3.8 Article

Children's visits to providers of complementary and alternative medicine in San Diego

Journal

AMBULATORY PEDIATRICS
Volume 6, Issue 5, Pages 293-296

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.ambp.2005.11.007

Keywords

alternative medicine; alternative therapy; child; complementary and alternative medicine

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective.-Increased attention has been focused on the growing use of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM); however, few studies have included children in the general US population. The present study investigated children's visits to CAM providers and factors associated with these visits. Methods.-Analysis of cross-sectional data from the 2001 United Way Outcomes and Community Impact Program telephone survey, a representative sample of households in San Diego County, California. We selected households with children younger than 19 years of age (N = 1104). Parents reported on children's CAM visits in the past year. Results.-Approximately 23% of parents reported that their child saw a CAM provider in the past 12 months. CAM care was sought for sick and routine care. Children of white parents had greater odds of having a CAM visit in the past year compared with children whose parents were Hispanic (adjusted odds ratio 1.71, 95% confidence interval [95% CI] 1.11-2.63). Children whose parents were college graduates had a greater likelihood of seeing a CAM provider than children of parents with high school education (adjusted odds ratio = 1.82, 95% CI 1.19-2.79). Children who were insured were also more likely to have CAM visits than uninsured children (adjusted odds ratio = 2.32, 95% Cl 1.04-5.21). Conclusions.-Visits to CAM providers were much more common among children in the general San Diego population compared with 1996 national estimates. Pediatric health care providers should remain aware that their patients may be using CAM so they can provide coordinated care.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

3.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available