BACKGROUND: Complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) is commonly used to treat back pain, but little is known about factors associated with improvement. METHODS: We used data from the 2002 National Health Interview Survey to examine the associations between the perceived helpfulness of various CAM therapies for back pain. RESULTS: Approximately 6% of the US population used CAM to treat their back pain in 2002. Sixty percent of respondents who used CAM for back pain perceived a "great deal" of benefit. Using multivariable logistic regression, the factor associated with perceived benefit from CAM modalities was reporting that a reason for using CAM was that "conventional medical treatment would not help" (odds ratio [OR], 1.46; 95% CI, 1.14-1.86). The 2 factors associated with less perceived benefit from CAM modalities were fair to poor self-reported health status (OR, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.41-0.82) and referral by a conventional medical practitioner for CAM (OR, 0.7; 95% CI, 0.54-0.92). Using chiropractic as a reference, massage (OR, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.46-0.83), relaxation techniques (OR, 0.25; 95% CI, 0.14-0.45), and herbal therapy (OR, 0.3; 95% CI, 0.19-0.46) were all associated with less perceived benefit whereas those with similar perceived benefit included yoga/tai chi/qi gong (OR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.41-1.22) and acupuncture (OR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.37-1.38). CONCLUSIONS: The majority of respondents who used CAM for back pain perceived benefit. Specific factors and therapies associated with perceived benefit warrant further investigation.
BACKGROUND: Complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) is commonly used to treat back pain, but little is known about factors associated with improvement. METHODS: We used data from the 2002 National Health Interview Survey to examine the associations between the perceived helpfulness of various CAM therapies for back pain. RESULTS: Approximately 6% of the US population used CAM to treat their back pain in 2002. Sixty percent of respondents who used CAM for back pain perceived a "great deal" of benefit. Using multivariable logistic regression, the factor associated with perceived benefit from CAM modalities was reporting that a reason for using CAM was that "conventional medical treatment would not help" (odds ratio [OR], 1.46; 95% CI, 1.14-1.86). The 2 factors associated with less perceived benefit from CAM modalities were fair to poor self-reported health status (OR, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.41-0.82) and referral by a conventional medical practitioner for CAM (OR, 0.7; 95% CI, 0.54-0.92). Using chiropractic as a reference, massage (OR, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.46-0.83), relaxation techniques (OR, 0.25; 95% CI, 0.14-0.45), and herbal therapy (OR, 0.3; 95% CI, 0.19-0.46) were all associated with less perceived benefit whereas those with similar perceived benefit included yoga/tai chi/qi gong (OR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.41-1.22) and acupuncture (OR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.37-1.38). CONCLUSIONS: The majority of respondents who used CAM for back pain perceived benefit. Specific factors and therapies associated with perceived benefit warrant further investigation.
Authors: Taeho Greg Rhee; Brent D Leininger; Neha Ghildayal; Roni L Evans; Jeffery A Dusek; Pamela Jo Johnson Journal: Complement Ther Med Date: 2015-11-25 Impact factor: 2.446
Authors: Declan T Barry; Jonathan D Savant; Mark Beitel; Christopher J Cutter; Brent A Moore; Richard S Schottenfeld; David A Fiellin Journal: J Addict Med Date: 2012-12 Impact factor: 3.702
Authors: Ricardo José Dunder; Anderson Luiz-Ferreira; Ana Cristina Alves de Almeida; Felipe Meira de Faria; Christiane Takayama; Eduardo Augusto Rabelo Socca; Marcos José Salvador; Gláucia Coelho Mello; Catarina dos Santos; Pedro de Oliva-Neto; Alba Regina Monteiro Souza-Brito Journal: Mem Inst Oswaldo Cruz Date: 2013-05 Impact factor: 2.743