ObjectiveMore than 27,000 complementary medicine (CM) therapists are registered in Switzerland, but limited data are available on their occupational profile and role in the healthcare system. Herein we aimed to gain a better understanding of the professional profile of non-physician licensed therapists, focusing on acupuncture, osteopathy, and European naturopathy.DesignThis cross-sectional study was based on an online anonymous survey conducted from March to June 2017.Setting and participantsAll 1549 non-physician registered osteopaths, acupuncturists, and naturopaths in the French-speaking part of Switzerland were asked to complete the survey.Main outcome measuresWe measured the therapists’ demographics, training and practice characteristics, and workload.ResultsA total of 426 therapists returned the questionnaire (response rate: 27.5%). The mean age of the respondents was 46.0 years (SD 11.6) and most were women (67.8%). CM represented the main professional activity for a majority of therapists (82.8%), most of whom were independent (86.3%). The length and number of consultations per month varied across professions. Multivariate analysis showed that acupuncturists and naturopaths performed significantly fewer consults per month than osteopaths did. However, consultation length was significantly longer for acupuncturists and naturopaths than for osteopaths. Acupuncturists (71.6%) and naturopaths (64.4%) were significantly more favorable than osteopaths (27.7%) to have consultation costs covered by basic health insurance. Professional profiles differed between osteopaths, on the one hand, and naturopaths and acupuncturists, on the other, mainly regarding workload, treatment duration, and main reasons to consult.ConclusionsThis first study to investigate a variety of therapist profiles in Switzerland provides useful information about their activities and role within the Swiss healthcare system. Although all three professions are encompassed under the same umbrella term (CM), our study showed that they have specific work cultures and areas of intervention in the healthcare system.

ObjectiveRecent guidelines for chronic or recurrent low back pain recommend non-pharmacologic treatments as first-line options. The objective of this study was thus to explore the perceived usefulness of several conventional and complementary medicine treatments for chronic or recurrent low back pain by primary care physicians and their reported prescribing behavior.DesignAn exploratory cross-sectional study.Setting and participantsPrimary care physicians of the French-speaking part of Switzerland.Main outcome measuresPrimary care physicians’ perceived usefulness of each conventional and complementary medicine treatment and their reported recommendation behavior were considered dependent variables in multivariate logistic regression models. All correlations were computed between binary variables, and phi coefficients were calculated to estimate correlation strengths.Results533 primary care physicians answered the questionnaire (response rate: 25.6%). The top 3 conventional treatments most often considered useful by primary care physicians for chronic or recurrent low back pain were physiotherapy (94.8%), nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (87.9%), and manual therapy (82.5%), whereas the most prescribed conventional treatments were physiotherapy (99.2%), nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (97.4%), and acetaminophen (94.4%). Osteopathic treatment (78.4%), yoga (69.3%), and therapeutic massage (63.9%) were the complementary medicine treatments most often considered useful by primary care physicians in managing chronic or recurrent low back pain. Being a female physician, younger than 56 years, trained in complementary medicine, or using complementary medicine were all associated with higher perceived usefulness of complementary medicine treatments in general. The most recommended complementary medicine treatments by primary care physicians were osteopathic treatment (87.3%), acupuncture (69.3%), and therapeutic massage (58.7%). Being a female physician, younger than 56, and using complementary medicine were all associated with more complementary medicine recommendation in general.ConclusionOur results highlight the importance of better understanding the prescribing patterns of primary care physicians for chronic or recurrent low back pain. Considering the frequency and burden of chronic or recurrent low back pain, programs focusing on the most (cost-) effective treatments should be implemented.