BackgroundThere is increasing evidence that complementary medicine (CM) services are being used by a substantial proportion of the Australian population and this topic has attracted keen interest from primary health care providers and policy makers. This article outlines the first summative critical review of the predictors of CM use in Australia as well as the characteristics and perceptions of Australian CM users over the last 14 years.MethodsA literature search was conducted to ascertain original research from 2000 to 2014 in the AMED; CINAHL; and PubMed databases. Selected articles were subject to a critical appraisal analysis to identify the quality of the article. The search was confined to peer reviewed original articles published in English which identified the nature of CM services use in Australia.ResultsThe findings indicate a correlation between CM users and gender, with reports of a higher rate of use from females compared to males. Female CM users are more likely to be middle-aged with a higher education and higher annual income in comparison to female non-CM users. An association between resident location and use of CM disciplines was also identified with reports of rural residents utilising manual therapies more frequently compared to urban residents. CM users are more likely to seek CM services for a range of chronic conditions including diseases identified as National Health Priority Areas by the Australian Government.ConclusionsThis article provides the first comprehensive review examining the nature of CM use in Australia. The review findings offer important insights into the characteristics and features of CM use in Australia and provide insights for national and regional primary health care initiatives and of interest to medical doctors, allied health professionals, CM practitioners, researchers and policy makers.
Background: Naturopathy is a distinct system of traditional and complementary medicine recognized by the World Health Organization and defined by its philosophic approach to patient care, rather than the treatments used by practitioners. Worldwide, over 98 countries have practicing naturopaths, representing 36% of all countries and every world region. The contributions of naturopaths to healthcare delivery services internationally has not been previously examined. Thus, the primary intention of this research was to conduct an international survey of naturopathic practice and patient characteristics in order to gain insight to the breadth of their practices and the type of clinical conditions routinely encountered. Methods: The cross-sectional study was conducted in naturopathic clinics in 14 countries within 4 world regions including the European () and African (South Africa). Naturopathic practitioners in each country were invited to prospectively complete an online survey for 20 consecutive cases. The survey was administered in four languages. Results: A total of 56 naturopaths from 14 countries participated in the study, providing a mean of 15.1 cases each (SD 7.6) and 851 cases in total. Most patients were female (72.6%) and all age categories were represented with a similar proportion for 36-45 years (20.2%), 46-55 years (19.5%), and 56-65 years (19.3%). A substantial majority (75%) of patients were considered by the participant to be presenting with chronic health conditions. The most prevalent category of health conditions were musculoskeletal (18.5%), gastrointestinal (12.2%), and mental illness (11.0%). The most common treatment categories prescribed or recommended to patients by the participants were dietary changes (60.5%), lifestyle and behaviour changes (56.9%), herbal medicines (54.2%) and nutritional supplements (52.1%). Many patients were known by participants to be receiving care from a general practitioner (43.2%) or a specialist medical practitioner (27.8%). Conclusions: Naturopathic practitioners provide health care for diverse health conditions in patients in different age groups. The global population would benefit from researchers and policy makers paying closer attention to the potential risks, benefits, challenges and opportunities of the provision of naturopathic care within the community.
In recent years, evidence has emerged regarding the effectiveness of osteopathic manipulative treatments (OMT). Despite growing evidence in this field, there is need for appropriate research designs that effectively reflect the person-centred system of care promoted in osteopathy and provide data which can inform policy decisions within the healthcare system. The purpose of this systematic review is to identify, appraise and synthesise the evidence from comparative effectiveness and economic evaluation research involving OMT. A database search was conducted using CINAHL, PubMed, PEDro, AMED, SCOPUS and OSTMED.DR, from their inception to May 2015. Two separate searches were undertaken to identify original research articles encompassing the economic evaluation and comparative effectiveness of OMT. Identified comparative effectives studies were evaluated using the Cochrane risk of bias tool and appraised using the Good Reporting of Comparative Effectiveness (GRACE) principles. Identified economic studies were assessed with the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) guidelines. Sixteen studies reporting the findings of comparative effectiveness (n = 9) and economic evaluation (n = 7) research were included. The comparative effectiveness studies reported outcomes for varied health conditions and the majority (n = 6) demonstrated a high risk of bias. The economic evaluations included a range of analyses and considerable differences in the quality of reporting were evident. Despite some positive findings, published comparative effectiveness and health economic studies in OMT are of insufficient quality and quantity to inform policy and practice. High quality, well-designed, research that aligns with international best practice is greatly needed to build a pragmatic evidence base for OMT.
Despite the mounting evidence supporting the value and importance of PCC, there is insufficient research attention given to the clinical reality of PCC service and programme delivery. The transfer of PCC guidelines from broad policy to grass roots practice requires a more detailed consideration of the practicalities of implementing PCC within contemporary women's health care.
Objectives: To report the prevalence of naturopathic and Western herbal medicine service utilization in Australia, and describe the characteristics of individuals who use these services. Design: This is a national cross-sectional study. Settings: Online survey platform. Subjects: Purposive convenience sampling was used to recruit 2025 adults who were matched to Australian population demographics by gender, age, and state of residence. Interventions: A survey instrument consisting of 50 items covering demographics, health service utilization, health status, health literacy, and medicine disclosure to complementary health care providers. Outcome measures: The prevalence, frequency, and cost of naturopathy and Western herbal medicine consultations and sociodemographic characteristics of users of naturopathic and Western herbalist services and associations between these factors. Results: The final data set included 2019 participants: 6.2% (n = 126) consulted a naturopath and 3.8% (n = 76) a Western herbalist. These health services were most commonly used to improve well-being. An average of AUD$102.67 and AUD$49.64 was spent per user on consultations with naturopaths and Western herbalists, respectively, in the previous year. The most prevalent users were those between 18 and 29 years of age (39.3%), in a relationship (51%), employed (70%), and held a bachelor degree or higher (40.5%). Some degree of financial difficulty was reported by 65.4% of users. Having a chronic illness (p < 0.01) and using both conventional and complementary medicines (p = 0.05) were both associated with using naturopathic or Western herbal medicine services. Less than 40% of participants disclosed their use of conventional medicines to Western herbalists. Conclusions: Naturopathy and Western herbal medicine services are used by a substantial number of Australian adults who also use conventional health services. Accordingly, research is needed to determine how these health professions can be better integrated into mainstream health care settings to improve patientpractitioner communication and safety related to the use of these health services.
Objective Currently, it is estimated that one in 10 women of reproductive age are affected by the reproductive condition known as endometriosis. However, there has been limited research and policy attention on the prevalence of endometriosis in Australia. Utilising a nationally-representative Australian sample (N = 2025), this study aimed to report on the prevalence of endometriosis in the general population and to examine the sociodemographic factors associated with the condition. Results The results identified a prevalence rate for endometriosis of 3.4%, which aligns with previous Australian research on this topic. However, the prevalence rate from this data set is lower than the estimate prevalence from the Global Burden of Disease Study. In addition, this study reported that women self-reporting diagnosis of endometriosis, were between 40–49 years of age, with a higher proportion living in South Australia (18.2%) compared to women within the general population (8.4%). The findings highlight endometriosis as a significant health care issue warranting further research and policy attention. While acknowledging some limitations, the study provides an important foundation for further large-scale research to be conducted on this important women’s health topic.
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
334 Leonard St
Brooklyn, NY 11211
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.