Joannie Shen1, Emeka Oraka. 1. Air Pollution and Respiratory Health Branch, Division of Environmental Hazards and Health Effects, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia 30341, USA. GMQ6@cdc.gov
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To estimate the prevalence of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) use among children with current asthma. DESIGN: We analyzed data from the Asthma Call Back Survey (ACBS) 2006-2008. ACBS is a follow-up to the state-based Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) survey that collects information on asthma and related factors including CAM use for asthma. The survey is administered to the parents who report in a subset of BRFSS states that their children have asthma. 5435 children had current asthma and were included in this analysis. RESULTS: Overall, 26.7% (95% confidence interval [CI]=24.5-29.0) of children with current asthma reported CAM use in the previous 12 months. Among them, the three most commonly used therapies were breathing techniques (58.5%; 95% CI=53.6-63.5), vitamins (27.3%; 95% CI=23.0-31.5), and herbal products (12.8%; 95% CI=9.2-16.4). Multivariate analysis of CAM use revealed higher adjusted odds ratios (aOR) among children who experienced cost barriers to conventional health care compared with children with no cost barrier (aOR=1.8; 95% CI=1.2-2.8). Children with poorly controlled asthma were most likely to use all types of CAM when compared to their counterpart with well-controlled asthma: aOR=2.3 (95% CI=1.6-3.3) for any CAM; aOR=1.7 (95% CI=1.2-2.6) for self-care based CAM; and aOR=4.4 (95% CI=1.6-9.3) for practitioner-based CAM. CONCLUSIONS: Children with poorly controlled asthma are more likely to use CAM; this likelihood persists after controlling for other factors (including parent's education, barriers to conventional health care, and controller medication use). CAM is also more commonly used by children who experienced cost barriers to conventional asthma care. CAM use could be a marker to identify patients who need patient/family education and support thus facilitate improved asthma control.
OBJECTIVE: To estimate the prevalence of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) use among children with current asthma. DESIGN: We analyzed data from the Asthma Call Back Survey (ACBS) 2006-2008. ACBS is a follow-up to the state-based Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) survey that collects information on asthma and related factors including CAM use for asthma. The survey is administered to the parents who report in a subset of BRFSS states that their children have asthma. 5435 children had current asthma and were included in this analysis. RESULTS: Overall, 26.7% (95% confidence interval [CI]=24.5-29.0) of children with current asthma reported CAM use in the previous 12 months. Among them, the three most commonly used therapies were breathing techniques (58.5%; 95% CI=53.6-63.5), vitamins (27.3%; 95% CI=23.0-31.5), and herbal products (12.8%; 95% CI=9.2-16.4). Multivariate analysis of CAM use revealed higher adjusted odds ratios (aOR) among children who experienced cost barriers to conventional health care compared with children with no cost barrier (aOR=1.8; 95% CI=1.2-2.8). Children with poorly controlled asthma were most likely to use all types of CAM when compared to their counterpart with well-controlled asthma: aOR=2.3 (95% CI=1.6-3.3) for any CAM; aOR=1.7 (95% CI=1.2-2.6) for self-care based CAM; and aOR=4.4 (95% CI=1.6-9.3) for practitioner-based CAM. CONCLUSIONS:Children with poorly controlled asthma are more likely to use CAM; this likelihood persists after controlling for other factors (including parent's education, barriers to conventional health care, and controller medication use). CAM is also more commonly used by children who experienced cost barriers to conventional asthma care. CAM use could be a marker to identify patients who need patient/family education and support thus facilitate improved asthma control.
Authors: Elizabeth L McQuaid; David A Fedele; Sue K Adams; Daphne Koinis-Mitchell; Jessica Mitchell; Sheryl J Kopel; Ronald Seifer; Barbara Jandasek; Gregory K Fritz; Glorisa Canino Journal: Acad Pediatr Date: 2014 Mar-Apr Impact factor: 3.107
Authors: Ola A Dabbous; Mona M Soliman; Nagwa H Mohamed; Magda Y Elseify; Mai S Elsheikh; Asmaa A A Alsharkawy; Manal M Abd Al Aziz Journal: Lasers Med Sci Date: 2016-10-05 Impact factor: 3.161
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: Sandra Peláez; Alexandrine J Lamontagne; Johanne Collin; Annie Gauthier; Roland M Grad; Lucie Blais; Kim L Lavoie; Simon L Bacon; Pierre Ernst; Hélène Guay; Martha L McKinney; Francine M Ducharme Journal: BMC Pulm Med Date: 2015-04-25 Impact factor: 3.317