4.5 Article

Prevalence and Determinants of Traditional 5 Complementary and Alternative Medicine Provider Use among Adults from 32 Countries

Journal

CHINESE JOURNAL OF INTEGRATIVE MEDICINE
Volume 24, Issue 8, Pages 584-590

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s11655-016-2748-y

Keywords

utilization; traditional; complementary medicine; Africa; Asia; America; Australia; Europe

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective: To estimate recent prevalence data (2011-2013) on traditional, complementary and alternative medicine (TCAM) provider use and sociodemographic and health related correlates in nationally representative population samples from 32 countries from all world regions. Methods: This secondary analysis was based on the International Social Survey Program (ISSP), 2011-2013, Health and Health Care Module. In a cross-sectional population-based survey (N=52,801), simple or multi-stage stratified random sampling was used, resulting in representative samples of the adult population of respective countries. Results: Overall, the 12-month TCAM provider use prevalence was 26.4%, ranging from under 10% in Bulgaria, Poland and Slovenia to over 50% in China mainland, the Philippines and Republic of Korea. Over 80% TCAM treatment satisfaction was found in Europe in Denmark, Slovenia, Spain and Switzerland, in Asia in Taiwan (China) and USA. Multivariate logistic regression found sociodemographic variables (middle age, female sex, lower educational status, not having a religious affiliation, and lower economic indicators) and health variables (perceived poor or fair health status, being unhappy and depressed, having a chronic condition or disability, and having positive attitudes towards TCAM) were associated with TCAM provider use. Conclusions: A high prevalence TCAM provider use was found in all world regions and several sociodemographic and health related factors of its use were identified.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available