Vivian Lin1, Rachel Canaway2, Bronwyn Carter1. 1. CAMELOT Project, School of Public Health and Human Biosciences, La Trobe University, Bundoora, Vic., Australia. 2. CAMELOT Project, School of Social Sciences, Monash University, Clayton, Vic., Australia.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To understand the extent to which conventional and complementary health care are integrated for CAM users with chronic conditions. METHODS: In-depth interviews and a self-administered questionnaire were used to collect data on care-seeking, self-management and CAM use among people with type 2 diabetes and/or cardiovascular disease living in Victoria, Australia. RESULTS: Many participants reported regular, frequent and long-term use of CAM therapies to maintain their health or assist in the management of their chronic condition. They generally managed the interface between convention and complementary health care on their own, as the perceived or expressed negative attitudes of some doctors, or the belief that the doctor did not need to know, were barriers to the disclosure of CAM use. For a smaller group, there was interaction between conventional and CAM providers, which limited the extent of uncertainty and conflicting information being (mis)interpreted by consumers. CONCLUSIONS: Greater interaction between CAM and medical providers would be beneficial to consumers. Structural barriers, related to financing and service organization, need to be addressed. Attitudinal shifts of some health-care practitioners also need to be addressed, in the context of workforce development.
OBJECTIVES: To understand the extent to which conventional and complementary health care are integrated for CAM users with chronic conditions. METHODS: In-depth interviews and a self-administered questionnaire were used to collect data on care-seeking, self-management and CAM use among people with type 2 diabetes and/or cardiovascular disease living in Victoria, Australia. RESULTS: Many participants reported regular, frequent and long-term use of CAM therapies to maintain their health or assist in the management of their chronic condition. They generally managed the interface between convention and complementary health care on their own, as the perceived or expressed negative attitudes of some doctors, or the belief that the doctor did not need to know, were barriers to the disclosure of CAM use. For a smaller group, there was interaction between conventional and CAM providers, which limited the extent of uncertainty and conflicting information being (mis)interpreted by consumers. CONCLUSIONS: Greater interaction between CAM and medical providers would be beneficial to consumers. Structural barriers, related to financing and service organization, need to be addressed. Attitudinal shifts of some health-care practitioners also need to be addressed, in the context of workforce development.
Authors: Sandra J W Smeeding; David H Bradshaw; Karol Kumpfer; Susan Trevithick; Gregory J Stoddard Journal: J Altern Complement Med Date: 2010-08 Impact factor: 2.579
Authors: Laurann Yen; James Gillespie; Yun-Hee Jeon; Marjan Kljakovic; Jo Anne Brien; Stephen Jan; Elin Lehnbom; Carmen Pearce-Brown; Tim Usherwood Journal: Health Expect Date: 2011-03 Impact factor: 3.377
Authors: Tanisha Jowsey; Yun-Hee Jeon; Paul Dugdale; Nicholas J Glasgow; Marjan Kljakovic; Tim Usherwood Journal: Aust New Zealand Health Policy Date: 2009-09-08
Authors: Jennifer Hunter PhD MScPH BMed; Iman Majd Md Ms; Matthew Kowalski Dc; Joanna E Harnett PhD MHSc BHSc Journal: Glob Adv Health Med Date: 2021-05-03
Authors: Irene G Ampomah; Bunmi S Malau-Aduli; Abdul-Aziz Seidu; Aduli E O Malau-Aduli; Theophilus I Emeto Journal: BMC Health Serv Res Date: 2022-01-05 Impact factor: 2.655