Cargando…

Acceptance and use of complementary and alternative medicine among medical specialists: a 15-year systematic review and data synthesis

BACKGROUND: Complementary and Alternative Medicine (CAM) has gained popularity among the general population, but its acceptance and use among medical specialists have been inconclusive. This systematic review aimed to identify relevant studies and synthesize survey data on the acceptance and use of...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Phutrakool, Phanupong, Pongpirul, Krit
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8759198/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35027078
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13643-021-01882-4
_version_ 1784633062400720896
author Phutrakool, Phanupong
Pongpirul, Krit
author_facet Phutrakool, Phanupong
Pongpirul, Krit
author_sort Phutrakool, Phanupong
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Complementary and Alternative Medicine (CAM) has gained popularity among the general population, but its acceptance and use among medical specialists have been inconclusive. This systematic review aimed to identify relevant studies and synthesize survey data on the acceptance and use of CAM among medical specialists. METHODS: We conducted a systematic literature search in PubMed and Scopus databases for the acceptance and use of CAM among medical specialists. Each article was assessed by two screeners. Only survey studies relevant to the acceptance and use of CAM among medical specialists were reviewed. The pooled prevalence estimates were calculated using random-effects meta-analyses. This review followed both PRISMA and SWiM guidelines. RESULTS: Of 5628 articles published between 2002 and 2017, 25 fulfilled the selection criteria. Ten medical specialties were included: Internal Medicine (11 studies), Pediatrics (6 studies), Obstetrics and Gynecology (6 studies), Anesthesiology (4 studies), Surgery (3 studies), Family Medicine (3 studies), Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation (3 studies), Psychiatry and Neurology (2 studies), Otolaryngology (1 study), and Neurological Surgery (1 study). The overall acceptance of CAM was 52% (95%CI, 42–62%). Family Medicine reported the highest acceptance, followed by Psychiatry and Neurology, Neurological Surgery, Obstetrics and Gynecology, Pediatrics, Anesthesiology, Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Internal Medicine, and Surgery. The overall use of CAM was 45% (95% CI, 37–54%). The highest use of CAM was by the Obstetrics and Gynecology, followed by Family Medicine, Psychiatry and Neurology, Pediatrics, Otolaryngology, Anesthesiology, Internal Medicine, Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, and Surgery. Based on the studies, meta-regression showed no statistically significant difference across geographic regions, economic levels of the country, or sampling methods. CONCLUSION: Acceptance and use of CAM varied across medical specialists. CAM was accepted and used the most by Family Medicine but the least by Surgery. Findings from this systematic review could be useful for strategic harmonization of CAM and conventional medicine practice. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42019125628 GRAPHICAL ABSTRACT: [Image: see text] SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13643-021-01882-4.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8759198
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-87591982022-01-18 Acceptance and use of complementary and alternative medicine among medical specialists: a 15-year systematic review and data synthesis Phutrakool, Phanupong Pongpirul, Krit Syst Rev Research BACKGROUND: Complementary and Alternative Medicine (CAM) has gained popularity among the general population, but its acceptance and use among medical specialists have been inconclusive. This systematic review aimed to identify relevant studies and synthesize survey data on the acceptance and use of CAM among medical specialists. METHODS: We conducted a systematic literature search in PubMed and Scopus databases for the acceptance and use of CAM among medical specialists. Each article was assessed by two screeners. Only survey studies relevant to the acceptance and use of CAM among medical specialists were reviewed. The pooled prevalence estimates were calculated using random-effects meta-analyses. This review followed both PRISMA and SWiM guidelines. RESULTS: Of 5628 articles published between 2002 and 2017, 25 fulfilled the selection criteria. Ten medical specialties were included: Internal Medicine (11 studies), Pediatrics (6 studies), Obstetrics and Gynecology (6 studies), Anesthesiology (4 studies), Surgery (3 studies), Family Medicine (3 studies), Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation (3 studies), Psychiatry and Neurology (2 studies), Otolaryngology (1 study), and Neurological Surgery (1 study). The overall acceptance of CAM was 52% (95%CI, 42–62%). Family Medicine reported the highest acceptance, followed by Psychiatry and Neurology, Neurological Surgery, Obstetrics and Gynecology, Pediatrics, Anesthesiology, Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Internal Medicine, and Surgery. The overall use of CAM was 45% (95% CI, 37–54%). The highest use of CAM was by the Obstetrics and Gynecology, followed by Family Medicine, Psychiatry and Neurology, Pediatrics, Otolaryngology, Anesthesiology, Internal Medicine, Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, and Surgery. Based on the studies, meta-regression showed no statistically significant difference across geographic regions, economic levels of the country, or sampling methods. CONCLUSION: Acceptance and use of CAM varied across medical specialists. CAM was accepted and used the most by Family Medicine but the least by Surgery. Findings from this systematic review could be useful for strategic harmonization of CAM and conventional medicine practice. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42019125628 GRAPHICAL ABSTRACT: [Image: see text] SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13643-021-01882-4. BioMed Central 2022-01-14 /pmc/articles/PMC8759198/ /pubmed/35027078 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13643-021-01882-4 Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Research
Phutrakool, Phanupong
Pongpirul, Krit
Acceptance and use of complementary and alternative medicine among medical specialists: a 15-year systematic review and data synthesis
title Acceptance and use of complementary and alternative medicine among medical specialists: a 15-year systematic review and data synthesis
title_full Acceptance and use of complementary and alternative medicine among medical specialists: a 15-year systematic review and data synthesis
title_fullStr Acceptance and use of complementary and alternative medicine among medical specialists: a 15-year systematic review and data synthesis
title_full_unstemmed Acceptance and use of complementary and alternative medicine among medical specialists: a 15-year systematic review and data synthesis
title_short Acceptance and use of complementary and alternative medicine among medical specialists: a 15-year systematic review and data synthesis
title_sort acceptance and use of complementary and alternative medicine among medical specialists: a 15-year systematic review and data synthesis
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8759198/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35027078
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13643-021-01882-4
work_keys_str_mv AT phutrakoolphanupong acceptanceanduseofcomplementaryandalternativemedicineamongmedicalspecialistsa15yearsystematicreviewanddatasynthesis
AT pongpirulkrit acceptanceanduseofcomplementaryandalternativemedicineamongmedicalspecialistsa15yearsystematicreviewanddatasynthesis