Out-of-pocket payments for complementary medicine following cancer and the effect on financial outcomes in middle-income countries in southeast Asia: a prospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Complementary medicine, which refers to therapies that are not part of conventional medicine, comprising both evidence-based and non-evidence-based interventions, is increasingly used following a diagnosis of cancer. We aimed to investigate out-of-pocket spending patterns on complementary medicine and its association with adverse financial outcomes following cancer in middle-income countries in southeast Asia. METHODS: In this prospective cohort study, data on newly diagnosed patients with cancer were derived from the ASEAN Costs in Oncology (ACTION) cohort study, a prospective longitudinal study in 47 centres located in eight countries in southeast Asia. The ACTION study measured household expenditures on complementary medicine in the immediate year after cancer diagnosis. Participants were given cost diaries at baseline to record illness-related payments that were directly incurred and not reimbursed by insurance over the 12-month period after study recruitment. We assessed incidence of financial catastrophe (out-of-pocket cancer-related costs ≥30% of annual household income), medical impoverishment (reduction in annual household income to below poverty line following subtraction of out-of-pocket cancer-related costs), and economic hardship (inability to make necessary household payments) at 1 year. FINDINGS: Between March, 2012, and September, 2013, 9513 participants were recruited into the ACTION cohort study, of whom 4754 (50·0%) participants were included in this analysis. Out-of-pocket expenditures on complementary medicine were reported by 1233 households. These payments constituted 8·6% of the annual total out-of-pocket health costs in lower-middle-income countries and 42·9% in upper-middle-income countries. Expenditures on complementary medicine significantly increased risks of financial catastrophe (adjusted odds ratio 1·52 [95% CI 1·23-1·88]) and medical impoverishment (1·75 [1·36-2·24]) at 12 months in upper-middle-income countries only. However, the risks were significantly higher for economically disadvantaged households, irrespective of country income group. INTERPRETATION: Integration of evidence-supported complementary therapies into mainstream cancer care, along with interventions to address use of non-evidence-based complementary medicine, might help alleviate any associated adverse financial impacts. FUNDING: None.

A cost analysis of a community-based support centre for cancer patients and their families in Ireland: the EVeCANs study.

Cancer patients and their families experience a range of physical, psychological and financial adverse effects. Community-based cancer centres offer a range of services and interventions, free of charge, to support those affected by cancer. While shown to be effective, there is a lack of information on the costs of these services. Our aim was to estimate the resource impact of a community-based cancer support centre. Over a 7-month period, there were 2032 contacts with 238 clients whose average age was 60 years. The most frequently used services were transport to treatment (20%), complementary therapies (48%), exercise classes (10%) and counselling (9%). This cost analysis estimated total annual cost to provide all services was €313,744. Average annual cost per person was €1138. Current uptake at the centre represents 8% of all cancer incidences in seven counties surrounding the centre. If uptake increases by 10%, scenario analyses predict an increase in total costs increase to €429,043 and a decrease in costs per patient to €915. As cancer incidences increase, the need for supportive care is growing. Community-based services have been established to meet these needs and fill this gap in national health services. Long-term sustainability of these centres is uncertain as they are entirely reliant on donations and volunteers. This analysis estimates the costs of one such community-based cancer support centre, for the first time in Ireland. Findings can be used to inform future planning of cancer supportive care services, including establishing links between tertiary and community-based centres, and cost effectiveness analyses, nationally and internationally.

Crowdfunding for complementary and alternative medicine: What are cancer patients seeking?

BACKGROUND: Complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) is increasingly being integrated into conventional medical care for cancer, used to counter the side effects of conventional cancer treatment, and offered as an alternative to conventional cancer care. Our aim is to gain a broader understanding of trends in CAM interventions for cancer and crowdfunding campaigns for these interventions. METHODS: GoFundMe campaigns fundraising for CAM were retrieved through a database of crowdfunding campaign data. Search terms were drawn from two National Institutes of Health lists of CAM cancer interventions and a previous study. Campaigns were excluded that did not match these or related search terms or were initiated outside of June 4th, 2018 to June 4th, 2019. RESULTS: 1,396 campaigns were identified from the US (n = 1,037, 73.9%), Canada (n = 165, 11.8%), and the UK (n = 107, 7.7%). Most common cancer types were breast (n = 344, 24.6%), colorectal (n = 131, 9.4%), and brain (n = 98, 7.0%). CAM interventions sought included supplements (n = 422, 30.2%), better nutrition (n = 293, 21.0%), high dose vitamin C (n = 276, 19.8%), naturopathy (n = 226, 16.2%), and cannabis products (n = 211, 15.1%). Mexico (n = 198, 41.9%), and the US (n = 169, 35.7%) were the most common treatment destinations. CONCLUSIONS: These findings confirm active and ongoing interest in using crowdfunding platforms to finance CAM cancer interventions. They confirm previous findings that CAM users with cancer tend to have late stage cancers, cancers with high mortality rates, and specific diseases such as breast cancer. These findings can inform targeted responses where facilities engage in misleading marketing practices and the efficacy of interventions is unproven.

Use of GoFundMe® to crowdfund complementary and alternative medicine treatments for cancer.

PURPOSE: Complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) use is common amongst cancer patients. However, there is growing concern about its safety and efficacy. Online crowdfunding campaigns represent a unique avenue to understand the cancer patient's perspective for using CAM or declining conventional cancer therapy (CCT). METHODS: Five hundred GoFundMe campaigns from 2012 to 2019 detailing financial need for cancer treatment were randomly selected and reviewed for endorsement of CAM use, reasons for using CAM, and reasons for declining CCT. Descriptive statistics were used to compare patient and campaign characteristics between 250 CAM users and 250 non-CAM users. RESULTS: Compared to non-CAM users, CAM users were more likely to be female (70% vs. 54%, p < 0.01), to report more stage IV cancer (54% vs. 12%, p < 0.01), and to have a history of delayed, missed, or misdiagnosis (10% vs. 4%, p < 0.01). Reasons for using CAM include endorsing curative/therapeutic effects 212 (85%), pain/stress reduction 137 (55%), and dissatisfaction with current or past medical treatment options 105 (42%). 87 (35%) CAM users that declined CCT reported that they wanted to try to fight off cancer using CAM first 57 (61%), that CCT was too "toxic" to the body 39 (42%), and cancer was already too advanced, so that CCT would be futile or too aggressive 25 (27%). CONCLUSION: Cancer patients on GoFundMe using CAM highly value quality of life, comfort, and autonomy. Physicians should educate themselves on CAM to set realistic expectations and provide comprehensive counseling of the risks and benefits of CAM usage to patients who choose to use CAM to either augment or completely replace CCT.

Cost analysis in a traditional, complementary and integrative medicine unit in Brazil / Análise de custos em unidade de medicina tradicional, complementar e integrativa no Brasil

ABSTRACT OBJECTIVE To analyze the costs of a specialized service in Traditional Complementary and Integrative Medicines (TCIM) in Northeast Brazil to provide data on the cost linked to the implementation and maintenance of services of this nature and to identify the average cost per user for the Unified Health System. METHODS This is a partial, descriptive, quantitative economic assessment, which used secondary data, later grouped in Microsoft Excel spreadsheets. The method used to analyze such costs was absorption costing, from which the service was divided into three costing centers: productive, administrative and auxiliary. RESULTS After analyzing the data, the total cost of the service in 2014 was estimated at R$ 1,270,015.70, with a proportion of 79.69% of direct costs. The average cost per user in this period was R$ 36.79, considering the total of 34,521 users in individual and collective practices. CONCLUSIONS The service has a cost per user compatible with a specialized service; however, TCIM offers a comprehensive and holistic approach, which can have a positive impact on quality of life.

RESUMO OBJETIVO Analisar os custos de um serviço especializado em Medicinas Tradicionais Complementares e Integrativas (MTCI) no Nordeste brasileiro, com o intuito de fornecer dados sobre o custo atrelado à implantação e manutenção de serviços dessa natureza e identificar o custo médio por usuário para o Sistema Único de Saúde. MÉTODOS Trata-se de uma avaliação econômica do tipo parcial, com caráter descritivo, de natureza quantitativa, que utilizou dados secundários, posteriormente agrupados em planilhas do Microsoft Excel. O método utilizado para analisar tais custos foi o de custeio por absorção, a partir do qual o serviço foi dividido em três centros de custeio: produtivo, administrativo e auxiliar. RESULTADOS Após a análise dos dados, o custo total do serviço em 2014 foi estimado em R$ 1.270.015,70, com proporção de 79,69% de custos diretos. O custo médio por usuário neste período foi R$ 36,79, considerando o total de 34.521 usuários em práticas individuais e coletivas. CONCLUSÕES O serviço apresenta um custo por usuário compatível com um serviço especializado, contudo, as MTCI oferecem abordagem compreensiva e holística, as quais podem impactar de forma positiva a qualidade de vida.

Complementary and alternative medicine use in glioma patients in France.

PURPOSE: Complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) use increases in cancer patients, including adult patients with diffuse gliomas. METHODS: Questionnaires addressing CAM use were distributed to adult patients with gliomas of WHO grades II-IV and ECOG performance score of 0-2 during hospital visits and filled in anonymously. The study was conducted in nine centers in France from May 2017 to May 2018. Descriptive cohort analyses and comparative analyses according to gender, age, WHO grade, and recurrent versus newly diagnosed disease were conducted. RESULTS: Two hundred twenty-seven questionnaires were collected; 135 patients (59%) were male. Median age was 48 years, 105 patients (46%) declared having glioblastoma, 99 patients (43%) declared having recurrent disease. Hundred-three patients (45%) had modified their alimentary habits after the glioma diagnosis. At the time of the questionnaire, 100 patients (44%) were on complementary treatment, mainly vitamins and food supplements, and 73 patients (32%) used alternative medicine approaches, mainly magnetism and acupuncture. In total, 154 patients (68%) declared using at least one of these approaches. Expenditures exceeding 100 € per month were reported by users in 14% for modification of alimentary habits, in 25% for complementary treatment, and in 18% for alternative medicines. All approaches were commonly considered as improving quality of life and experienced as efficient, notably those associated with more expenditures. CONCLUSIONS: CAM are frequently used by glioma patients in France. Underlying needs and expectations, as well as potential interactions with tumor-specific treatments, and financial and quality of life burden, should be discussed with patients and caregivers.

The Trials (and Tribulations) of Complementary and Alternative Medicine in Oncology.

Two decades following the creation of the Office of Cancer Complementary and Alternative Medicine at the National Cancer Institute, the status of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) research within oncology remains opaque. To better understand the landscape of CAM studies in oncology, we identified CAM-related phase III randomized controlled trials (RCTs) through ClinicalTrials.gov and compared these CAM trials to all non-CAM oncologic RCTs. Pearson χ2 testing was used to compare proportions across groups; all tests were two-sided. Comparing the 25 identified CAM RCTs with 739 non-CAM RCTs, CAM studies were more likely to be sponsored by a cooperative group (64.0% vs 28.6%, P < .001) and less likely to be industry funded (8.0% vs 76.5%, P < .001). CAM trials disproportionately excluded disease-related outcomes as endpoints (8.0% vs 84.6%, P < .001), were unsupported by prior early-phase data (55.0% vs 96.1%, P < .001), and did not meet the primary endpoint (8.7% vs 53.0%, P < .001). Given the observed relationship between encouraging pilot data and subsequent phase III trial success, we contend that future CAM RCTs may yield more promising findings if better supported by appropriately designed and well-characterized early-phase signals.

Complementary medicine use and costs in patients with breast cancer who experienced treatment-related side effects: A cross-sectional survey in Korea.

OBJECTIVES: Population-based information on the costs of complementary medicine for treatment-related side effects in patients with breast cancer is scarce. We aimed to investigate the prevalence and expenditure on complementary medicine in patients with breast cancer who experienced treatment-related side effects. DESIGN AND SETTING: Two datasets were analyzed: 1) a 2017 survey on direct and indirect costs for treatment-related side effects, which was completed by 100 patients with stage 0-IV breast cancer, and 2) a Korean representative cross-sectional survey (Patient Survey 2014) that examined the prevalence of integrative medicine in 41 patients with breast cancer. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The direct and indirect costs for treatment-related side effects. RESULTS: In the first dataset, the mean total direct medical cost for complementary medicine was US$1,584 and the mean indirect cost was US$6,988 per patient per year. Some patients (6%) visited non-medical institutions to utilize complementary medicine and additionally spent US$460 per patient per year. Approximately one-third of participants reported a substantial-to-heavy financial burden for using complementary medicine. However, only 17% of patients got information about complementary medicine through their physician. In the second dataset, 49% of patients with breast cancer who were discharged from Korean Medicine hospitals in Patient Survey 2014 data indicated that integrative medicine had been used. CONCLUSIONS: Despite some complementary medicine could be reimbursed by National Health Insurance in Korea, a considerable number of patients reported an economic burden associated with their use of complementary medicine. Strategies for guiding patients to receive evidence-based and cost-effective complementary medicine are needed.

Cost-Effectiveness of a Team-Based Integrative Medicine Approach to the Treatment of Back Pain.

OBJECTIVES: To report the results of health economic analyses comparing two treatment approaches for chronic low back pain (CLBP). DESIGN: Observational prospective cohort study comparing effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of CLBP care provided at an integrative care clinic with that provided in other clinics within the same hospital. CLBP-related medical utilization, function, quality of life, and days of work incapacity were self-reported at baseline, 3, 6, and 12 months. SETTINGS/LOCATION: Osher Clinical Center (OCC) based at a tertiary academic hospital (Brigham and Women's Hospital [BWH]) and other clinics at BWH. SUBJECTS: CLBP patients seeking care at OCC or non-OCC BWH clinics. INTERVENTIONS: Integrative or conventional care for CLBP as prescribed by the treating clinician(s). OUTCOME MEASURES: Quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) were estimated per treatment approach based on the SF-12. Cost per QALY gained was evaluated using an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). ICERs based on CLBP-specific effectiveness measures (Roland Disability Questionnaire [RDQ] and bothersomeness of pain [BOP]) were exploratory outcomes. RESULTS: Total adjusted annual CLBP-related costs per patient were greater in the OCC versus non-OCC group ($11,526.73 vs. $6,810.63). Between group differences in QALYs were small and ICER estimate of cost per QALY gained was high ($436,676). However, unadjusted mean direct costs per patient decreased over time in the OCC group. Savings in direct costs of $391 (95% confidence interval: -1,078 to 1,861) were observed in the OCC group for the 6- to 12-month period, driven primarily by reduced medication usage. ICERs based on adjusted RDQ and BOP group differences showed cost of $2,073 and $4,203 for a one-point reduction per respective scale. CONCLUSIONS: When adjusted for baseline differences, self-reported costs were higher in the OCC group with only small effects on QALYs. However, trends toward decreased direct expenditures and medication usage over time warrant further investigation. Future studies evaluating potential benefits of integrative care models for the management of CLBP should employ randomized designs, longer observational periods, and explore multiple metrics of cost-effectiveness.

Patient Costs Associated with Rosacea.

The recalcitrance of rosacea to many treatment options may prompt patients to spend exorbitant amounts of money on unsubstantiated treatment regimens in an effort to achieve relief. The authors examine the relationship between disease severity and treatment cost across several demographic and socioeconomic strata. Familiarization of evidence-based clinical recommendations and consensus guidelines may equip physicians to educate patients about the most efficacious and cost-effective treatment options to assist patients in making cost-conscious decisions in the management of their rosacea.

The Role of Complementary and Alternative Medicine in the Healthcare System: A German Paradox.

BACKGROUND: This paper examines a paradox in the German healthcare system: Complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) practices are a major element of medical encounters in Germany. Patients seek them, physicians provide them, and public health insurances pay for them in part. Despite all this, CAM practices are not acknowledged as scientifically valid. MATERIAL AND METHOD: I will examine this situation in detail based on 2 ethnographic studies. The first study refers to an attempt to introduce homeopathic education at a German university. The second one is a study in the context of cancer and CAM. These cases are perfect examples of the current power struggles that are impeding the expansion of CAM practices in Germany. RESULTS: The results should be seen from the theoretical angle of the study of science. The conventional method of proving scientific validity is in contradiction to those frameworks in which the impact of CAM might be demonstrated. There are economic interests invested in preventing the integration of CAM into existing scientific structures. However, the current hybridization of CAM with conventional medicine might be a step towards an institutionalized heterogenization of medical practices in Germany. CONCLUSIONS: A broader understanding of scientific methods within the CAM community could provide a useful frame for future research. I suggest that the CAM community more actively takes part in the discourse with representatives of conventional medicine and come out of the closet.

Do cancer survivors change their prescription drug use for financial reasons? Findings from a nationally representative sample in the United States.

BACKGROUND: There is limited evidence from nationally representative samples about changes in prescription drug use for financial reasons among cancer survivors in the United States. METHODS: The 2011 to 2014 National Health Interview Survey was used to identify adults who reported ever having been told they had cancer (cancer survivors; n = 8931) and individuals without a cancer history (n = 126,287). Measures of changes in prescription drug use for financial reasons included: 1) skipping medication doses, 2) taking less medicine, 3) delaying filling a prescription, 4) asking a doctor for lower cost medication, 5) buying prescription drugs from another country, and 6) using alternative therapies. Multivariable logistic regression analyses were controlled for demographic characteristics, number of comorbid conditions, interactions between cancer history and number of comorbid conditions, and health insurance coverage. Main analyses were stratified by age (nonelderly, ages 18-64 years; elderly, ages ≥65 years) and time since diagnosis (recently diagnosed, <2 years; previously diagnosed, ≥2 years). RESULTS: Among nonelderly individuals, both recently diagnosed (31.6%) and previously diagnosed (27.9%) cancer survivors were more likely to report any change in prescription drug use for financial reasons than those without a cancer history (21.4%), with the excess percentage changes for individual measures ranging from 3.5% to 9.9% among previously diagnosed survivors and from 2.6% to 2.7% among recently diagnosed survivors (P < .01). Elderly cancer survivors and those without a cancer history had comparable rates of changes in prescription drug use for financial reasons. CONCLUSIONS: Nonelderly cancer survivors are particularly vulnerable to changes in prescription drug use for financial reasons, suggesting that targeted efforts are needed. Cancer 2017;123:1453-1463. © 2016 American Cancer Society.

Inadvertently boarding a pirate ship: disease progression in a paediatric patient with relapsed metastatic Ewing sarcoma receiving treatment at a centre for alternative therapy in Mexico.

Complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) therapies are commonly incorporated into the care of patients with paediatric cancer. Many modalities are safe and effective during cancer treatment and have proved beneficial for symptom relief and quality of life. However, situations where alternative therapy is provided without allopathic medical care supportive care resources can pose a safety risk to patients. This report describes the case of a 16-year-old Chinese girl with metastatic Ewing sarcoma who sought treatment with alternative treatment in Mexico. When her disease progressed with an ensuing significant loss of function, the centre personnel were unable to respond to her acute deterioration or provide necessary medical care. This resulted in her being stranded in a foreign country paralysed, isolated, and with large unanticipated financial expenditures.

Economic Evaluation of Complementary and Alternative Medicine in Oncology: Is There a Difference Compared to Conventional Medicine?

OBJECTIVE: To analyze the financial burden of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) in cancer treatment. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Based on a systematic search of the literature (Medline and the Cochrane Library, combining the MeSH terms 'complementary therapies', 'neoplasms', 'costs', 'cost analysis', and 'cost-benefit analysis'), an expert panel discussed different types of analyses and their significance for CAM in oncology. RESULTS: Of 755 publications, 43 met our criteria. The types of economic analyses and their parameters discussed for CAM in oncology were cost, cost-benefit, cost-effectiveness, and cost-utility analyses. Only a few articles included arguments in favor of or against these different methods, and only a few arguments were specific for CAM because most CAM methods address a broad range of treatment aim parameters to assess effectiveness and are hard to define. Additionally, the choice of comparative treatments is difficult. To evaluate utility, healthy subjects may not be adequate as patients with a life-threatening disease and may be judged differently, especially with respect to a holistic treatment approach. We did not find any arguments in the literature that were directed at the economic analysis of CAM in oncology. Therefore, a comprehensive approach assessment based on criteria from evidence-based medicine evaluating direct and indirect costs is recommended. CONCLUSION: The usual approaches to conventional medicine to assess costs, benefits, and effectiveness seem adequate in the field of CAM in oncology. Additionally, a thorough deliberation on the comparator, endpoints, and instruments is mandatory for designing studies.

Uso de medicina alternativa y su relación con el nivel socioeconómico, el estado de salud del paciente y el nivel de satisfacción de la medicina convencional en pacientes que acuden a consultorio externo de medicina general del Hospital II ESSALUD Huánuco durante el período de agosto a octubre del 2015 / Use of alternative medicine and its relationship with the socioeconomic level, the health status of the patient and the level of satisfaction of conventional medicine in patients who attend the outpatient clinic of general medicine of Hospital II ESSALUD Huánuco during the period from August to October. 2015

La presente investigación tiene por objetivo: Determinar la prevalencia del uso de medicina alternativa y su relación con el nivel socioeconómico, el estado de salud del paciente y el nivel de satisfacción de la medicina convencional en pacientes que acuden a consultorio externo de Medicina General del Hospital II EsSalud Huánuco, 2015. Diseño: Se realizó un estudio observacional, transversal, retrospectivo, en pacientes que acuden a consultorio externo de Medicina General del Hospital II EsSalud Huánuco en el 2015; para determinar los factores relacionados al uso de medicina alternativa, los datos se obtuvieron a partir de entrevistas. Se contó con una muestra de 278 sujetos, obtenida mediante muestreo probabilístico aleatorio simple para estudios descriptivos transversales. Se estableció asociación estadística (p<0,05) con Chi2 para variables cualitativas. Resultados: La prevalencia del Uso de Medicina Alternativa en pacientes de consultorio externo fue 255 (91,7%). Entre las características clínicas se encontró 226 pacientes (81,3%) con nivel socioeconómico bajo, los problemas de salud más frecuentes fueron los problemas gastrointestinales 139 (50%) y problemas musculo esqueléticos 113 (40,6%). El nivel de satisfacción de la mayoría de pacientes fue baja 95 (34,2%), seguida de moderada 94 (33,8%) y alta 89 (32,0%). En el análisis bivariado de las variables en estudio de los pacientes participantes que usan o no medicina alternativa no se encontró asociaciones estadísticamente significativas (p>0,05). Conclusiones: La prevalencia del Uso de Medicina Alternativa en pacientes de consultorio externo fue 255 (91,7%). No se halló asociaciones estadísticamente significativas entre el uso de medicina alternativa y las variables nivel socioeconómico, el estado de salud del paciente y el nivel de satisfacción de la medicina convencional.

Complementary and alternative medicine use among US cancer survivors.

PURPOSE: US cancer survivors commonly use vitamins/minerals and complementary and alternative medicine (CAM). We compare use of vitamins/minerals and CAM between adult cancer survivors and cancer-free adults and estimate annual out-of-pocket expenses. METHODS: Data on self-reported vitamin/mineral and CAM use in the past 12 months from the cross-sectional 2012 US National Health Interview Survey were used to estimate prevalence of use and out-of-pocket expenditures. The cohort included adults with (n = 2977) and without (n = 30,551) a self-reported cancer diagnosis. RESULTS: Approximately 79 % of cancer survivors and 68 % of cancer-free adults reported using ≥1 vitamins/minerals and/or CAM modality in the past year. Compared to cancer-free adults, cancer survivors were more likely to report use of vitamin/minerals (75 vs. 61 %, P < 0.001), non-vitamin/mineral natural products (24 vs. 19 %, P < 0.001), manipulative and body-based therapies (19 vs. 17 %, P = 0.03), and alternative medical systems (5 vs. 4 %, P = 0.04). Adult cancer survivors and cancer-free adults spent an annual estimated $6.7 billion and $52 billion out-of-pocket, respectively, on vitamins/minerals and CAM. Survivors spent 60 % of the total on vitamins/minerals ($4 billion), 18 % ($1.2 billion) on non-vitamin/mineral natural products, and 7 % ($0.5 billion) on massage. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with cancer-free adults, a higher proportion of cancer survivors report vitamin/mineral and CAM use. Cancer survivors, who accounted for 6.9 % of the total population, accrued more than 11.4 % of the annual out-of-pocket costs on vitamins/minerals and CAM spent by US adults. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: Given the high use of vitamins/minerals and CAM in cancer survivors, studies are needed to analyze health outcomes and the cost/benefit ratio of such use.

Una aproximación a la medicina complementaria y alternativa en el contexto de su desarrollo como industria en el Perú / An approximation to the complementary and alternative medicine in the context of its development as an industry in Peru

La presente revisión, busca enfatizar y poner en foco la importancia de un esfuerzo coordinado para desarrollar la Medicina Complementaria y Alternativa (CAM en inglés) en el Perú en la próxima década, señalando que se requiere analizar también el entorno económico en función a la demanda real y las ventajas diferenciales que lo integran en la matriz de la industria de la salud, a fin de reafirmar las variables críticas para su desarrollo y sostenibilidad futura. También, se advierte la importancia de una sólida ejecución de investigación clínica en Medicina Complementaria y Alternativa, por ser transversal entre los varios objetivos de consolidación, así como el compromiso de la academia, la industria y los órganos de decisión en relación a un adecuado marco normativo, para facilitar la materialización de una visión compatible al liderazgo sustantivo del Perú en la región.

Out-Of-Pocket Expenditures on Complementary Health Approaches Associated With Painful Health Conditions in a Nationally Representative Adult Sample.

UNLABELLED: National surveys suggest that millions of adults in the United States use complementary health approaches such as acupuncture, chiropractic manipulation, and herbal medicines to manage painful conditions such as arthritis, back pain, and fibromyalgia. Yet, national and per person out-of-pocket (OOP) costs attributable to this condition-specific use are unknown. In the 2007 National Health Interview Survey, the use of complementary health approaches, the reasons for this use, and the associated OOP costs were captured in a nationally representative sample of 5,467 adults. Ordinary least square regression models that controlled for comorbid conditions were used to estimate aggregate and per person OOP costs associated with 14 painful health conditions. Individuals using complementary approaches spent a total of $14.9 billion (standard error [SE] = $.9 billion) on these approaches to manage these painful conditions. Total OOP expenditures by those using complementary approaches for their back pain ($8.7 billion, SE = $.8 billion) far outstripped OOP expenditures for any other condition; the majority of these costs ($4.7 billion, SE = $.4 billion) were for visits to complementary providers. Annual condition-specific per person OOP costs varied from a low of $568 (SE = $144) for regular headaches to a high of $895 (SE = $163) for fibromyalgia. PERSPECTIVE: Adults in the United States spent $14.9 billion on complementary health approaches (eg, acupuncture, chiropractic manipulation, and herbal medicines) to manage painful conditions including back pain ($8.7 billion). This back pain estimate is almost one-third of the total conventional health care expenditure for back pain ($30.4 billion) and two-thirds higher than conventional OOP expenditures ($5.1 billion).