The aim of this hospital-based, cross-sectional study was to examine nurses' knowledge, personal and professional practices and attitude towards complementary and alternative medical therapies in urban Ghana.
Using convenience sampling technique, cross-sectional data were collected from 210 registered and practicing nurses with self-administered questionnaire based on the Complementary and Alternative Medicine (CAM) Health Belief Questionnaire (CHBQ). Descriptive statistics and the associations between variables were calculated using Pearson's Chi-square test and/or Fisher's exact test with p < 0.05.
The mean score of nurses' knowledge on CAM therapies was low (mean ± SD, 38.39 ± 10.11; possible range, 18-72) which was built on nurses' personal experiences. Nurses, therefore, lacked the confidence to recommend CAM therapies to patients. Despite the isolated cases of non-herbal supplements, relaxation techniques, massage and prayer healing, the study found an overall low personal use of CAM (mean ± SD, 32.97 ± 10.78; possible range, 18-72) among nurses over the last 12 months. Yet, nurses exhibited a positive attitude towards CAM (mean ± SD, 72.7 ± 12.5, possible range, 67-110). We observed significant associations among nurses' CAM knowledge and education [χ(2) (2) = 6.69, p = 0.035] and religion [χ(2) (2) = 7.96, p = 0.019]; nurses' personal use of CAM and income [χ(2) (2) = 16.07, p < 0.001] and religion [χ(2) (2) = 18.65, p < 0.001]; and nurses' clinical CAM use and income [χ(2) (2) = 7.01, p = 0.030].
Despite the overall positive attitude towards CAM therapies, Ghanaian nurses do not perceive themselves to have sufficient knowledge of CAM. Integrating CAM education into the nurses' training curriculum can improve CAM knowledge and professional practice among nurses, and in turn, enhance evidence-based patient care within the framework of intercultural healthcare system in Ghana.
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science
4
3%
Other
16
13%
Unknown
56
44%
Attention Score in Context
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 11 November 2017.
All research outputs
#19,311,147
of 28,087,890 outputs
Outputs from Complementary Therapies in Clinical Practice
#850
of 1,172 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#214,829
of 331,642 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Complementary Therapies in Clinical Practice
#11
of 17 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 28,087,890 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,172 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.7. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 331,642 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 17 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
