Use of Complementary Health Approaches Overall and for Pain Management by US Adults.

This study examines prevalence of use of complementary health approaches overall and for pain management among US adults.

Prevalence and patterns of use of mantra, mindfulness and spiritual meditation among adults in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Despite a growing body of scientific literature exploring the nature of meditation there is limited information on the characteristics of individuals who use it. This is particularly true of comparative studies examining prevalence and predictors of use of various forms of meditation. METHODS: A secondary analysis was conducted using data from the 2012 National Health Interview Survey (n = 34,525). Three popular forms of meditation were compared-mantra, mindfulness, and spiritual-to determine lifetime and 12-month use related to key sociodemographic, health behavior, health status, and healthcare access variables. RESULTS: The 12-month prevalence for meditation practice was 3.1% for spiritual meditation, 1.9% for mindfulness meditation, and 1.6% for mantra meditation. This represents approximately 7.0, 4.3, and 3.6 million adults respectively. A comparison across the three meditation practices found many similarities in user characteristics, suggesting interest in meditation may be more related to the type of person meditating than to the type of practice selected. Across meditation styles use was more prevalent among respondents who were female, non-Hispanic White, college educated, physically active; who used other complementary health practices; and who reported depression. Higher utilization of conventional healthcare services was one of the strongest predictors of use of all three styles. In addition to similarities, important distinctions were observed. For example, spiritual meditation practice was more prevalent among former drinkers. This may reflect use of spiritual meditation practices in support of alcohol treatment and sobriety. Reasons for use of meditation were examined using the sample of respondents who practiced mindfulness meditation. Wellness and prevention (74%) was a more common reason than use to treat a specific health condition (30%). Common reasons for use included stress management (92%) and emotional well-being (91%), and to support other health behaviors. Meditation was viewed positively because it was self-care oriented (81%) and focused on the whole person (79%). CONCLUSION: Meditation appears to provide an accessible, self-care resource that has potential value for mental health, behavioral self-regulation, and integrative medical care. Considering consumer preference for distinct types of meditation practices, understanding the underlying mechanisms, benefits, and applications of practice variations is important.

Mixed methods system for the assessment of post-exertional malaise in myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome: an exploratory study.

Background: A central feature of myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome (ME/CFS) is post-exertional malaise (PEM), which is an acute worsening of symptoms after a physical, emotional and/or mental exertion. Dynamic measures of PEM have historically included scaled questionnaires, which have not been validated in ME/CFS. To enhance our understanding of PEM and how best to measure it, we conducted semistructured qualitative interviews (QIs) at the same intervals as visual analogue scale (VAS) measures after a cardiopulmonary exercise test (CPET). Methods: Ten ME/CFS and nine healthy volunteers participated in a CPET. For each volunteer, PEM symptom VAS (12 symptoms) and semistructured QIs were administered at six timepoints over 72 hours before and after a single CPET. QI data were used to plot the severity of PEM at each time point and identify the self-described most bothersome symptom for each ME/CFS volunteer. Performance of QI and VAS data was compared with each other using Spearman correlations. Results: Each ME/CFS volunteer had a unique PEM experience, with differences noted in the onset, severity, trajectory over time and most bothersome symptom. No healthy volunteers experienced PEM. QI and VAS fatigue data corresponded well an hour prior to exercise (pre-CPET, r=0.7) but poorly at peak PEM (r=0.28) and with the change from pre-CPET to peak (r=0.20). When the most bothersome symptom identified from QIs was used, these correlations improved (r=0.0.77, 0.42. and 0.54, respectively) and reduced the observed VAS scale ceiling effects. Conclusion: In this exploratory study, QIs were able to capture changes in PEM severity and symptom quality over time, even when VAS scales failed to do so. Measurement of PEM can be improved by using a quantitative-qualitative mixed model approach.

Development of the adult and child complementary medicine questionnaires fielded on the National Health Interview Survey.

The 2002, 2007, and 2012 complementary medicine questionnaires fielded on the National Health Interview Survey provide the most comprehensive data on complementary medicine available for the United States. They filled the void for large-scale, nationally representative, publicly available datasets on the out-of-pocket costs, prevalence, and reasons for use of complementary medicine in the U.S. Despite their wide use, this is the first article describing the multi-faceted and largely qualitative processes undertaken to develop the surveys. We hope this in-depth description enables policy makers and researchers to better judge the content validity and utility of the questionnaires and their resultant publications.

A Mixed Methods System for the Assessment of Post Exertional Malaise in Encephalomyelitis/Chronic Fatigue Syndrome.

Background: A central feature of Myalgic Encephalomyelitis/Chronic Fatigue Syndrome (ME/CFS) is post exertional malaise (PEM), which is an acute worsening of symptoms after a physical, emotional and/or mental exertion. PEM is also a feature of Long COVID. Dynamic measures of PEM have historically included scaled questionnaires which have not been validated in ME/CFS. To enhance our understanding of PEM and how best to measure it, we conducted semi-structured qualitative interviews (QIs) at the same intervals as Visual Analog Scale (VAS) measures after a Cardiopulmonary Exercise Test (CPET). Methods: Ten ME/CFS and nine healthy volunteers participated in a CPET. For each participant, PEM symptom VAS (7 symptoms) and semi-structured QIs were administered at six timepoints over 72 hours before and after a single CPET. QI data were used to plot the severity of PEM at each time point and identify the self-described most bothersome symptom for each patient. QI data were used to determine the symptom trajectory and peak of PEM. Performance of QI and VAS data were compared to each other using Spearman correlations. Results: QIs documented that each ME/CFS volunteer had a unique PEM experience, with differences noted in the onset, severity, trajectory over time, and most bothersome symptom. No healthy volunteers experienced PEM. Scaled QI data were able to identify PEM peaks and trajectories, even when VAS scales were unable to do so due to known ceiling and floor effects. QI and VAS fatigue data corresponded well prior to exercise (baseline, r=0.7) but poorly at peak PEM (r=0.28) and with the change from baseline to peak (r=0.20). When the most bothersome symptom identified from QIs was used, these correlations improved (r=.0.77, 0.42. and 0.54 respectively) and reduced the observed VAS scale ceiling and floor effects. Conclusion: QIs were able to capture changes in PEM severity and symptom quality over time in all the ME/CFS volunteers, even when VAS scales failed to do so. Information collected from QIs also improved the performance of VAS. Measurement of PEM can be improved by using a quantitative-qualitative mixed model approach.

Disease severity is associated with the use of complementary medicine to treat or manage type-2 diabetes: data from the 2002 and 2007 National Health Interview Survey.

BACKGROUND: The overall prevalence of complementary medicine (CM) use among adults in the United States with diabetes has been examined both in representative national samples and in more restricted populations. However, none of these earlier studies attempted to identify predictors of CM use to treat diabetes among the populations sampled, nor looked for a relationship between CM use and diabetes severity. METHODS: Combining data from the 2002 and 2007 National Health Interview Survey (NHIS), we constructed a nationally representative sample of 3,978 U.S. adults aged ≥18 years with self-reported diabetes. Both the 2002 and 2007 NHIS contained extensive questions on the use of CM. We used logistic regression to examine the association between diabetes severity and overall CM use, as well as the use of specific categories of CM. RESULTS: In adults with type-2 diabetes, 30.9% used CM for any reason, but only 3.4% used CM to treat or manage their type-2 diabetes versus 7.1% of those with type-1 diabetes. Among those using CM to treat/manage their type-2 diabetes, 77% used both CM and conventional prescription medicine for their diabetes. The most prevalent types of CM therapies used were diet-based interventions (35.19%, S.E. 5.11) and non-vitamin/non-mineral dietary supplements (33.74%, S.E. 5.07). After controlling for sociodemographic factors, we found that, based on a count of measures of diabetes severity, persons with the most severe diabetes had nearly twice the odds of using CM as those with less severe disease (OR=1.9, 95%CI 1.2-3.01). Persons who had diabetes 10 years or more (OR=1.66, 95%CI 1.04-3.66) and those that had a functional limitation resulting from their diabetes (OR=1.74, 95%CI 1.09-2.8) had greater odds of using CM than those not reporting these measures. No significant associations were observed between overall CM use and other individual measures of diabetes severity: use of diabetic medications, weak or failing kidneys, coronary heart disease, or severe vision problems. CONCLUSIONS: Our results demonstrate that individuals with more severe diabetes are more likely to use CM independent of sociodemographic factors. Further studies are essential to determine if CM therapies actually improve clinical outcomes when used to treat/manage diabetes.

Reasons Office-Based Physicians in the United States Recommend Common Complementary Health Approaches to Patients: An Exploratory Study Using a National Survey.

Objective: To examine the reasons why office-based physicians do or do not recommend four selected complementary health approaches to their patients in the context of the Andersen Behavioral Model. Design: Descriptive estimates of physician-level data from the 2012 National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey (NAMCS) Physician Induction Interview, a nationally representative survey of office-based physicians (N = 5622, weighted response rate = 59.7%). Setting/Location: The United States. Outcome measures: Reasons for the recommendation or lack thereof to patients for: herbs and other non-vitamin supplements, chiropractic/osteopathic manipulation, acupuncture, and mind-body therapies (including meditation, guided imagery, and progressive relaxation). Differences by physician sex and medical specialty were described. Results: For each of the four complementary health approaches, more than half of the physicians who made recommendations indicated that they were influenced by scientific evidence in peer-reviewed journals (ranging from 52.0% for chiropractic/osteopathic manipulation [95% confidence interval, CI = 47.6-56.3] to 71.3% for herbs and other non-vitamin supplements [95% CI = 66.9-75.4]). More than 60% of all physicians recommended each of the four complementary health approaches because of patient requests. A higher percentage of female physicians reported evidence in peer-reviewed journals as a rationale for recommending herbs and non-vitamin supplements or chiropractic/osteopathic manipulation when compared with male physicians (herbs and non-vitamin supplements: 78.8% [95% CI = 72.4-84.3] vs. 66.6% [95% CI = 60.8-72.2]; chiropractic/osteopathic manipulation: 62.3% [95% CI = 54.7-69.4] vs. 47.5% [95% CI = 42.3-52.7]). For each of the four complementary health approaches, a lack of perceived benefit was the most frequently reported reason by both sexes for not recommending. Lack of information sources was reported more often by female versus male physicians as a reason to not recommend herbs and non-vitamin supplements (31.4% [95% CI = 26.8-36.3] vs. 23.4% [95% CI = 21.0-25.9]). Conclusions: There are limited nationally representative data on the reasons as to why office-based physicians decide to recommend complementary health approaches to patients. Developing a more nuanced understanding of influencing factors in physicians' decision making regarding complementary health approaches may better inform researchers and educators, and aid physicians in making evidence-based recommendations for patients.

Health need and the use of alternative medicine among adults who do not use conventional medicine.

BACKGROUND: We hypothesize that a substantial portion of individuals who forgo conventional care in a given year turn to some form of alternative medicine. This study also examines whether individuals who use only alternative medicine will differ substantially in health and sociodemographic status from individuals using neither alternative medicine nor conventional care in a given year. To identify those factors that predict alternative medicine use in those not using conventional care, we employed the socio-behavioral model of healthcare utilization. METHODS: The current study is a cross-sectional regression analysis using data from the 2002 National Health Interview Survey. Data were collected in-person from 31,044 adults throughout the 50 states and the District of Columbia. RESULTS: 19.3% of adults (38.3 million) did not use conventional care in a 12 month period, although 39.5% of these individuals (14.7 million) reported having one or more problems with their health. Of those not using conventional care, 24.8% (9.5 million) used alternative medicine. Users of alternative medicine had more health needs and were more likely to delay conventional care because of both cost and non-cost factors compared to those not using alternative medicine. While individual predisposing factors (gender, education) were positively associated with alternative medicine use, enabling factors (poverty status, insurance coverage) were not. CONCLUSIONS: We found that a quarter of individuals who forgo conventional care in a given year turn towards alternative medicine. Our study suggests that the potential determinants of using only alternative medicine are multifactorial. Future research is needed to examine the decision process behind an individual's choice to use alternative medicine but not conventional medicine and the clinical outcomes of this choice.

U.S. Physician Recommendations to Their Patients About the Use of Complementary Health Approaches.

Objective: There are no nationally representative studies using a probability sample that have been published examining whether physicians recommend complementary health approaches (CHAs) to their patients, as previous research has focused only on selected medical specialties or a particular U.S. region. This article fills a void in the current literature for robust data on recommendations for CHAs by office-based physicians in the United States. Design: Descriptive statistics and multivariable regression analyses of physician-level data were from the 2012 Physician Induction Interview of the National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey (NAMCS PII), a nationally representative survey of office-based physicians. Weighted response rate among eligible physicians sampled for the 2012 NAMCS PII was 59.7%. Setting/Location: United States. Outcome measures: Recommendations by physicians to their patients for any CHA, and individual CHAs: massage therapy, herbs/nonvitamin supplements, chiropractic/osteopathic manipulation, yoga, acupuncture, and mind-body therapies. Differences in recommendations by physician demographic characteristics were identified. Results: Massage therapy was the most commonly recommended CHA (30.4%), followed by chiropractic/osteopathic manipulation (27.1%), herbs/nonvitamin supplements (26.5%), yoga (25.6%), and acupuncture (22.4%). The most commonly recommended CHAs by general/family practice physicians were chiropractic/osteopathic manipulation (54.0%) and massage therapy (52.6%). Of all U.S. physicians, 53.1% recommended at least one CHA to patients during the previous 12 months. Multivariable analyses found physician's sex, race, specialty, and U.S. region to be significant predictors of CHA recommendations. Female physicians were more likely than male physicians to recommend massage therapy (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 1.76, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.40-2.20), herbs/nonvitamin supplements (aOR = 1.85, 95% CI = 1.46-2.35), yoga (aOR = 2.16, 95% CI = 1.70-2.75), acupuncture (aOR = 1.65, 95% CI = 1.27-2.13), and mind-body therapies (aOR = 2.63, 95% CI = 2.02-3.41) to patients. Psychiatrists (aOR = 0.13, 95% CI = 0.07-0.23), OB/GYNs (aOR = 0.38, 95% CI = 0.24-0.60), and pediatricians (aOR = 0.26, 95% CI = 0.18-0.38) were all less likely to recommend chiropractic/osteopathic manipulation than general and family practitioners. Conclusions: Overall, more than half of office-based physicians recommended at least one CHA to their patients. Female physicians recommended every individual CHA at a higher rate than male physicians except for chiropractic and osteopathic manipulation. These findings may enable consumers, physicians, and medical schools to better understand potential differences in use of CHAs with patients.

Characterization of Post-exertional Malaise in Patients With Myalgic Encephalomyelitis/Chronic Fatigue Syndrome.

Background: Myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome is characterized by persistent and disabling fatigue, exercise intolerance, cognitive difficulty, and musculoskeletal/joint pain. Post-exertional malaise is a worsening of these symptoms after a physical or mental exertion and is considered a central feature of the illness. Scant observations in the available literature provide qualitative assessments of post-exertional malaise in patients with myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome. To enhance our understanding, a series of outpatient focus groups were convened. Methods: Nine focus groups totaling 43 patients who reported being diagnosed with myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome were held between November 2016 and August 2019. Focus groups queried post-exertional malaise in daily life and participants' retrospective memory of post-exertional malaise that followed an exercise provocation with a cardiopulmonary exercise test. Data analysis followed the grounded theory method to systematically code and categorize the data to find meaningful patterns. A qualitative software package was used to move text into categories during data coding. Results: A wide range of symptoms were attributed to exertion both in daily lives and following cardiopulmonary exercise testing. While three core symptoms emerged (exhaustion, cognitive difficulties, and neuromuscular complaints), participants' descriptions were notable for their unique individual variations. Of 18 participants who responded to questions centered around symptoms following a cardiopulmonary exercise test, 17 reported that symptoms started within 24 h and peaked in severity within 72 h following the cardiopulmonary exercise test. Patients described post-exertional malaise as interfering with their ability to lead a "normal" life. Conclusion: The experience of post-exertional malaise in myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome varies greatly between individuals and leads to a diminished quality of life. myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome patients describe post-exertional malaise as all-encompassing with symptoms affecting every part of the body, difficult to predict or manage, and requiring complete bedrest to fully or partially recover. Given the extensive variability in patients, further research identifying subtypes of post-exertional malaise could lead to better targeted therapeutic options.

Eighteen-Year Trends in the Prevalence of, and Health Care Use for, Noncancer Pain in the United States: Data from the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey.

We used data from the nationally representative Medical Expenditure Panel Survey to determine the 18-year trends in the overall rates of noncancer pain prevalence and pain-related interference, as well as in health care use attributable directly to pain management. The proportion of adults reporting painful health condition(s) increased from 32.9% (99.7% confidence interval [CI] = 31.6-34.2%;120 million adults) in 1997/1998 to 41.0% (99.7% CI = 39.2-42.4%; 178 million adults) in 2013/2014 (Ptrend < .0001). Among adults with severe pain-related interference associated with their painful health condition(s), the use of strong opioids specifically for pain management more than doubled from 11.5% (99.7% CI = 9.6-13.4%) in 2001/2002 to 24.3% (99.7% CI = 21.3-27.3%) in 2013/2014 (Ptrend < .0001). A smaller increase (Pinteraction < .0001) in strong opioid use was seen in those with minimal pain-related interference: 1.2% (99.7% CI = 1.0-1.4%) in 2001/2002 to 2.3% (99.7% CI = 1.9-2.7%) in 2013/2014. Small but statistically significant decreases (Ptrend < .0001) were seen in 1) the percentage of adults with painful health condition(s) who had ≥1 ambulatory office visit for their pain: 56.1% (99.7% CI = 54.2-58.0%) in 1997/1998 and 53.3% (99.7% CI = 51.4-55.4%) in 2013/2014; 2) the percentage who had ≥1 emergency room visit for their pain; 9.9% (99.7% CI = 8.6-11.2%) to 8.8% (99.7% CI = 7.9-9.7%); and 3) the percentage with ≥1 overnight hospitalization for their pain: 3.2% (99.7% CI = 2.6-4.0%) to 2.3% (99.7% CI = 1.8-2.8%). PERSPECTIVE: Our data illustrate changes in the management of painful health conditions over the last 2 decades in the United States. Strong opioid use remains high, especially in those with severe pain-related interference. Additional education of health care providers and the public concerning the risk/benefit ratio of opioids appears warranted.

Fibromyalgia patients and healthy volunteers express difficulties and variability in rating experimental pain: a qualitative study.

Background and aims Despite the enormous body of literature spanning more than 50 years describing results of pain experiments, very few have used qualitative methods to explore subjects' thoughts while scoring experimental painful stimuli, and none in the available literature have used qualitative interviews to do so. The current study examined how participants in experimental pain research delineate pain ratings to better understand the unique influences of the experimental setting on pain scores. An additional aim was to highlight how individuals with fibromyalgia and healthy volunteers are differently influenced by characteristics of the experimental setting. Methods This was an inductive, qualitative study in which individual, semi-structured interviews were performed with 31 fibromyalgia patients and 44 healthy volunteers. Participants had taken part in a pain experiment during which a thermode was used to induce painful heat stimuli on two skin areas. There were two primary interview questions analyzed for this report: (1) "Thinking back to when you were getting the heat pain on your leg, what were you thinking about when deciding on your pain score?" and (2) Participants who said that it was difficult to decide on a pain score were asked to, "Describe what made it difficult to choose a number." Thematic analysis was used to generate conceptual categories from textual data and find common themes. Results Three notable differences were found between fibromyalgia patients and healthy volunteers: (1) using current daily pain as a benchmark was seen more in patients, (2) wanting to appear strong in front of the study investigators was more common in healthy volunteers, and (3) becoming mentally fatigued from rating many stimuli was more common for fibromyalgia patients. Thoughts while scoring pain included: (1) comparing with previous or current pain, (2) self-monitoring of one's ability to endure the pain, (3) focusing on the physical aspects of the pain, (4) knowing the experimental setting is safe, (5) focusing on the pain scale as an anchor, and (6) desire to appear strong. Additionally, five difficulties in scoring experimental pain were identified: (1) falling asleep, (2) mentally fatigued, (3) feeling as though they were guessing, (4) having to make a quick decision, and (5) difficulty in being consistent. Conclusions This study provides insights into the thoughts of participants in experimental pain research studies. Participants were distracted and influenced by the experimental setting and some factors differed for fibromyalgia patients versus healthy volunteers. Implications Understanding the ways in which the experimental setting influences pain ratings may help pain researchers better design and interpret studies. Researchers can use these findings to mitigate difficulties for participants in experimental research to add to its validity.

Use of Yoga, Meditation, and Chiropractors Among U.S. Adults Aged 18 and Over.

Complementary health is the use of holistic or unconventional medicine with mainstream Western medicine for health and wellness (1,2). Past research has identified yoga, meditation, and seeing a chiropractor as some of the most commonly used approaches (3). This report examines changes over time in the percentage of adults who used yoga, meditation, and chiropractors in the past 12 months, as well as variation by sex, age, and race and Hispanic origin.

Use of Yoga, Meditation, and Chiropractors Among U.S. Children Aged 4-17 Years.

Yoga, meditation, and use of chiropractors are types of complementary health approaches developed outside of mainstream Western medicine (1-2). Although complementary health approaches as a whole are not widely used among children, previous work has established a rise in the use of selected approaches over time (3). This report presents the most recent national estimates of use of the three most prevalent approaches during the past 12 months, among children aged 4-17 years in the United States. Comparable estimates from 2012 are also included to examine changes over time.

Health behaviors and risk factors in those who use complementary and alternative medicine.

BACKGROUND: Surveys have generally found that individuals more likely to use complementary and alternative medicine are female, live in the western United States, are likely to have a health complaint, and have a higher socioeconomic status than do nonusers. What is not known is the extent to which those who use complementary and alternative medicine also engage in positive health behaviors, such as smoking cessation or increased physical activity and/or exhibit fewer health risk factors such as obesity. This has been identified as a key research question in a recent Institute of Medicine report. In the present study we sought to determine whether the use of complementary and alternative medicine is associated with health behaviors or risk factors known to impact on health status. METHODS: The current study is a cross-sectional regression analysis using data from the 2002 National Health Interview Survey. Data were collected in-person from 31,044 adults throughout the 50 states and the District of Columbia. RESULTS: After controlling for a range of other factors, we found that engaging in leisure-time physical activity, having consumed alcohol in one's life but not being a current heavy drinker, and being a former smoker are independently associated with the use of CAM. Obese individuals are slightly less likely to use CAM than individuals with a healthy body-mass index. No significant associations were observed between receipt of an influenza vaccine and CAM use. CONCLUSION: Those engaging in positive health behaviors and exhibiting fewer health risk factors are more likely to use CAM than those who forgo positive health behaviors or exhibit more health risk factors. The fact that users of CAM tend to pursue generally healthy lifestyles suggests that they may be open to additional recommendations toward optimizing their health.

Insurance Coverage for Complementary Health Approaches Among Adult Users: United States, 2002 and 2012.

KEY FINDINGS: Data from the 2002 and 2012 National Health Interview Surveys. Between 2002 and 2012, the use of acupuncture, chiropractic, and massage therapy increased among adults who did not have health insurance coverage for these complementary health approaches. No change in use was observed among those who had coverage for these approaches. While 60% of adults who saw a practitioner for chiropractic had at least some health insurance coverage for this approach, far fewer adults seeing a practitioner for acupuncture (25%) or massage therapy (15%) had coverage for these approaches. Adults who saw practitioners for acupuncture and chiropractic-and had health insurance coverage for these approaches-were more likely to have partial than complete coverage.

Expenditures on Complementary Health Approaches: United States, 2012.

OBJECTIVE: This report presents estimates of expenditures on complementary health approach use among the U.S. population. Estimates are presented for adults and children separately and combined, as well as stratified by type of approach and family income. METHODS: Combined data from 44,743 individuals aged 4 years and over, collected as part of the 2012 National Health Interview Survey, were analyzed for this report. Sample data were weighted to produce national estimates that are representative of the civilian noninstitutionalized U.S. population. Differences between percentages were evaluated using two-sided significance tests at the 0.05 level. Linear regression was used to assess trends in expenditures when stratifying by family income. RESULTS: An estimated 59 million persons aged 4 years and over had at least one expenditure for some type of complementary health approach, resulting in total out-of-pocket expenditures of $30.2 billion. More was spent on visits to complementary practitioners ($14.7 billion) than for purchases of natural product supplements ($12.8 billion) or self-care approaches ($2.7 billion). The mean per user out-of-pocket expenditure for visits to a complementary practitioner ($433) was significantly more than for purchases of natural product supplements ($368) or for self-care approaches ($257). Adults had higher mean annual out-of-pocket expenditures for visits to complementary practitioners than children ($442 and $291, respectively). Total out-of-pocket expenditures and mean per user out-of pocket expenditures for complementary health approaches increased significantly as family income increased. The mean per user out-of-pocket expenditure for complementary health approaches was $435 for persons with family incomes less than $25,000 and $590 for persons with family incomes of $100,000 or more.

Use of Complementary Health Approaches for Musculoskeletal Pain Disorders Among Adults: United States, 2012.

OBJECTIVE: This report examines the use of complementary health approaches among U.S. adults aged 18 and over who had a musculoskeletal pain disorder. Prevalence of use among this population subgroup is compared with use by persons without a musculoskeletal disorder. Use for any reason, as well as specifically to treat musculoskeletal pain disorders, is examined. METHODS: Using the 2012 National Health Interview Survey, estimates of the use of complementary health approaches for any reason, as well as use to treat musculoskeletal pain disorders, are presented. Statistical tests were performed to assess the significance of differences between groups of complementary health approaches used among persons with specific musculoskeletal pain disorders. Musculoskeletal pain disorders included lower back pain, sciatica, neck pain, joint pain or related conditions, arthritic conditions, and other musculoskeletal pain disorders not included in any of the previous categories. Respondents could report having more than one disorder. RESULTS: In 2012, 54.5% of U.S. adults had a musculoskeletal pain disorder. The use of any complementary health approach for any reason among persons with a musculoskeletal pain disorder (41.6%) was significantly higher than use among persons without a musculoskeletal pain disorder (24.1%). Among adults with any musculoskeletal pain disorder, the use of natural products for any reason (24.7%) was significantly higher than the use of mind and body approaches (15.3%), practitioner-based approaches (18.2%), or whole medical system approaches (5.3%). The pattern of use of the above-mentioned groups of complementary health approaches was similar for persons without a musculoskeletal disorder. However, prevalence of use among these persons was significantly lower compared with persons with a musculoskeletal disorder. For treatment, the use of practitioner-based approaches among persons with any musculoskeletal pain disorder (9.7%) was more than three times as high as the use of any other group of approaches (0.7%-3.1%). The patterns of use of specific groups of complementary health approaches also differed among specific musculoskeletal pain disorders.

Evidence-Based Evaluation of Complementary Health Approaches for Pain Management in the United States.

Although most pain is acute and resolves within a few days or weeks, millions of Americans have persistent or recurring pain that may become chronic and debilitating. Medications may provide only partial relief from this chronic pain and can be associated with unwanted effects. As a result, many individuals turn to complementary health approaches as part of their pain management strategy. This article examines the clinical trial evidence for the efficacy and safety of several specific approaches-acupuncture, manipulation, massage therapy, relaxation techniques including meditation, selected natural product supplements (chondroitin, glucosamine, methylsulfonylmethane, S-adenosylmethionine), tai chi, and yoga-as used to manage chronic pain and related disability associated with back pain, fibromyalgia, osteoarthritis, neck pain, and severe headaches or migraines.

Limited Health Knowledge as a Reason for Non-Use of Four Common Complementary Health Practices.

BACKGROUND: Complementary health practices are an important element of health/healthcare seeking behavior among adults in the United States. Reasons for use include medical need, prevention and wellness promotion, and cultural relevance. Survey studies published over the past several decades have provided important information on the use of complementary health practices, such as acupuncture and yoga. A review of the literature, however, reveals an absence of studies looking specifically at who does not use these approaches, and why not. METHODS: To explore this issue two samples were created using data from the 2007 National Health Interview Survey Complementary and Alternative Medicine supplement. Of particular interest was the relationship between lack of health knowledge, as a reason for non-use, and key independent variables. The first sample was comprised of individuals who had never used any of four common complementary health practices -- acupuncture, chiropractic, natural products, and yoga. The second was a subset of those same non-users who had also reported low back pain, the most frequently cited health concern related to use of complementary therapies. RESULTS: A hypothesized association between lack of health knowledge, lower educational attainment, and other key socioeconomic indicators was supported in the findings. Although it was hypothesized that low back pain would be associated with greater information seeking, regardless of level of education, that hypothesis was not supported. CONCLUSION: Lack of knowledge was found to affect utilization of common complementary health practices, regardless of the potentially motivating presence of back pain. Disparities in the utilization of complementary medicine, related to educational attainment and other socioeconomic factors, may negatively affect quality of care for many Americans. Creative approaches are needed to help reduce inequities in understanding and improve access to care for underserved populations.