Table 2.

Studies Included in the Scoping Review

First Author and Year of Publication	Study Design and Data Collection Approach, Sample Size and Sex of Participants	Prevalence of Use of T&CM and Disclosure of Use to HCP	Types of T&CM Used#	Reasons for Using T&CM	Characteristics of Users Significantly Associated with T&CM Use	Reported Satisfaction or Disappointment with T&CM Use	Country
Asuzu et al, 2017,24	(a) Cross-sectional study. N = 400 patients Female = 76.2% (n=305); Mean age = 50.9±14.6 years; (b) Focus Group Discussions (FGD) Cancer sites: Various cancers including breast (33.5%) and cervix (32.5%).	Prevalence use = 34.5% No results of disclosure or nondisclosure	Not reported	Desire to be healed and get rid of pains, Recommendations by friends and relatives, Orthodox medicine expensive and no provisions for delayed or part payment; Perceived attacks from the devil or evil spirits causing illness, Fear of surgery, Unawareness about the illness, Breakdown of facilities	Not reported	T&CM not effective reported by 70.1% of users. No particular side effects or perceived risks reported in the study.	Nigeria
Ezeome et al, 2007,3	Cross-sectional study. N = 160 patients Female = 57.5% (n=94) Mean age = 52.3 years Cancer sites: Various cancers.	Prevalence use = 65.0% (n=104) Disclosed use = 32.7%	Herbs (51.9%) Healing prayers (39.4%) Aloe vera (23.1%) Forever living products (16.3%) Meditation (6.7%) Python fat (7.7%) Black stone (12.5%) Medicinal tea (14.4%) Special diet (6.7%) Chinese medicines (8.7%)	Directly treat/cure cancer, Do something to the cancer, Improve physical wellbeing, Improve psychological and emotional wellbeing.	Use associated with: Male sex, No association with: Age, Marital status, Level of education, Religion and Cancer site.	Specific benefits: No benefits reported by 63.4% (n=70); 79.8% would not want to use T&CM again. 23.1% (n=26) were satisfied with T&CM use and 16.3% would recommend T&CM use. Side effects 21.2% reported side effects including slimming, weakness, malaise, generalized body discomfort, diarrhea, and cough.	Nigeria
Aliyu et al, 2017,48	Cross-sectional survey. N = 240 patients. Females = 56.2% Mean age = 45±13.7 years Cancer types: Various including cervical cancer (33.3%), Breast (22.1%), and Head/neck cancers (15.8%)	Prevalence = 66.3% (159/240) Disclosed use = 15.3%	Prayers = 30.8% (n=49) Herbal medicines = 28.3% (n=45) Scarification = 10.0% (n=17)	Potentiate conventional cancer treatment 37.1% (n=59) More affordable = 18.9% (n=30) Readily available = 25.1% (n=40) Reduces nausea and vomiting = 11.9% (n=19)	Use associated with: Male sex (OR=1.83; 95% CI: 1.02 – 3.25), and Absence of comorbidities (OR=0.32; 95% CI: 0.18 – 0.57).	Benefits: 64.2% reported no benefits from use. Improved appetite (10.1%, n=16) Reduced pain (6.9%, n=11) Adverse reactions: Users reported Diarrhea (44.2%, n-106) Nausea and Vomiting (52.5%, n=126) Itching (30.4%, n=73) Skin rashes (9.3%, n=22) Headaches (7.1%, n=17)	Nigeria
Yarney et al, 2013,25	Cross-sectional survey. N = 98 patients. Females = 51%. Mean age = 55.5±17.1 years.	Prevalence use = 73.5% Disclosed use = 16.7%.	Massage = 66.3% Herbal = 59.2% Mega vitamins = 55.1% Chinese medicines = 53.1% Prayer = 42.9%	Try anything = 31.2% Faith/beliefs = 21.9% Sickness is spiritual = 15.6% Toxicity of conventional treatment = 9.4% Conventional doctors are mechanical to the patient = 12.5% Disappointed with conventional treatment = 9.4%	Use associated with: Young age, Being married, Higher level of education, Being female, Undergoing palliative care. No association with: Sex and cancer site.	Benefits Fight cancer = 40.6% Relieve severity of the cancer = 23.2% Relaxation or sleep = 17.4% Improve emotional and physical well-being = 14.5% Adverse effects: Gastric upset Nausea and vomiting Diarrhea Itching Headaches	Ghana
Kiwanuka et al, 2018,26	Cross-sectional study. N = 235 patients Breast cancer only Female only	Prevalence use = 77%	Herbal = 22.0% Prayer = 20.0% Vitamins = 13.8% Native healers = 8.2% Chinese medicines = 5.5%	Not reported	Use associated with: Dissatisfaction with conventional therapy (Odds ratio 2.15)	Not reported	Uganda
Mwaka et al, 2019,27	Cross-sectional study. N = 434 patients Female = 81.9% (352/) Mean age = 49.2±12.2 years Cancer sites: Breast (71.9%), Stomach (4.1%), Esophagus (8.3%), Colorectal (15.1%)	Prevalence use = 55.6% Disclosed use = 38.7%	Extracts from leaves = 45.4% Bottled mixed liquids = 43.3% Prayers = 28.8% Extracts from roots = 25.0% Dry power herbs = 17.9% Chinese medicines = 10.4%	Cure cancer = 68.3% Improve immunity = 35.6% Relieve pain = 31.2% Reduce cancer symptoms = 19.5% Treat side effects of chemotherapy = 16.8% Prevent cancer = 8.6% Potentiate chemotherapy = 6.6%	Use associated with: Advanced stage cancer, Being divorced or separated, No association with: Sex, age, education, and cancer site.	No report on perceived benefits, risks or side effects of T&CM	Uganda
Kiraki et al, 2019,42	Cross-sectional study. N = 117 patients Female= 53.8% Age: ≥16 years Cancer sites: Various including breast (13.7%) and cervix (12.8%)	Prevalence use = 47.9% Disclosed use = 85.7%	Spiritual therapy (37.5%, n=21) Vitamins and supplements (26.5%, n=15) Herbs (19.6%, n=11) Chinese herbs (12.5%, n=7)	Cure of cancer = 78.6% Improve immunity = 44.6% Relieve cancer symptoms = 44.6% Manage pain = 23.2%	No association with: Age, education, total household income, marital status, religion, residence.	Benefits: Improved health (53.6%) Improved ability to cope (28.6%) Side effects No T&CM user reported adverse effects	Kenya
Aziato et al, 2015,49	Exploratory qualitative study. N = 12 patients All female Age: 31 – 60 years Cancer site: Breast	Prevalence of use = 33.3%	Prayers = 8.3% Herbs = 25.0%	Avoid mastectomy	Not applicable	Benefits: Preserved femininity and sex life Avoid ridicule from men Side effects No report on perceived adverse effects of T&CM	Ghana
Erku et al, 2016,23	Cross-sectional study. N = 195 Female = 54.3% Age: ≥18 years Cancer sites: Various including breast (37.9%)	Prevalence of use = 79.0% Disclosed use = 20.8%	Herbs = 72.1% Special foods = 38.9% Spiritual healing = 36.4% Dietary supplements = 22.1%	Belief in advantages = 73.4% Dissatisfaction with conventional therapy = 14.9% Family tradition = 13.0% Emotional support = 11.0% Boost immunity = 8.4%	Use associated with: Higher income, Tertiary education, Presence of comorbidity, Advanced stage cancer.	Benefits: 49.3% (n=76) reported satisfaction with use 9.7% (n=15) were dissatisfied with use Adverse effects: 81.8% (n=126) of users reported no adverse effects from T&CM.	Ethiopia
Ong’udia et al, 2019,40	Cross-sectional study. N = 78 patients Female = 55.1% Age: ≥18 years Cancer site: Various including breast (29.5%)	Prevalence of use = 14.1% Disclosed use = 55.0%	Herbs = 91.0% Faith healing = 54.5% Divination = 36.3% Massage = 27.3%	Restore hope = 73.0% Psychological comfort = 82.0% Increase quality of life = 82.0% Boost immunity = 73.0% Cure of disease = 64% Symptoms relief = 36%	No association with: Age, Sex, Education, Marital status, Religion, Level of income.	Benefit: 54.5% (n=5) of users satisfied with T&CM use 55.0% disappointed with use because use did not meet their expectations. 72% (n=8) of users would not recommend use. Side effects 27.0% (n=3) of users reported vomiting and urinary frequency	Kenya
Nwankwo et al, 2019,50	Cross-sectional study. N = 95 patients Female = 100.0% Mean age = 50.9±11 years Cancer sites: Gynecological including cervix (44.2%) and ovary (32.6%).	Prevalence use = 64.3%	Herbs = 73.8%	Not reported	Use associated with: Longer time to diagnosis, Longer duration of illness symptoms, Monthly income less than expenditure.	Not reported	Nigeria
De Boer et al, 2014,41	Cross-sectional study N = 161 patients Female = 31.1% Mean age = 34.0±7.7 years Cancer type: Kaposi sarcoma (100%)	Prevalence use = 25.5%	Not reported	Not reported	Use associated with: Longer diagnostic delay (OR = 2.69 (95%CI: 1.17 – 6.17)	Not reported	Uganda

Note: ^a Reported percentages ≥5%.