Abstract P1-10-29: Randomized trial of aromatherapy vs. conventional care for breast cancer patients during perioperative periods
Authors: K Tamaki, A Komatsu-Fukuyama, S Terukina, Y Kamada, K Uehara, K Yamashiro, M Arakaki, M Miyashita, T Ishida, N Ohuchi, H Sasano, N Tamaki
Journal: Cancer Research (2016)

Abstract PURPOSE: The aromatherapy has been performed as palliative care of the breast cancer patients but no studies have been reported regarding whether the therapy improved QOL of the patients during perioperative periods or not. Therefore, in this study, we compared the effects on QOL between aromatherapy and conventional therapy during perioperative periods of the patients. METHODS: We examined Japanese breast cancer patients operated at Nahanishi Clinic , Okinawa, JAPAN.The patients were randomly assigned to a 2:1 ratio to aromatherapy or usual care following the informed consents were obtained. The aromatherapy group had aroma-oil (lavender, orange or ylang-ylang) placed at the bedside from 9 pm until 6 am. QOL of the patients was the primary endpoints and the changes of vital signs and the rate of hypnotic usage as secondary endpoints. QOL was assessed using the EORTC QLQ-C30,in which the Patients completed a baseline QOL assessment at the time of admission , of surgery day (AM7:00) and at the morning of post-operative day 1. Vital signs and hypnotic usage were also recorded at the same time. RESULTS: Among 249 women screened, we randomized 153 women, with 102 to aromatherapy and 51 to conventional care. QOL tended to be improved among aromatherapy groups in physical functioning and role functioning at the morning of post-operative day 1, but the differences did not reach statistical significance (P = 0.08 and 0.09, respectively). There were no statistically significant differences between two groups in the other points of QOL assessment. Aromatherapy did by no means improve vital signs and the rate of hypnotic usage of the patients. Global health status, functional scales and symptomatic scales of aromatherapy and usual care assessed by the EORTC QLQ-C30 questionnaire Aromatherapy Usual care (%)Good (≥66.7)Average (33.3-66.6)Poor (&amp;lt;33.3)Good (≥66.7)Average (33.3-66.6)Poor (&amp;lt;33.3)PAfter operation Global health status QOL47.143.19.833.352.913.7.26Functional scales Physical functioning76.518.64.958.831.49.8.08Role functioning81.48.89.870.621.67.8.09Emotional functioning81.416.71.976.519.63.9.68Congnitive functionin85.313.71.090.27.82.0.51Social functioning82.412.74.968.619.611.8.13Symptom scales/items Fatigue10.856.932.415.758.825.5.56Nausea and vomiting2.922.574.52.013.784.3.39Pain11.853.934.319.649.031.4.43Dyspnoea3.927.568.65.933.360.8.61Insomnia22.548.029.435.339.225.5.24Appetite loss8.839.252.07.839.252.9.98Constipation8.834.356.99.837.352.9.90Diarrhoea1.08.890.23.93.992.2.27Financial functioning16.742.241.225.535.339.2.41 Conclusion: Aromatherapy did not improve the QOL including vital signs and the rate of hypnotic usage during perioperative periods but no adverse effects also detected. Therefore, aromatherapy may not be prohibited during perioperative periods of the patients when they asked to the physicians. Citation Format: Tamaki K, Komatsu-Fukuyama A, Terukina S, Kamada Y, Uehara K, Yamashiro K, Arakaki M, Miyashita M, Ishida T, Ohuchi N, Sasano H, Tamaki N. Randomized trial of aromatherapy vs. conventional care for breast cancer patients during perioperative periods. [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the Thirty-Eighth Annual CTRC-AACR San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium: 2015 Dec 8-12; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2016;76(4 Suppl):Abstract nr P1-10-29.