investigate the factors influencing the demand for GETAT applications in palliative care, considering the conditions of the service. Methods: This cross-sectional, descriptive study’s population consists of caregivers of patients receiving treatment in a palliative care service conducted by family physician specialists. A mixed-method approach was utilized, employing face-to-face surveys with Likert-type questions and adding open-ended questions to the survey. Results: During the study period, 67 out of 72 caregivers who were providing care to patients were included. The average age of caregivers was 46.4 ± 13.7, and 55.2% (n=37) were female. As for education, 62.7% (n=42) had completed primary education. When inquired about GETAT knowledge, 56.7% had awareness, with the most common source of knowledge being acquaintances, neighbors, spouses, friends, and relatives at 31.3%, followed by social media at 16.4%. Among the participants who were knowledgeable about GETAT applications, the proportion of those who had previously applied it to a palliative care patient was determined to be 28.9% (n=11). Caregivers’ perspectives on GETAT applications included concerns about causing harm to the patient, individual patient-related factors, and inadequate or incorrect information about GETAT practices.When comparing GETAT knowledge based on gender, it was determined that women had a 24% higher awareness of the applications compared to men. In the group with lower education levels, the primary source of GETAT knowledge was found to be acquaintances, spouses, friends, and relatives (p<0.05). When the caregivers’ knowledge levels of GETAT were compared with the diagnoses of the patients they were caring for, a statistically significant result could not be found. Conclusion: In our study, sociodemographic information and awareness of GETAT applications were found to be similar to the literature. In a study conducted in 2020 with cancer patients receiving palliative care, a usage rate of 30% for GETAT was identified, with herbal therapy being the most frequently applied method. In our study, even though our palliative care service included not only cancer patients but also all patient groups, the rate of GETAT application was found to be 28.9%. The low rate can be interpreted as stemming from the severity of the health conditions of palliative care patients. In Turkey, caregivers have concerns about GETAT applications in palliative care services. Although further research on the subject is needed, obtaining accurate information about GETAT applications from reliable sources can potentially change perspectives.