Positive Health Online

Abstract

DAVIS and colleagues, Department of Internal Medicine, University of California at Davis, USA write that, despite advances in the diagnosis and treatment of asthma, the incidence of mortality is increasing throughout the developed world. A variety of complementary and alternative medical therapies are now being used in the treatment and prevention of asthma . The authors conducted a survey to identify the type and prevalence of complementary and alternative treatments for asthma in use in the United States.

Background

Methodology

10,000 copies of a survey developed by an expert panel were inserted into the May 1996 issue of Alternative Therapies in Health and Medicine. Only those professionals who treated asthma were invited to respond. The survey attempted to identify characteristics of the respondent, their particular type of practice, use of complementary, alternative or conventional medicine, patient characteristics and numbers, as well as their use of 20 specific potential therapies for the treatment of asthma. A total of 564 surveys were returned, a low response rate (5.64%), but reflective of the demographics of the readership of this journal.

Results

The responders to the survey were 46% male and 43% female; 11% did not specify gender. The ranged in age from under 31 years to over 70. The largest group of respondents (37%) were medical doctors, 27% held doctorates in complementary and alternative medicine-related disciplines, 11% had registered nursing degrees, 4% were acupuncturists and 18% did not specify their training. The characteristics between MD and non-MD asthma care providers did not differ. The majority had general practices (75%) with all ages of patients. MDs were less likely than non-MDs to employ complementary and alternative medicine techniques for the treatment of asthma. Both groups cited dietary and nutritional methods as their most prevalent and effective asthma treatment option. Botanicals, meditation and homoeopathy were frequently cited therapies. There were statistically significant differences in the rankings of treatment usefulness and prevalence between MD and non-MDs. Non-MD asthma practitioners were more likely to question patients regarding their use of complementary and alternative asthma treatments than were MDs (92% vs 70%). Both groups of practitioners showed statistically significant increases in their levels of patient inquiries compared to 2 years previously (up 9% and 8% for MDs and non-MDs respectively).

Conclusion

The predominance of diet and nutritional supplements used both by MDs and non-MDs suggests that further research be directed toward these practices, as well as toward the use of botanicals, meditation and homoeopathy. The variations between MDs and non-MDs regarding the use of therapies may reflect differing philosophies and training.

References

Davis PA et al. The use of complementary/alternative medicine for the treatment of asthma in the United States. J Investig Allergol Clin Immunol 8(2): 73-7 Mar-Apr 1998.