Characteristics of Patients Presenting at a University Outpatient Department for Complementary and Integrative Medicine

Abstract

Background: Complementary and integrative medicine (CIM) is increasingly provided at university outpatient departments (OPDs) in Germany, but its scientific evaluation is sparse. Therefore, we aimed to investigate and evaluate feasibility, patients’ characteristics and complaints at a university’s CIM-OPD. Methods: A prospective evaluation included new patients without age restriction. At baseline, and after 6 and 12 months, patients filled out paper questionnaires. Patients rated their mean subjectively perceived severity of the main complaint within the last 7 days on a numerical rating scale (NRS) from 0 = no complaints to 10 = maximum complaints, their perceived resilience capacity in everyday life within the last 7 days (0 = not resilient to 10 = very resilient), and their contentment with the treatment (0 = not content to 10 = very content). Diagnoses were provided by physicians and coded according to the International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems, 10th revision. All data were analyzed descriptively. Results: During two years, 536 new patients {72.6% response, age (mean ± standard deviation [SD] and range) 49.6 ± 15.8 and 1–86 years, 75.7% female} chose to participate. The most frequent diagnosis groups were neoplasms (C00-C97, n = 143, 18.6%) and musculoskeletal diseases (M00-M99, n = 137, 17.9%). In n = 165 patients (30.8%), more than one diagnosis was provided. In a subgroup of 187 patients, who returned the questionnaire after 6 months, we compared baseline to 6-month values: severity of main complaint (mean ± SD) 5.2 ± 2.6 changed to 3.9 ± 2.6; resilience capacity 5.1 ± 2.6 to 5.6 ± 2.4. After 6 months, respondents rated their contentment with the treatment with (mean ± SD) 7.7 ± 2.6. Data after 12 months (n = 113) are comparable to data after 6 months. Conclusion: Patients of our CIM-OPD had a broad age range, were predominantly female, and suffered mostly from oncologic-related complaints and musculoskeletal diseases. In the responding subgroup after 6 months, patients were content with the treatment. These results should be verified by further prospective evaluations.