PURPOSE: Complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) use in children is common although estimates of prevalence vary widely. We studied CAM use in our multisite pediatric oncology practice and evaluated factors influencing CAM use. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We conducted an anonymous cross-sectional survey of 274 parents of children treated at the combined Nemours oncology practice in Florida and Delaware. Prevalence of CAM use was determined and binary logistic regression was used to evaluate factors related to CAM use in children. RESULTS: The prevalence of CAM use among children and parents was 24.5% and 66.7%, respectively. Intensity of parent's use of CAM and geographic region were significantly associated with CAM use in children. The odds of CAM use in children increased with increasing use among parents. When parents used 6 or more therapies children were 33 times more likely to use CAM compared with those whose parents did not use CAM (odds ratio=33.3; 95% confidence interval, 10.4-106.2, P<0.01). Children in Florida were more likely to use CAM compared with children in Delaware (odds ratio=3.0; 95% confidence interval, 1.6-5.8, P<0.01). CONCLUSIONS: These results indicate that children's use of CAM is significantly related to the intensity of parent's use regardless of parent's race, sex, education, household income, or child's sex or age. Clinicians should consider parental use and intensity of CAM use. Assessing CAM use should include classifications established by the National Center for CAM and a standard format for inquiring about CAM use should be developed.
PURPOSE: Complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) use in children is common although estimates of prevalence vary widely. We studied CAM use in our multisite pediatric oncology practice and evaluated factors influencing CAM use. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We conducted an anonymous cross-sectional survey of 274 parents of children treated at the combined Nemours oncology practice in Florida and Delaware. Prevalence of CAM use was determined and binary logistic regression was used to evaluate factors related to CAM use in children. RESULTS: The prevalence of CAM use among children and parents was 24.5% and 66.7%, respectively. Intensity of parent's use of CAM and geographic region were significantly associated with CAM use in children. The odds of CAM use in children increased with increasing use among parents. When parents used 6 or more therapies children were 33 times more likely to use CAM compared with those whose parents did not use CAM (odds ratio=33.3; 95% confidence interval, 10.4-106.2, P<0.01). Children in Florida were more likely to use CAM compared with children in Delaware (odds ratio=3.0; 95% confidence interval, 1.6-5.8, P<0.01). CONCLUSIONS: These results indicate that children's use of CAM is significantly related to the intensity of parent's use regardless of parent's race, sex, education, household income, or child's sex or age. Clinicians should consider parental use and intensity of CAM use. Assessing CAM use should include classifications established by the National Center for CAM and a standard format for inquiring about CAM use should be developed.
Authors: Sarah K Nabukera; Paul A Romitti; Kimberly A Campbell; F John Meaney; Kristin M Caspers; Katherine D Mathews; Stacey M Hockett Sherlock; Soman Puzhankara; Christopher Cunniff; Charlotte M Druschel; Shree Pandya; Dennis J Matthews; Emma Ciafaloni Journal: J Child Neurol Date: 2011-12-07 Impact factor: 1.987
Authors: Yong Zhu; Paul A Romitti; Kristin M Conway; Jennifer Andrews; Ke Liu; F John Meaney; Natalie Street; Soman Puzhankara; Charlotte M Druschel; Dennis J Matthews Journal: Pediatr Neurol Date: 2014-02-15 Impact factor: 3.372
Authors: Lisa Watt; Sonia Gulati; Nicola T Shaw; Lillian Sung; David Dix; Iraj Poureslami; Anne F Klassen Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2011-02-12 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: Kavita D Chandwani; Julie L Ryan; Luke J Peppone; Michelle M Janelsins; Lisa K Sprod; Katie Devine; Lara Trevino; Jennifer Gewandter; Gary R Morrow; Karen M Mustian Journal: Evid Based Complement Alternat Med Date: 2012-07-15 Impact factor: 2.629