Sheng-Kang Huang1, Yu-Ling Ho2, Yuan-Shiun Chang3. 1. Department of Chinese Pharmaceutical Sciences and Chinese Medicine Resources, China Medical University, No. 91, Hsueh-Shih Road, Taichung City 40402, Taiwan; Chang-Hua Hospital, Ministry of Health and Welfare. No. 80 Chung Cheng Road. Changhua County 51341, Taiwan. Electronic address: huang04142@gmail.com. 2. Department of Nursing, Hung Kuang University, No. 1018, Sec. 6, Taiwan Boulevard, Shalu District, Taichung City 43302, Taiwan. Electronic address: elaine@sunrise.hk.edu.tw. 3. Department of Chinese Pharmaceutical Sciences and Chinese Medicine Resources, China Medical University, No. 91, Hsueh-Shih Road, Taichung City 40402, Taiwan. Electronic address: yschang@mail.cmu.edu.tw.
Abstract
ETHNOPHARMACOLOGICAL RELEVANCE: Allergic rhinitis has long been a worldwide health problem with a global growth trend. The use of traditional Chinese medicines alone or integrated Chinese-Western medicines for its treatment is quite common in Taiwan. Respiratory diseases account for the majority of outpatient traditional Chinese medicine treatment, while allergic rhinitis accounts for the majority of respiratory diseases. We hereby conduct a comparative analysis between traditional Chinese medicine treatments and western medicine treatments for allergic rhinitis in Taiwan. The results of the analysis on the prescription difference of traditional Chinese medicine and western medicine treatments would be helpful to clinical guide and health policy decision making of ethnopharmacological therapy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients diagnosed as allergic rhinitis with diagnostic code 470-478 (ICD-9-CM) were selected as subjects from 2009-2010 National Health Insurance Research Database based on the claim data from the nationwide National Health Insurance in Taiwan. This retrospective study used Chi-Square test to test the effects of gender and age on visit of traditional Chinese medicine, western medicine, and integrated Chinese-Western medicine treatments. RESULTS: A total of 45,804 patients diagnosed as allergic rhinitis with ICD-9-CM 470-478 were identified from 2009-2010 NHIRD. There were 36,874 subjects for western medicine treatment alone, 5829 subjects for traditional Chinese medicine treatment alone, and 3101 subjects for integrated Chinese-Western medicine treatment. Female patients were more than male in three treatments. 0-9 years children had the highest visit frequency in western medicine and integrated Chinese-Western medicine groups, while 10-19 years young-age rank the highest in traditional Chinese medicine group. The Chi-square test of independence showed that the effects of gender and age on visit of three treatments were significant. CONCLUSIONS: The prescription drugs of western medicine treatment alone were almost for relieving the symptoms of allergic rhinitis. That leads to the little difference between 2009 and 2010. The same phenomenon occurs in integrated Chinese-Western medicine. However, the prescription drugs of traditional Chinese medicine treatment vary considerably. Multiple-composition medicine been replaced by single-composition medicine implied that syndrome differentiation and treatment were used and the synergistic effects of multiple-composition medicine were no longer suitable for the most patients of 2010.
ETHNOPHARMACOLOGICAL RELEVANCE: Allergic rhinitis has long been a worldwide health problem with a global growth trend. The use of traditional Chinese medicines alone or integrated Chinese-Western medicines for its treatment is quite common in Taiwan. Respiratory diseases account for the majority of outpatient traditional Chinese medicine treatment, while allergic rhinitis accounts for the majority of respiratory diseases. We hereby conduct a comparative analysis between traditional Chinese medicine treatments and western medicine treatments for allergic rhinitis in Taiwan. The results of the analysis on the prescription difference of traditional Chinese medicine and western medicine treatments would be helpful to clinical guide and health policy decision making of ethnopharmacological therapy. MATERIALS AND METHODS:Patients diagnosed as allergic rhinitis with diagnostic code 470-478 (ICD-9-CM) were selected as subjects from 2009-2010 National Health Insurance Research Database based on the claim data from the nationwide National Health Insurance in Taiwan. This retrospective study used Chi-Square test to test the effects of gender and age on visit of traditional Chinese medicine, western medicine, and integrated Chinese-Western medicine treatments. RESULTS: A total of 45,804 patients diagnosed as allergic rhinitis with ICD-9-CM 470-478 were identified from 2009-2010 NHIRD. There were 36,874 subjects for western medicine treatment alone, 5829 subjects for traditional Chinese medicine treatment alone, and 3101 subjects for integrated Chinese-Western medicine treatment. Female patients were more than male in three treatments. 0-9 years children had the highest visit frequency in western medicine and integrated Chinese-Western medicine groups, while 10-19 years young-age rank the highest in traditional Chinese medicine group. The Chi-square test of independence showed that the effects of gender and age on visit of three treatments were significant. CONCLUSIONS: The prescription drugs of western medicine treatment alone were almost for relieving the symptoms of allergic rhinitis. That leads to the little difference between 2009 and 2010. The same phenomenon occurs in integrated Chinese-Western medicine. However, the prescription drugs of traditional Chinese medicine treatment vary considerably. Multiple-composition medicine been replaced by single-composition medicine implied that syndrome differentiation and treatment were used and the synergistic effects of multiple-composition medicine were no longer suitable for the most patients of 2010.