| Literature DB >> 32650773 |
Hadia Radwan1, Hayder Hasan1, Rena Hamadeh2, Mona Hashim1, Zeenat AbdulWahid3, Mahboobeh Hassanzadeh Gerashi1, Marwa Al Hilali4, Farah Naja5,6.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The use of Complementary and Alternative Medicine (CAM) among Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus (T2DM) patients is increasing to manage the complexities of their condition, enhance their health, and ease complications. The burden of T2DM in the United Arab Emirates (UAE) coupled with the high prevalence of CAM use and its associated risks among patients with T2DM necessitated the investigation of the use of CAM by this patients' population. The aim of this study is to examine the prevalence, types, and correlates of CAM use among T2DM patients in the UAE.Entities:
Keywords: Complementary and alternative medicine; Folk food and herbs; Integration; Patient safety; Type 2 diabetes mellitus; United Arab Emirates
Mesh:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32650773 PMCID: PMC7350641 DOI: 10.1186/s12906-020-03011-5
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Complement Med Ther ISSN: 2662-7671
Socio-demographic and disease-related characteristics of the study population and their association with CAM use (n = 244)a
| Characteristics | Overall | CAM users | CAM non-users | OR (95%,CI) b | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age ( | 55.8 ± 12.5 | 56.9 ± 13.3 | 55.1 ± 12.0 | 0.29 | 1.01 (0.99–1.03) |
| Sex ( | |||||
| Male | 86 (35.2) | 32 (33.3) | 54 (36.5) | 1 | |
| Female | 158 (64.8) | 64 (66.7) | 94 (63.5) | 0.62 | 1.15 (0.67–1.97) |
| Nationality ( | |||||
| Emirati | 113 (46.3) | 43 (44.8) | 70 (47.3) | 1 | |
| Non-Emirati | 131 (53.7) | 53 (55.2) | 78 (52.7) | 0.70 | 1.11 (0.66–1.85) |
| Religion ( | |||||
| Muslim | 236 (96.7) | 94 (97.9) | 142 (95.9) | 1 | |
| Non-Muslim | 8 (3.3) | 2 (2.1) | 6 (4.1) | 0.41 | 0.50 (0.10–2.55) |
| Marital Status ( | |||||
| Single | 24 (9.8) | 7 (7.3) | 17 (11.5) | 1 | |
| Married | 213 (87.3) | 88 (91.7) | 125 (84.5) | 0.25 | 1.71 (0.68–4.30) |
| Widowed or Divorced | 7 (2.9) | 1 (1.0) | 6 (4.1) | 0.44 | 0.41 (0.04–4.01) |
| Education ( | |||||
| Illiterate/ Primary Education | 113 (46.3) | 39 (40.6) | 74 (50.0) | 1 | |
| Secondary Education | 99 (40.6) | 48 (50.0) | 51 (34.5) | ||
| Higher Education | 32 (13.1) | 9 (9.4) | 23 (15.5) | 0.50 | 0.749 (0.31–1.76) |
| Employment ( | |||||
| Unemployed | 152 (62.3) | 54 (56.3) | 98 (66.2) | 1 | |
| Employed | 92 (37.7) | 42 (43.8) | 50 (33.8) | 0.12 | 1.52 (0.90–2.58) |
| Monthly Income ( | |||||
| ≤ 5000 AED | 97 (39.8) | 37 (38.5) | 60 (40.5) | 1 | |
| 5000–10,000 AED | 107 (43.9) | 43 (44.8) | 64 (43.2) | 0.77 | 1.09 (0.62–1.91) |
| > 10,000 AED | 40 (16.4) | 16 (16.7) | 24 (16.2) | 0.84 | 1.08 (0.51–2.30) |
| Presence of Health Insurance ( | |||||
| Uninsured | 66 (27.0) | 18 (18.8) | 48 (32.4) | 1 | |
| Insured | 178 (73.0) | 78 (81.3) | 100 (67.6) | ||
| Diabetes related characteristics | |||||
| Duration of T2DM ( | |||||
| ≤ 10 years | 93 (38.1) | 39 (40.6) | 54 (36.5) | 1 | |
| ≥ 11 years | 151 (61.9) | 57 (59.4) | 94 (63.5) | 0.52 | 0.84 (0.50–1.42) |
| Management of Blood Sugar Level ( | |||||
| Oral Medication | 75 (31.3) | 29 (30.9) | 46 (31.5) | 1 | |
| Insulin | 44 (18.3) | 13 (13.8) | 31 (21.2) | 0.32 | 0.67 (0.30–1.48) |
| Diet | 121 (50.4) | 52 (55.3) | 69 (47.3) | 0.55 | 1.20 (0.66–2.15) |
| HbA1C ( | |||||
| Uncontrolled (≥6.5) | 35 (50.0) | 19 (57.6) | 16 (43.2) | 1 | |
| Controlled (< 6.5) | 35 (50.0) | 14 (42.4) | 21 (56.8) | 0.23 | 0.56 (0.22–1.45) |
| Family history of diabetes ( | |||||
| No | 25 (11.9) | 11 (12.9) | 14 (11.2) | 1 | |
| Yes | 185 (88.1) | 74 (87.1) | 111 (88.8) | 0.70 | 0.85 (0.37–1.97) |
| Presence of diabetes complications ( | |||||
| No | 117 (48.1) | 47 (49.5) | 70 (47.3) | 1 | |
| Yes | 126 (51.9) | 48 (50.5) | 78 (52.7) | 0.74 | 0.92 (0.55–1.54) |
| Adhere to doctor’s recommendations ( | |||||
| No | 29 (11.9) | 15 (15.6) | 14 (9.5) | 1 | |
| Yes | 215 (88.1) | 81 (84.4) | 134 (90.5) | 0.15 | 0.56 (0.26–1.23) |
CAM refers to Complementary and Alternative Medicine; aExcept for age (continuous variable) which was described as mean ± SD, all variables (categorical variables) were reported as frequencies and proportions; +p-values were derived from independent t test for continuous variables and from Chi square for categorical variables; b OR (95% CI) refers to Odds Ratios and their corresponding Confidence Intervals, OR which were found to be significant at p less than 0.05 were bolded
Correlates of CAM use using multiple logistic regression (n = 244)a
| Characteristic | OR (95% CI) b | |
|---|---|---|
| Age | ||
| Sex | ||
| Male | 1 | |
| Female | ||
| Education | ||
| Illiterate/ Primary Education | 1 | |
| Secondary Education | ||
| Higher Education | 0.68 (0.27–1.76) | 0.43 |
| Employment | ||
| Unemployed | 1 | |
| Employed | ||
| Presence of Health Insurance | ||
| Uninsured | 1 | |
| Insured | ||
| Adhere to doctor’s recommendations | ||
| No | 1 | |
| Yes | 0.47 (0.19–1.16) | 0.10 |
CAM refers to Complementary and Alternative Medicine; aVariables with a p value less than 0.2 in the bivariate analyses were included in this regression model; bOR (95% CI) refers to Odds Ratios and their corresponding Confidence Intervals, OR which were found to be significant at p less than 0.05 were bolded
Prevalence, modes and characteristics of CAM use among patients with T2DM (n = 96)a
| Prevalence and types of CAM used among diabetic patients | n (%) |
|---|---|
| Used CAM since diagnosis ( | |
| No | 148 (60.7) |
| Yes | 96 (39.3) |
| Used CAM in the previous year among CAM users ( | |
| Yes | 86 (90.5) |
| No | 9 (9.5) |
| CAM related characteristics among CAM users | |
| CAM choice ( | |
| Family beliefs, traditions, etc. | 41 (42.7) |
| Friends suggestion | 24 (25) |
| Internet, social media, etc. | 17 (17.7) |
| Health practitioner | 13 (13.5) |
| Not applicable | 1 (1.0) |
| Frequency of CAM use ( | |
| Once/month or less | 24 (25.0) |
| Once/week | 16 (16.7) |
| 2 or more times/week | 38 (39.6) |
| Daily | 18 (18.8) |
| Reasons of CAM use ( | |
| Belief in the benefits of CAM practices | 63 (66.3) |
| Disappointed with conventional medical therapy | 22 (23.2) |
| Trying it as it was suggested to you | 10 (10.5) |
| What was your expectation when you were using CAM ( | |
| Prevention of the progression of disease | 76 (80) |
| No expectation | 10 (10.5) |
| Symptoms relief | 6 (6.3) |
| Complete cure of disease | 3 (3.2) |
| Side effects from CAM use ( | |
| No | 71 (74) |
| Yes | 10 (10.4) |
| Not applicable | 8 (8.3) |
| Not sure | 7 (7.3) |
| Would you recommend CAM to other T2DM patients? ( | |
| Yes | 53 (55.2) |
| Undecided | 29 (30.2) |
| No | 14 (14.6) |
| Did you consult a doctor before using CAM ( | |
| No | 73 (76) |
| Yes | 21 (21.9) |
| Not Applicable | 2 (2.1) |
| CAM related characteristics among diabetic non-users | |
| Reasons for not using CAM ( | |
| I don’t want additional burden | 72 (48.6) |
| I’ve never heard of it | 26 (17.6) |
| I don’t believe in it | 21 (14.2) |
| My doctor didn’t prescribe it | 21 (14.2) |
| I’m afraid of the side effects | 8 (5.4) |
| Would you consider using in the future ( | |
| No | 117 (79.1) |
| Yes | 31 (20.9) |
CAM refers to Complementary and Alternative Medicine; aNumbers in this table refer to frequencies (n) and proportions (%)
Fig. 1Distribution (%) of various CAM types as used by the study population (n = 96)*. *CAM refers to Complementary and Alternative Medicine