Τρίτη 18 Νοεμβρίου 2014

Unfortunately Reflexology "only" got a C in breast cancer patients with quality of life and physical functioning outcomes!

Μία επισκόπηση ερευνών η οποία πραγματοποιήθηκε με το κίνητρο να δημιουργηθούν κλινικές οδηγίες για την χρήση ΣΕΘ από τους ασθενείς καρκίνου του μαστού, βαθμολόγησε την Ρεφλεξολογία με C στον τομέα βελτίωση της ποιότητας ζωής.
Τα αποτελέσματα δεν είναι καθόλου ενθαρρυντικά, είτε για εμάς, είτε για τον κόσμο των ερευνών.
Πως είναι δυνατόν τα καθημερινά θετικά αποτελέσματα της μεθόδου μας, η οποία απολαμβάνει καθημερινά όλο και μεγαλύτερη αποδοχή, να μην επαναλαμβάνονται στις κλινικές δοκιμές.
Που θα βρεθούν και άλλα εκατομμύρια για να γίνουν έρευνες, ποιος θα τις κάνει - αξιολογήσει? Το υπάρχον σύστημα "έρευνας" έχει αποτύχει.

Τελικά, τι είδους έρευνες θα πρέπει να κάνουμε, μήπως έρευνες των οποίων τα αποτελέσματα θα διαφωτίσουν τους επαγγελματίες?

Going through the supplementary data I was very disapointed to read in all cases that there is insufficient evidence, except for one case!

We got a C grade and the recommendation that "Reflexology can be considered for improving quality of life among breast cancer patients.

Once again, after so much effort and enthusiasm, after all the money spent, with so many difficulties in raising more needed money to conduct even more research, with the existing problems current research is being conducted and published, I question if we are on the right track.

How can it be that Reflexology is being utilized more and more by the public, but research does not reproduce the everyday Reflexologists results?

And what kind of research should we be involved in, maybe research that will enlighten Reflexologists themselves.

Oh well I guess it could have been worse.

Experts say more than 80 percent of breast cancer survivors in the United States rely on some form of complementary or integrative therapies such as vitamins, acupuncture, meditation, massage, and yoga.

Despite their widespread use, there has been little rigorous research to see if these practices are helpful or harmful.

To address this void, Dr. Heather Greenlee, an assistant professor of epidemiology at Columbia University’s Mailman School of Public Health, developed a new set of clinical practice guidelines on the use of integrative therapies.

She presented her guidelines at a recent meeting of the Society for Integrative Oncology.

Greenlee and her colleagues reviewed nearly 5,000 articles published between 1990 and 2013. From this, researchers reviewed 203 separate randomized control trials of the various interventions.

http://psychcentral.com/news/2014/11/06/alternative-therapy-guidelines-issued-for-breast-cancer-survivors/77032.html

The new guidelines come from the Society for Integrative Oncology, researchers at Columbia University Mailman School of Public Health, and the Herbert Irving Comprehensive Cancer Center with colleagues at MD Anderson Cancer Center, University of Michigan, Memorial Sloan Kettering, and other institutions in the United States and Canada. More than 80 different therapies were analyzed by the researchers.

Meditation, yoga, and relaxation with imagery were found to have the strongest evidence supporting their use. They received an "A" grade and are recommended for routine use for anxiety and other mood disorders common to breast cancer patients. The same practices received a "B" grade for reducing stress, depression, and fatigue, but are also endorsed for most patients with breast cancer.

Acupuncture received a "B" grade for controlling chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting and can be recommended to most patients. More than 30 interventions, including some natural products and acupuncture for other conditions, had weaker evidence of benefit due to either small study sizes or conflicting study results, and received a "C" grade.

These results were published in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute Monograph (2014; doi:10.1093/jncimonographs/lgu041) and were presented at the 11th International Conference of the Society for Integrative Oncology in Houston, Texas.

A number of interventions did not have sufficient evidence to support specific recommendations. "This does not mean that they don't work, this means that we don't yet know if they work, in what form, or what dose is the most effective. The vast majority of therapies require further investigation through well-designed controlled clinical trials," said Greenlee.

http://www.oncologynurseadvisor.com/the-society-for-integrative-oncology-sio-and-co-researchers-issue-a-report-card-on-complementary-therapies-for-breast-cancer/article/383467/