Use of complementary and alternative medicine among patients with arthritis.

INTRODUCTION: Previous studies suggest that people with arthritis have high rates of using complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) approaches for managing their arthritis, in addition to conventional treatments such as prescription medications. However, little is known about the use of CAM by diagnosis, or which forms of CAM are most frequently used by people with arthritis. This study was designed to provide detailed information about use of CAM for symptoms associated with arthritis in patients followed in primary care and specialty clinics in North Carolina. METHODS: Using a cross-sectional design, we drew our sample from primary care (n = 1,077) and specialist (n = 1,063) physician offices. Summary statistics were used to calculate differences within and between diagnostic groups, practice settings, and other characteristics. Logistic regression models clustered at the site level were used to determine the effect of patient characteristics on ever and current use of 9 CAM categories and an overall category of "any use." RESULTS: Most of the participants followed by specialists (90.5%) and a slightly smaller percentage of those in the primary care sample (82.8%) had tried at least 1 complementary therapy for arthritis symptoms. Participants with fibromyalgia used complementary therapies more often than those with rheumatoid arthritis, osteoarthritis, or chronic joint symptoms. More than 50% of patients in both samples used over-the-counter topical pain relievers, more than 25% used meditation or drew on religious or spiritual beliefs, and more than 19% used a chiropractor. Women and participants with higher levels of education were more likely to report current use of alternative therapies. CONCLUSION: Most arthritis patients in both primary care and specialty settings have used CAM for their arthritis symptoms. Health care providers (especially musculoskeletal specialists) should discuss these therapies with all arthritis patients.

Arthritis patients' perceptions of rheumatologists' participatory decision-making style and communication about complementary and alternative medicine.

OBJECTIVE: To examine if patients with arthritis who reported using complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) were more likely to tell their physicians about their CAM use if they rated their rheumatologist as using a more participatory decision-making style and what reasons patients gave for telling or not telling their rheumatologist about their CAM use. METHODS: A survey that asked about CAM use, health status, demographics, physician use of a participatory decision-making style, and medical skepticism was sent to individuals with arthritis who saw 23 rheumatologists at universities and private practice clinics in North Carolina. Generalized estimating equations were used to analyze the data. RESULTS: A total of 92% of patients reported using CAM for their arthritis and 54% of these patients discussed their CAM use with their rheumatologist. Women, patients who used more types of CAM, and patients who rated their rheumatologist as using a more participatory decision-making style were significantly more likely to tell their physicians about their CAM use. CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that if rheumatologists use more participatory styles of decision making with patients and involve them when making treatment decisions, patients are more likely to tell them about their CAM use.

The relationship between spirituality and depressive symptoms: testing psychosocial mechanisms.

Although many studies suggest lower rates of depressive symptoms in those who report greater spirituality, few have investigated the mechanisms by which spirituality might relate to depressive symptoms. The current study aimed to elucidate potential psychosocial mechanisms that link these 2 variables. Data were drawn from a community-dwelling stratified sample of 630 racially diverse adults in rural North Carolina. Spirituality was assessed by 6 items of the Daily Spiritual Experiences Scale. Depressive symptoms were measured using 4 subscales from the Center for Epidemiological Studies-Depression. Hypothesized mediators were optimism, volunteering, and perceived social support. Structural equation modeling was used to test whether proposed mediators explain a link between spirituality and depressive symptoms. The model demonstrated a satisfactory fit. Spirituality was indirectly related to depressive symptoms. More specifically, spirituality was significantly associated with optimism and volunteering but not with social support, and optimism, volunteering and perceived social support were significantly associated with depressive symptoms. The link between spirituality and depressive symptoms is indirect. The relationship is mediated by optimism, volunteering, and social support. Findings present research and practice implications.

Spirituality and depressive symptoms in a racially diverse US sample of community-dwelling adults.

The role of spirituality in depression is understudied. We examined the relationship between one dimension of spirituality, spiritual experiences, and depressive symptoms, and evaluated whether differences in gender, race, age, and stress moderated the relationship. The study was conducted with a community-based sample of 630 racially diverse middle-aged and older adults. Structural equation modeling was used to estimate a model linking spiritual experiences to depressive symptoms while controlling for demographic and health variables. Spiritual experiences were operationalized using six items of the Daily Spiritual Experiences Scale. Sample items included, "I feel God's presence," and, "I feel comfort in my religion or spirituality." The model achieved satisfactory goodness of fit. Spiritual experiences were significantly associated with fewer depressive symptoms, and age as well as stress moderated the association, but not gender and race. Spirituality appears to be a psychosocial resource against depressive symptoms, although the results must be confirmed in longitudinal investigations.

Four methods of estimating the minimal important difference score were compared to establish a clinically significant change in Headache Impact Test.

OBJECTIVE: To estimate the smallest decrease in Headache Impact Test (HIT) scores that reflects meaningful clinical change among patients with chronic daily headache (CDH). STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: We applied four methods of estimating the minimum important difference (MID) to data from 71 patients with CDH who participated in a clinical trial. The HIT was administered at baseline and at the 6-week follow-up assessment. Patients were considered to have experienced meaningful improvement if they reported that their headache condition was "somewhat better" or "much better" at the 6-week follow-up. RESULTS: Mean HIT scores at baseline and 6 weeks for all patients were 64.5 (standard deviation SD = 6.0) and 62.6 (SD = 5.7), respectively. HIT scores decreased 3.7 (SD = 4.4) and 1.4 (SD = 3.6) units, respectively, among patients who reported "somewhat better" change and those who reported no change at 6 weeks. Estimates of the MID of the HIT ranged from -2.7 to -2.3. CONCLUSIONS: The method that we judge to be most valid estimated the MID of the HIT at -2.3 units (95% confidence interval = -4.3, -0.3). This suggests that a between-group difference in HIT change scores of 2.3 units over time among patients with CDH reflects improvement in patients' headache condition that may be considered clinically significant.

Patients' perceptions of primary care physicians' participatory decision-making style and communication about complementary and alternative medicine for arthritis.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to examine: (1) which patient demographics were related to whether patients rated their family physicians as using a participatory decision-making style, and (2) whether arthritis patients who reported using complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) were more likely to report discussing CAM use with their providers if they saw family physicians rated with participatory decision-making styles. METHODS: A survey that asked about health status, demographics, physician use of a participatory decision-making style, and medical skepticism was sent to 2178 patients with arthritis who attended 16 different family practice sites that were part of a research network in rural and urban North Carolina. Generalized estimating equations were used to analyze the data. RESULTS: Younger and more educated patients were more likely to rate their family physicians as using participatory styles. In all, 71% of patients who reported having used one or more CAM strategy reported having discussed it with their physicians. Patients who rated their health as worse, reported using more categories of CAM, and rated their physicians as being using participatory styles were more likely to tell their physicians about their CAM use. CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that if providers use more participatory styles with patients and involve them when making treatment decisions; patients will tell providers more about what they are doing for their health.