Pseudoscience in Cancer Services; a survey of National Health Service Trusts in England

Leslie Rose

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.06.26.24309516

2024-06-27

Abstract:Scientifically implausible treatments are offered by some hospital cancer departments. Examples are reiki, aromatherapy, and reflexology. Salaried practitioners are employed to deliver these therapies, which are provided as palliative care, although they lack evidence of effectiveness. Such practices seem to conflict with efforts to make health care evidence based. The aim of this survey was to estimate the extent of certain pseudoscientific practices in cancer care departments in NHS hospitals in England, and to evaluate the rationale for such provision. Relevant documents were requested from NHS Trusts under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FOIA). Main outcome measures were: number of trusts offering pseudoscientific practices in cancer departments, time to full FOIA response, presence and content of practice governance documents, and presence and quality of evidence for practices. 13.6% of eligible NHS trusts were offering pseudoscientific clinical practices. No trust provided a valid business case, or any robust evidence for the practices. The governance documents included claims about chakras, meridians, and invisible energy. Ten trusts required that informed consent be obtained from patients. This could not have been obtained because information given was misleading. Conclusions Pseudoscientific practices are embedded in the NHS in England, and governance documents show poor understanding of clinical evidence.

Palliative Medicine

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

This paper primarily explores the issue of pseudoscientific treatment methods within the National Health Service (NHS) in the UK and investigates this phenomenon.

### Research Background
Despite the NHS's efforts in recent years to promote evidence-based medicine in clinical practice, some hospital cancer departments still offer treatments lacking effective evidence, such as Reiki, aromatherapy, and reflexology. These treatments are based on unrealistic understandings of how the body works and contradict modern science.

### Research Objectives
- **Estimate Scope**: Assess the extent to which NHS Trusts in England provide pseudoscientific treatment methods.
- **Evaluate Basis**: Evaluate the rationale and evidence base for these treatment methods.

### Key Findings
- In England, approximately 13.6% of eligible NHS Trusts provided pseudoscientific clinical practices.
- No Trust was able to provide a strong business case or solid research evidence to support these treatment methods.
- Governance documents included references to chakras, meridians, and invisible "energy," indicating a poor understanding of clinical evidence.
- Ten Trusts required informed consent from patients, but due to misleading information, effective informed consent could not be obtained.

### Conclusion
Pseudoscientific treatment methods have some penetration in the NHS system in England, and related governance documents show a poor understanding of clinical evidence. This may hinder the transition to a fully evidence-based healthcare system.

In summary, this study aims to reveal and quantify the issue of pseudoscientific treatment methods within the NHS in England, highlighting the potential impact on patients and the potential damage to the professionalism of healthcare providers. Additionally, the study emphasizes the need to reassess the basis of all clinical practices to improve patient care quality and ensure the effective use of NHS resources.