학술논문

Prevalence of complementary and alternative medicine despite limited perceived efficacy in patients with rheumatic diseases in Mexico: Cross-sectional study.
Document Type
Article
Source
PLoS ONE. 9/28/2021, Vol. 16 Issue 9, p1-18. 18p.
Subject
*ALTERNATIVE medicine
*RHEUMATISM
*DISEASE prevalence
*SYMPTOMS
Language
ISSN
1932-6203
Abstract
Introduction: Complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) is frequently used by patients with rheumatic diseases (RD) to improve their symptoms; however, its diversity and availability have increased notably while scientific support for its effectiveness and adverse effects is still scarce. Objective: To describe the prevalence and diversity of CAM in patients with RD in Chihuahua, Mexico. Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted in 500 patients with RD who were interviewed about the use of CAM to treat their disease. The interview included sociodemographic aspects, characteristics of the disease, as well as a description of CAM use, including type, frequency of use, perception of the benefit, communication with the rheumatologist, among others. Results: The prevalence of CAM use was reported by 59.2% of patients, which informed a total of 155 different therapies. The herbal CAM group was the most used (31.4%) and included more than 50 different therapies. The use of menthol-based and arnica ointments was highly prevalent (35%). Most patients (62.3%) reported very little or no improvement in their symptoms. Only a fourth of the patients informed the rheumatologist of the use of CAM. The use of CAM was influenced by female sex, university degree, diagnosis delay, lack adherence to the rheumatologist's treatment, family history of RD, and orthopedic devices. Conclusion: The use of CAM in our population is highly prevalent and similar to reports in different populations suggesting a widespread use in many different societies. We found high use of herbal remedies; however, there were many different types suggesting a lack of significant effect. Patients continue using CAM despite a perception of no-effectiveness. Recurrent use of CAM is explained by factors other than its efficacy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]