Abstract
Background
Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) concerns a group of chronic autoimmune diseases that results in uncontrolled inflammation of the gastrointestinal (GI) tract, which can lead to long-term complications. Conventional treatments for IBD usually target inflammation and include biologics and immunosuppressants, which have been associated with significant adverse effects. Also, non-response to biologics has been reported in up to 50% of patients. Hence, patients sometimes turn to unconventional methods of treatment, such as complementary and alternative medicine (CAM). In this study, we examine patterns of CAM use in Saudi patients diagnosed with IBD.
Materials and methods
We conducted a cross-sectional study of patients with IBD who were seen at the outpatient gastroenterology clinic between January 2018 and December 2019. Adult patients diagnosed with ulcerative colitis (UC) or Crohn’s disease (CD) were identified and surveyed. Clinical, laboratory, endoscopic, radiologic, and histologic data were collected. The patients completed a detailed questionnaire focusing on CAM use. Descriptive statics, quantitative variables, means, standard deviations (SDs), and minimum and maximum values or medians with interquartile ranges were used where appropriate; for qualitative variables, we reported frequencies. The prevalence of CAM use was calculated using standard prevalence formulae. Logistic regression analysis was performed to identify predictors for CAM use. A p-value of <0.05 was set as statistically significant.
Results
A total of 71 IBD patients were surveyed, of which 75% had CD. Severe symptoms were reported by 54% of patients, and 41% were receiving biological treatment; 90% of this cohort reported using some form of CAM, of which 78% used them within the past year, and 52% reported CAM treatment having a positive effect. Of note, 63% of patients reported using CAM therapy without the knowledge of their treating physician. The most common source of advice regarding the use of CAM medicine was relatives (66%), and the most common forms of CAM used were honey (62%), Zamzam water (54%), and physical activity (32%). Binary logistic regression analysis identified watery diarrhea (OR=5.7, 95% CI=1.0-31, P=0.04) and azathioprine (OR=18.1, 95% CI=1.3-255, P=0.03) as predictors of CAM use.
Conclusions
CAM use is very common in Saudi patients with IBD. The majority of patients seem to turn to CAM if their symptoms are severe. They generally appear to be influenced by culture, the Internet, local society, and family tradition in their decision to use CAM, rather than expert advice from their treating physician.