ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: To describe the self-reported use of natural health products (NHPs) and identify characteristics that predict selected NHP use in rheumatology patients. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional survey of consecutive rheumatology patients in two major clinics in Edmonton, Alberta. Survey items included demographic data, rheumatologic diagnoses, prescribed medications, NHPs, and information regarding patients' use of NHPs. Selected NHPs of interest - defined to include joint-specific products, oils with putative joint benefits, and other non-vitamin, non-mineral products - were classified by 2 reviewers. The characteristics of selected NHP users and non-users were compared using chi-squared and ANOVA tests, followed by multivariable-adjusted logistic regression. RESULTS: 1063 patients completed the survey (response rate = 36%, mean age 53 [sd 15], 70% female). 36% of respondents reported using one or more of a wide range of selected NHPs (mean 1.8, range 1-9). The most common source of NHP recommendations for selected NHP users were physicians (42%). Significant predictors of selected NHP use were: being female (aOR 1.41, 95%CI [1.05-1.90], p = 0.02), having a post-secondary degree (aOR 1.60 [1.15-2.22], p = 0.005), and the number of non-rheumatic medications (aOR 1.08 [ 1.00-1.15], p = 0.03) and NSAIDs (aOR 1.32 [1.06, 1.63], p = 0.01). Similar findings were observed among only inflammatory arthritis patients. CONCLUSIONS: Our study confirms the frequent use of selected NHPs, possibly to mitigate persistent symptoms of rheumatologic illness. Rheumatologists appear to be trusted sources of advice and recommendations on NHP use and should provide balanced counselling for their patients.
Subject(s)
Dietary Supplements/statistics & numerical data , Rheumatic Diseases/drug therapy , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Antirheumatic Agents/therapeutic use , Cross-Sectional Studies , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Rheumatology , Young AdultABSTRACT
The aim of this study is to identify and evaluate the quality of videos for patients available on YouTube for learning to self-administer subcutaneous methotrexate. Using the search term "Methotrexate injection," two clinical reviewers analyzed the first 60 videos on YouTube. Source and search rank of video, audience interaction, video duration, and time since video was uploaded on YouTube were recorded. Videos were classified as useful, misleading, or a personal patient view. Videos were rated for reliability, comprehensiveness, and global quality scale (GQS). Reasons for misleading videos were documented, and patient videos were documented as being either positive or negative towards methotrexate (MTX) injection. Fifty-one English videos overlapped between the two geographic locations; 10 videos were classified as useful (19.6 %), 14 misleading (27.5 %), and 27 personal patient view (52.9 %). Total views of videos were 161,028: 19.2 % useful, 72.8 % patient, and 8.0 % misleading. Mean GQS: 4.2 (±1.0) useful, 1.6 (±1.1) misleading, and 2.0 (±0.9) for patient videos (p < 0.0001). Mean reliability: 3.3 (±0.6) useful, 0.9 (±1.2) misleading, and 1.0 (±0.7) for patient videos (p < 0.0001). Comprehensiveness: 2.2 (±1.9) useful, 0.1 (±0.3) misleading, and 1.5 (±1.5) for patient view videos (p = 0.0027). This study demonstrates a minority of videos are useful for teaching MTX injection. Further, video quality does not correlate with video views. While web video may be an additional educational tool available, clinicians need to be familiar with specific resources to help guide and educate their patients to ensure best outcomes.