"By knowing more about medical skepticism and other determinants of CAM provider use, conventional practitioners can target patients to improve their uptake of appropriate conventional care, while also monitoring patients alternative therapy use."
Comment: It would seem that if the care was so "appropriate" that uptake would be self-evident.
Medical skepticism and the use of complementary and alternative health care providers by patients followed by rheumatologists.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18525432?ordinalpos=1&itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_RVDocSum
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18525432?ordinalpos=1&itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_RVDocSum
J Clin Rheumatol. 2008 Jun;14(3):143-7.
Callahan LF, Freburger JK, Mielenz TJ, Wiley-Exley EK.
Thurston Arthritis Research Center, University of North Carolina at
Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC 27599-7280, USA. Leigh_Callahan@med.unc.edu
PMID: 18525432
BACKGROUND: Our understanding of the determinants of use of complementary and alternative (CAM) providers is limited, especially in regard to medical skepticism (ie, doubt in the ability of conventional medical care to appreciably alter health status).
OBJECTIVES: To determine whether medical skepticism was associated with CAM provider use in patients with arthritis and to explore the association between medical skepticism and demographic and health-related characteristics of persons with arthritis.
METHODS: A cross-sectional analysis of data from patients (N = 721) with osteoarthritis, rheumatoid arthritis, or fibromyalgia who completed a questionnaire about their health, health care use, and health-related attitudes/behaviors, including medical skepticism. Patients were recruited from 14 rheumatology practices in North Carolina. A multiple logistic regression analysis was conducted to examine the relationship between medical skepticism and the use of any CAM providers. Multiple linear regression analysis was conducted
to examine relationships between medical skepticism and demographic and health-related measures.
RESULTS: Fifteen percent of the sample used one or more CAM providers. Medical skepticism was positively associated with CAM provider use. A one point increase in skepticism increased the probability of CAM provider use by approximately 70% (odds ratios =1.70; 95% confidence intervals [1.13-2.56]). Individuals, who were younger, had better perceived health, and had a diagnosis of osteoarthritis or fibromyalgia had greater skepticism.
CONCLUSIONS: By knowing more about medical skepticism and other determinants of CAM provider use, conventional practitioners can target patients to improve their uptake of appropriate conventional care, while also monitoring patients alternative therapy use.
