4.4 Article

Women's perspectives towards traditional and complementary medicine used to conceive, during pregnancy and the postpartum period

期刊

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.ctcp.2017.12.009

关键词

Perspective; Traditional medicine; Complementary therapy; Pregnancy; Postpartum

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objectives: This study aims to explore pregnant and postpartum women's understanding of the meaning of traditional and complementary medicine (T&CM) and how that may affect their T&CM use. Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted using self-administered questionnaires. Data collected from 374 women were analysed and represented via descriptive statistics. Results: Out of the 374 participants, 285 (76.2%) reported using at least one type of T&CM to conceive, during pregnancy or in the postpartum period. The majority of the participants identified that T&CM is all about plants or natural products without chemicals or drugs (n = 267, 71.4%, p < .001). The category of T&CM with the highest usage was biological based therapies (n = 272, 95.4%), while the lowest was energy therapies (n = 8, 2.8%). The most commonly used T&CM was the traditional Malay massage (n = 170, 59.6%). The main sources of information and recommendations for using T&CM came from their family members or friends (n = 199, 69.8%). Almost half of the participants incurred minimum expenditures of MYR100 and below on the T&CM used (n = 137, 48.1%) and there was no significant difference between pregnant and postpartum women (p = .056). Conclusion: This study reveals that many women are practising T&CM when trying to conceive and during pregnancy and the postpartum period even though they are aware that there is insufficient evidence on its safety and efficacy. Therefore, further studies are needed in order to gain sufficient clinical evidence that could be used to structure better guidelines for T&CM practices and services in Malaysia. (c) 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据