Predictors Of Complementary Medicine Use Research Articles

Rates, patterns, and predictors of complementary medicine use among patients with musculoskeletal diseases.

To investigate the extent of complementary medicine (CM) use and the most common therapies utilized by Jordanian patients with musculoskeletal (MSK) diseases. A semi-structured questionnaire was used to conduct a cross-sectional survey of outpatient orthopedic and rheumatology patients at an academic medical center in Amman, Jordan between January and September 2020. A convenience sample of 1001 patients was interviewed (82% females). Pearson's chi-square comparisons showed that nutritional CM was used by 43.4% of patients, while 29.8% used physical CM, and 16% used both. Almost all used the nutritional or physical CM in addition to their prescribed treatment. Nutritional form use was significantly higher among females, older age groups, married people, and those who worked (p < .05). Physical form use was statistically more prevalent in older age groups and those with a higher level of education (p < .05). Family income and urban residence were not significantly associated with the use of either form of CM therapy. Olive oil was the most frequently reported nutritional type (22.9%), and cupping was the most reported physical type (41.6%). Recommendations to use CM came primarily from family members or friends (64% of nutritional CM users and 59% of physical CM users). A physician or pharmacist was cited more frequently with physical CM (24% versus 8% for the nutritional form). In contrast, media sources were cited more for nutritional than physical form (28% versus 7%). Over half of the patients believed they received the desired effect from CM. Surprisingly, only 9.5% of the patients admitted to discussing their CM use with their physician. CM use is prevalent among Jordanian patients with MSK disorders. Most patients rely on family and friends for recommendations, and they rarely inform their physician of the CM use. Physicians should routinely inquire about CM to provide patients with information regarding their benefits and risks.

Complementary medicine use in US adults with a history of colorectal cancer: a nationally representative survey

BackgroundIn the USA, colorectal cancer is among the top diagnosed cancers. The current study specifically targets the US adult population that have a history of colorectal cancer.MethodsWe used the 2017 National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) to investigate the prevalence and predictors of colorectal cancer survivors using complementary medicine in the past 12 months in a representative sample of the US population (N = 26,742). We descriptively analyzed the 12-month prevalence of any complementary medicine use separately for individuals with a prior diagnosis of colorectal cancer and those without. Using chi-squared tests and backward stepwise multiple logistic regression analyses, we identified predictors of complementary medicine use in the past 12 months.ResultsA weighted total of 1,501,481 US adults (0.6%) had a history of colorectal cancer. More individuals without (weighted n = 76,550,503; 31.2%) than those with a history of colorectal cancer (weighted n = 410,086; 27.3%) had used complementary medicine. The most commonly used complementary medicine among colorectal cancer patients was mind-body medicine, followed by chiropractic. A higher prevalence of complementary medicine use was associated with being female, higher educated and/or living in the US Midwest or South.ConclusionsIn this study, over one fourth of the US colorectal cancer survivors had used complementary medicine. Mind-body medicine was found to be the most commonly used. With evidence supporting the effectiveness and safety of mind-body medicine use among colorectal cancer patients, promoting the use of evidence-based mind-body medicine for colorectal cancer management could be considered.

The prevalence, sociodemographic characteristics, expenditure and predictors of complementary medicine use in Australian adults living with gastrointestinal disorders

The prevalence, sociodemographic characteristics, expenditure and predictors of complementary medicine use in Australian adults living with gastrointestinal disorders

The prevalence, characteristics, expenditure and predictors of complementary medicine use in Australians living with gastrointestinal disorders: A cross-sectional study

AimsTo determine the prevalence, characteristics, expenditure and predictors of complementary medicine (CM) use in Australian adults living with gastrointestinal disorders (GID). MethodsA cross-sectional study involving 2,025 Australian adults was conducted. Participants were recruited through purposive convenience sampling. Descriptive statistics were conducted to report the prevalence of people living with GIDs and their CM use, including CM products, mind-body practices and CM practitioner services. Chi-square test and independent-samples t-test were used to determine the associations between sociodemographic or health-related variables with CM use. Binary logistic regression was conducted to determine the significant predictors of CM use in GID participants. Economic data was calculated based on the mean out-of-pocket expenditure on CM. ResultsOf the 293 participants reporting a GID, 186 (63.5%) used CM products, 55 (18.8%) used a mind-body practice and 141 (48.1%) visited at least one CM practitioner in the last 12 months. Collectively, the majority of GID participants using any type of CM were female, aged 40–49 years, married and employed. The mean score for health-related quality of life was 49.6 out of 100 in GID participants and 68.2 in participants without a GID (p < 0.001). Average annual out-of-pocket expenditure on CM products was AUD127.29 by CM products users with a GID. The predictors of CM products, mind-body practices and CM practitioner services use differed. Of the 111 CM product users with a GID, 103 (92.8%) disclosed all or some of their CM use to general practitioner, 89 (80.2%) to specialist doctor, 79 (71.2%) to pharmacist and 69 (62.1%) to hospital doctor. ConclusionsA substantial proportion of Australian adults living with GID use CM products, mind-body practices and CM practitioner services. This study provides important insights to inform and guide the development of a more coordinated health care services for individuals living with GID.

Complementary medicine use by the Australian population: a critical mixed studies systematic review of utilisation, perceptions and factors associated with use.

BackgroundThere is increasing evidence that complementary medicine (CM) services are being used by a substantial proportion of the Australian population and this topic has attracted keen interest from primary health care providers and policy makers. This article outlines the first summative critical review of the predictors of CM use in Australia as well as the characteristics and perceptions of Australian CM users over the last 14 years.MethodsA literature search was conducted to ascertain original research from 2000 to 2014 in the AMED; CINAHL; and PubMed databases. Selected articles were subject to a critical appraisal analysis to identify the quality of the article. The search was confined to peer reviewed original articles published in English which identified the nature of CM services use in Australia.ResultsThe findings indicate a correlation between CM users and gender, with reports of a higher rate of use from females compared to males. Female CM users are more likely to be middle-aged with a higher education and higher annual income in comparison to female non-CM users. An association between resident location and use of CM disciplines was also identified with reports of rural residents utilising manual therapies more frequently compared to urban residents. CM users are more likely to seek CM services for a range of chronic conditions including diseases identified as National Health Priority Areas by the Australian Government.ConclusionsThis article provides the first comprehensive review examining the nature of CM use in Australia. The review findings offer important insights into the characteristics and features of CM use in Australia and provide insights for national and regional primary health care initiatives and of interest to medical doctors, allied health professionals, CM practitioners, researchers and policy makers.

Disease severity is associated with the use of complementary medicine to treat or manage type-2 diabetes: data from the 2002 and 2007 National Health Interview Survey

BackgroundThe overall prevalence of complementary medicine (CM) use among adults in the United States with diabetes has been examined both in representative national samples and in more restricted populations. However, none of these earlier studies attempted to identify predictors of CM use to treat diabetes among the populations sampled, nor looked for a relationship between CM use and diabetes severity.MethodsCombining data from the 2002 and 2007 National Health Interview Survey (NHIS), we constructed a nationally representative sample of 3,978 U.S. adults aged ≥18 years with self-reported diabetes. Both the 2002 and 2007 NHIS contained extensive questions on the use of CM. We used logistic regression to examine the association between diabetes severity and overall CM use, as well as the use of specific categories of CM.ResultsIn adults with type-2 diabetes, 30.9% used CM for any reason, but only 3.4% used CM to treat or manage their type-2 diabetes versus 7.1% of those with type-1 diabetes. Among those using CM to treat/manage their type-2 diabetes, 77% used both CM and conventional prescription medicine for their diabetes. The most prevalent types of CM therapies used were diet-based interventions (35.19%, S.E. 5.11) and non-vitamin/non-mineral dietary supplements (33.74%, S.E. 5.07). After controlling for sociodemographic factors, we found that, based on a count of measures of diabetes severity, persons with the most severe diabetes had nearly twice the odds of using CM as those with less severe disease (OR=1.9, 95%CI 1.2-3.01). Persons who had diabetes 10 years or more (OR=1.66, 95%CI 1.04-3.66) and those that had a functional limitation resulting from their diabetes (OR=1.74, 95%CI 1.09-2.8) had greater odds of using CM than those not reporting these measures. No significant associations were observed between overall CM use and other individual measures of diabetes severity: use of diabetic medications, weak or failing kidneys, coronary heart disease, or severe vision problems.ConclusionsOur results demonstrate that individuals with more severe diabetes are more likely to use CM independent of sociodemographic factors. Further studies are essential to determine if CM therapies actually improve clinical outcomes when used to treat/manage diabetes.

Patients are more likely to use complementary medicine if it is locally available

Complementary medicine (CM) therapies and products, such as acupuncture, massage, prayer, vitamins, herbs, and diet programs, are widely used by patients as an adjunct to primary care. Predictors of CM use are complex, and include socioeconomic characteristics, clinical conditions and type of CM therapy used

An investigation of the health beliefs and motivations of complementary medicine clients

The current study was concerned with factors associated with the use of complementary medicine (CM). The reasons for CM use were examined by dividing complementary medicine clients into two groups based on the frequency and length of their use of complementary therapies, and comparing them with conventional medicine clients as well as to each other. New/infrequent CM clients ( n=70), established CM clients ( n=71), and orthodox medicine clients ( n=58) were distinguished on the basis of health beliefs, socio-demographic, medical, and personality variables. Different patterns of predictors of CM use emerged depending on which client groups were compared. In general, health-aware behaviors and dissatisfaction with conventional medicine were the best predictors of overall and initial/infrequent CM use, and more frequent health-aware behaviors were associated with continued CM use. Medical need also influenced the choice to use CM, and was the best predictor of committed CM use, with the established CM clients reporting more health problems than the new/infrequent CM group. Overall, income was a significant discriminator, but did not predict initial or continued CM use. Openness to new experience was associated with CM use in general, but was most notable in the decision to initially try or explore using CM. The findings support the utility of the three components (predisposing, enabling, and need factors) of the socio-behavioral model for explaining why some people choose CM. Overall, the results of the current study suggest that CM clients need to be looked at in more sophisticated ways, rather than being treated simply as a homogenous group with similar beliefs, motivations and needs

Complementary Medicine Use by Patients With Inflammatory Bowel Disease

The purpose of this study was to establish the degree and determinants of the use of complementary therapies by patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) and their reasons for seeking them. The first phase was a cross-sectional survey of 134 patients with IBD (98 with Crohn's disease, 34 with ulcerative colitis, and two indeterminate) using a mailed, structured questionnaire (response rate 70%). Determinants of complementary medicine use were examined using logistic regression. The second phase was an in-depth exploration using personal interviews of the beliefs and perceptions of 14 complementary medicine users about the management of their disease. Analysis was performed using standard qualitative techniques and the identification of important, patient-identified themes about the management of IBD. Complementary therapies had been used by 51% of patients in the previous 2 yr. Current use was reported by 33%, of whom one-half were using it for their IBD. Vitamins and herbal products were the most commonly reported therapies. In multivariate analysis, duration of disease > 10 yr and a history of hospitalization were independent predictors of complementary medicine use. The side effects and lack of effectiveness of standard therapies were the most commonly cited reasons for seeking complementary medicine. Sixty-two percent had told their doctor about their use of complementary medicine. Complementary medicine use is common in patients with IBD, especially among those with a longer duration of disease or a history of hospitalization.

Complementary medicine use by patients with inflammatory bowel disease

Objective: The purpose of this study was to establish the degree and determinants of the use of complementary therapies by patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) and their reasons for seeking them. Methods: The first phase was a cross-sectional survey of 134 patients with IBD (98 with Crohn’s disease, 34 with ulcerative colitis, and two indeterminate) using a mailed, structured questionnaire (response rate 70%). Determinants of complementary medicine use were examined using logistic regression. The second phase was an in-depth exploration using personal interviews of the beliefs and perceptions of 14 complementary medicine users about the management of their disease. Analysis was performed using standard qualitative techniques and the identification of important, patient-identified themes about the management of IBD. Results: Complementary therapies had been used by 51% of patients in the previous 2 yr. Current use was reported by 33%, of whom one-half were using it for their IBD. Vitamins and herbal products were the most commonly reported therapies. In multivariate analysis, duration of disease > 10 yr and a history of hospitalization were independent predictors of complementary medicine use. The side effects and lack of effectiveness of standard therapies were the most commonly cited reasons for seeking complementary medicine. Sixty-two percent had told their doctor about their use of complementary medicine. Conclusion: Complementary medicine use is common in patients with IBD, especially among those with a longer duration of disease or a history of hospitalization.