BackgroundComplementary medicine (CM) is popular in Switzerland. Several CM methods (traditional Chinese medicine/acupuncture, homeopathy, anthroposophic medicine, neural therapy, and herbal medicine) are currently covered by the mandatory basic health insurance when performed by a certified physician. Treatments by non-medical therapists are partially covered by a supplemental and optional health insurance. In this study, we investigated the frequency of CM use including the evolvement over time, the most popular methods, and the user profile.MethodsData of the Swiss Health Surveys 2007 and 2012 were used. In 2007 and 2012, a population of 14,432 and 18,357, respectively, aged 15 years or older answered the written questionnaire. A set of questions queried about the frequency of use of various CM methods within the last 12 months before the survey. Proportions of usage and 95% confidence intervals were calculated for these methods and CM in general. Users and non-users of CM were compared using logistic regression models.ResultsThe most popular methods in 2012 were homeopathy, naturopathy, osteopathy, herbal medicine, and acupuncture. The average number of treatments within the 12 months preceding the survey ranged from 3 for homeopathy to 6 for acupuncture. 25.0% of the population at the age of 15 and older had used at least one CM method in the previous 12 months. People with a chronic illness or a poor self-perceived health status were more likely to use CM. Similar to other countries, women, people of middle age, and those with higher education were more likely to use CM. 59.9% of the adult population had a supplemental health insurance that partly covered CM treatments.ConclusionsUsage of CM in Switzerland remained unchanged between 2007 and 2012. The user profile in Switzerland was similar to other countries, such as Germany, United Kingdom, United States or Australia.
BackgroundThough complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) are frequently used by children and adolescents with cancer, there is little information on how and why they use it. This study examined prevalence and methods of CAM, the therapists who applied it, reasons for and against using CAM and its perceived effectiveness. Parent-perceived communication was also evaluated. Parents were asked if medical staff provided information on CAM to patients, if parents reported use of CAM to physicians, and what attitude they thought physicians had toward CAM.Study DesignAll childhood cancer patients treated at the University Children’s Hospital Bern between 2002–2011 were retrospectively surveyed about their use of CAM.ResultsData was collected from 133 patients (response rate: 52%). Of those, 53% had used CAM (mostly classical homeopathy) and 25% of patients received information about CAM from medical staff. Those diagnosed more recently were more likely to be informed about CAM options. The most frequent reason for choosing CAM was that parents thought it would improve the patient’s general condition. The most frequent reason for not using CAM was lack of information. Of those who used CAM, 87% perceived positive effects.ConclusionsSince many pediatric oncology patients use CAM, patients’ needs should be addressed by open communication between families, treating oncologists and CAM therapists, which will allow parents to make informed and safe choices about using CAM.
Background: The demand for complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) treatment in the European Union (EU) has led to an increase in the various CAM interventions available to the public. Our aim was to describe the CAM services available from both registered medical practitioners and registered non-medical practitioners. Methods: Our literature search comprised a PubMed search of any scientific publications, secondary references and so-called grey literature, a search of government websites and websites of CAM organisations to collect data in a systematic manner, and personal communications, e.g., via e-mail contact. Due to the different reliability of data sources, a classification was developed and implemented. This weighted database was condensed into tables and maps to display the provision of CAM disciplines by country, showing the distribution of CAM providers across countries. Results: Approximately 305,000 registered CAM providers can be identified in the EU (∼160,000 non-medical and ∼145,000 medical practitioners). Acupuncture (n = 96,380) is the most available therapeutic method for both medical (80,000) and non-medical (16,380) practitioners, followed by homeopathy (45,000 medical and 5,800 non-medical practitioners). Herbal medicine (29,000 practitioners) and reflexology (24,600 practitioners) are mainly provided by non-medical practitioners. Naturopathy (22,300) is dominated by 15,000 (mostly German) doctors. Anthroposophic medicine (4,500) and neural therapy (1,500) are practised by doctors only. Conclusion: CAM provision in the EU is maintained by approximately 305,000 registered medical doctors and non-medical practitioners, with a huge variability in its national regulatory management, which makes any direct comparison across the EU almost impossible. Harmonisation of legal status, teaching and certification of expertise for therapists would be of enormous value and should be developed.
Background: The terms used for defining complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) including the methods, procedures and therapies vary greatly. The task of the CAMbrella working group on terminology was to explore the existing CAM terminologies and to develop a pragmatic definition of CAM that is acceptable Europewide. This can then be used to systematically research, e.g., its prevalence and legal status and to investigate the citizens’ demands on CAM and the perspectives of providers of CAM in Europe. Methods: Terms and definitions were collected from both scientific and non-scientific sources. The terms and definitions identified were analysed and discussed among the CAMbrella working group participants on several occasions with the aim of arriving at a consensus. Results: We developed a proposal for a pragmatic European definition of CAM: ‘Complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) utilised by European citizens represents a variety of different medical systems and therapies based on the knowledge, skills and practices derived from theories, philosophies and experiences used to maintain and improve health, as well as to prevent, diagnose, relieve or treat physical and mental illnesses. CAM has been mainly used outside conventional health care, but in some countries certain treatments are being adopted or adapted by conventional health care.’ Conclusion: Developing a uniform, pragmatic pan-European definition of CAM was complicated by a number of factors. These included the vast diversity of existing definitions, systems, disciplines, procedures, methods and therapies available within the EU.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.