BackgroundSurveys have generally found that individuals more likely to use complementary and alternative medicine are female, live in the western United States, are likely to have a health complaint, and have a higher socioeconomic status than do nonusers. What is not known is the extent to which those who use complementary and alternative medicine also engage in positive health behaviors, such as smoking cessation or increased physical activity and/or exhibit fewer health risk factors such as obesity. This has been identified as a key research question in a recent Institute of Medicine report. In the present study we sought to determine whether the use of complementary and alternative medicine is associated with health behaviors or risk factors known to impact on health status.MethodsThe current study is a cross-sectional regression analysis using data from the 2002 National Health Interview Survey. Data were collected in-person from 31,044 adults throughout the 50 states and the District of Columbia.ResultsAfter controlling for a range of other factors, we found that engaging in leisure-time physical activity, having consumed alcohol in one's life but not being a current heavy drinker, and being a former smoker are independently associated with the use of CAM. Obese individuals are slightly less likely to use CAM than individuals with a healthy body-mass index. No significant associations were observed between receipt of an influenza vaccine and CAM use.ConclusionThose engaging in positive health behaviors and exhibiting fewer health risk factors are more likely to use CAM than those who forgo positive health behaviors or exhibit more health risk factors. The fact that users of CAM tend to pursue generally healthy lifestyles suggests that they may be open to additional recommendations toward optimizing their health.

While most pain is acute, resolving within a few days or weeks, millions of Americans suffer from persistent or recurring pain that may become chronic and debilitating. Medications may provide only partial relief from this chronic pain and can be associated with unwanted side effects. As a result, many individuals turn to complementary health approaches as part of their pain management strategy. This article examines the clinical trial evidence for the efficacy and safety of several specific approaches – acupuncture, manipulation, massage therapy, relaxation techniques including meditation, selected natural product supplements (chondroitin, glucosamine, methylsulfonylmethane, S-adenoysl methionine), tai chi, and yoga – as used to manage chronic pain and related disability associated with back pain, fibromyalgia, osteoarthritis, neck pain, and severe headaches or migraines.

No abstract

Background: Myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome is characterized by persistent and disabling fatigue, exercise intolerance, cognitive difficulty, and musculoskeletal/joint pain. Post-exertional malaise is a worsening of these symptoms after a physical or mental exertion and is considered a central feature of the illness. Scant observations in the available literature provide qualitative assessments of post-exertional malaise in patients with myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome. To enhance our understanding, a series of outpatient focus groups were convened. Methods: Nine focus groups totaling 43 patients who reported being diagnosed with myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome were held between November 2016 and August 2019. Focus groups queried post-exertional malaise in daily life and participants' retrospective memory of post-exertional malaise that followed an exercise provocation with a cardiopulmonary exercise test. Data analysis followed the grounded theory method to systematically code and categorize the data to find meaningful patterns. A qualitative software package was used to move text into categories during data coding. Results: A wide range of symptoms were attributed to exertion both in daily lives and following cardiopulmonary exercise testing. While three core symptoms emerged (exhaustion, cognitive difficulties, and neuromuscular complaints), participants' descriptions were notable for their unique individual variations. Of 18 participants who responded to questions centered around symptoms following a cardiopulmonary exercise test, 17 reported that symptoms started within 24 h and peaked in severity within 72 h following the cardiopulmonary exercise test. Patients described post-exertional malaise as interfering with their ability to lead a "normal" life. Conclusion: The experience of post-exertional malaise in myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome varies greatly between individuals and leads to a diminished quality of life. myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome Stussman et al. Characterization of Post-exertional Malaise patients describe post-exertional malaise as all-encompassing with symptoms affecting every part of the body, difficult to predict or manage, and requiring complete bedrest to fully or partially recover. Given the extensive variability in patients, further research identifying subtypes of post-exertional malaise could lead to better targeted therapeutic options.

BackgroundDespite a growing body of scientific literature exploring the nature of meditation there is limited information on the characteristics of individuals who use it. This is particularly true of comparative studies examining prevalence and predictors of use of various forms of meditation.MethodsA secondary analysis was conducted using data from the 2012 National Health Interview Survey (n = 34,525). Three popular forms of meditation were compared—mantra, mindfulness, and spiritual—to determine lifetime and 12-month use related to key sociodemographic, health behavior, health status, and healthcare access variables.ResultsThe 12-month prevalence for meditation practice was 3.1% for spiritual meditation, 1.9% for mindfulness meditation, and 1.6% for mantra meditation. This represents approximately 7.0, 4.3, and 3.6 million adults respectively. A comparison across the three meditation practices found many similarities in user characteristics, suggesting interest in meditation may be more related to the type of person meditating than to the type of practice selected. Across meditation styles use was more prevalent among respondents who were female, non-Hispanic White, college educated, physically active; who used other complementary health practices; and who reported depression. Higher utilization of conventional healthcare services was one of the strongest predictors of use of all three styles. In addition to similarities, important distinctions were observed. For example, spiritual meditation practice was more prevalent among former drinkers. This may reflect use of spiritual meditation practices in support of alcohol treatment and sobriety. Reasons for use of meditation were examined using the sample of respondents who practiced mindfulness meditation. Wellness and prevention (74%) was a more common reason than use to treat a specific health condition (30%). Common reasons for use included stress management (92%) and emotional well-being (91%), and to support other health behaviors. Meditation was viewed positively because it was self-care oriented (81%) and focused on the whole person (79%).ConclusionMeditation appears to provide an accessible, self-care resource that has potential value for mental health, behavioral self-regulation, and integrative medical care. Considering consumer preference for distinct types of meditation practices, understanding the underlying mechanisms, benefits, and applications of practice variations is important.

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.

BackgroundWe hypothesize that a substantial portion of individuals who forgo conventional care in a given year turn to some form of alternative medicine. This study also examines whether individuals who use only alternative medicine will differ substantially in health and sociodemographic status from individuals using neither alternative medicine nor conventional care in a given year. To identify those factors that predict alternative medicine use in those not using conventional care, we employed the socio-behavioral model of healthcare utilization.MethodsThe current study is a cross-sectional regression analysis using data from the 2002 National Health Interview Survey. Data were collected in-person from 31,044 adults throughout the 50 states and the District of Columbia.Results19.3% of adults (38.3 million) did not use conventional care in a 12 month period, although 39.5% of these individuals (14.7 million) reported having one or more problems with their health. Of those not using conventional care, 24.8% (9.5 million) used alternative medicine. Users of alternative medicine had more health needs and were more likely to delay conventional care because of both cost and non-cost factors compared to those not using alternative medicine. While individual predisposing factors (gender, education) were positively associated with alternative medicine use, enabling factors (poverty status, insurance coverage) were not.ConclusionsWe found that a quarter of individuals who forgo conventional care in a given year turn towards alternative medicine. Our study suggests that the potential determinants of using only alternative medicine are multifactorial. Future research is needed to examine the decision process behind an individual's choice to use alternative medicine but not conventional medicine and the clinical outcomes of this choice.

Estimates of nonfatal work-related injuries range from 6 to 13 million annually, and the most serious of these injuries are presented to hospital emergency departments (EDs). To describe work-related injury ED visits in the United States, we examined data from the 1995-1996 National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Survey, which is a national probability sample survey of visits to EDs of non-federal, short-stay, and general hospitals. In 1995-1996, an annual average of 4 million work-related injury ED visits were made by persons 16 years of age and over. The average annual rate of work-related injury visits was 3.5 per 100 workers, and the rate of nonwork-related injury visits was 11.2 per 100 persons. Persons 16-19 years of age had a higher work-related injury visit rate (6.9 per 100 full-time equivalents [FTEs]) than did those 20 years of age and over (3.4 per 100 FTEs). Males had higher work-related injury visit rates (4.3 per 100 FTEs) than females (2.4 per 100 FTEs). The leading cause of injury and diagnosis for work-related injury ED visits were "cuts" (16%) and "open wound" (22%), respectively. Determining appropriate preventive action will reduce the number of workers injured and may result in financial savings for industries and health care systems.