Use of complementary therapies by individuals with ‘arthritis’

Resch, K. L.; Hill, Sara; Ernst, Edzard

doi:10.1007/bf02242457

Cited by 56 publications

(23 citation statements)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Second, the MEPS measures only medical expenditures and does not capture services for which there is no exchange of money. Third, we did not include in this analysis expenditures for complementary and alternative medicine, which is becoming an increasingly common treatment modality, especially among individuals with AORC (50,51). Fourth, the data from the current study precede the introduction of biologics for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis, more-aggressive testing for the presence and treatment of osteoporosis, and the growth of the coxibs and/or the use of protonpump inhibitors with traditional nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Medical care expenditures and earnings losses of persons with arthritis and other rheumatic conditions in the United States in 1997: Total and incremental estimates

Yelin¹,

Cisternas²,

Pasta³

et al. 2004

Arthritis & Rheumatism

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective. To provide estimates of the total medical care expenditures and earnings losses associated with arthritis and other rheumatic conditions (AORC), as well as the increment in such costs specifically attributable to these conditions, in the US in 1997.Methods. The estimates were derived from the 1997 Medical Expenditures Panel Survey (MEPS), a national probability sample of 14,147 households including 34,551 persons, of whom 4,776 self-reported arthritis. After weighting, those who self-reported AORC represent 38.4 million persons. We tabulated all medical care expenditures of the adult MEPS respondents, stratified by arthritis and comorbidity status, and then used regression techniques to estimate the increment in health care expenditures attributable to AORC, after taking comorbidity, demographic characteristics, and insurance status into account. Using the same methods, we also estimated the magnitude of the earnings losses sustained by persons of working ages (18-64 years) who had AORC.Results. Persons with AORC incurred mean total medical care expenditures of $4,865 (total $186.9 billion). The largest components of these expenditures were inpatient care (39%), ambulatory care (29%), and prescriptions (14%). The mean increment in medical care expenditures specifically attributable to AORC among those ages 18 years and older was $1,391 (total ϳ$51.1 billion). Persons with AORC ages 18-64 years earned $3,812 less on average than did other persons of these ages (total $82.4 billion). Of this average, $1,579 was attributable to the AORC (total $35.1 billion).Conclusion. In 1997, persons with AORC incurred direct and indirect costs of $269.3 billion, of which $86.2 billion was attributable to these conditions. Information about the economic impact of illness has become central to health policy debates, affecting the allocation of research funding among conditions and the choice of therapies for specific conditions. Because of the growing importance of cost of illness studies in health policy, the literature concerning the cost of all forms of musculoskeletal conditions for the US as a whole (1-8) and for other nations (9-13), as well as the cost of specific musculoskeletal conditions, including various forms of arthritis and other rheumatic conditions (AORC) (14-37), has been expanding rapidly.In general, the studies of the economic impact of all forms of musculoskeletal conditions have been derived from population-based surveys, but not directly observed individual-level medical care expenditures or employment status and earnings. In contrast, studies that have tracked the actual costs or expenditures for individuals have used clinical-based samples and are, thus, not representative of the general population. In the present study, we used the results of the Medical Expen-

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Medical care expenditures and earnings losses of persons with arthritis and other rheumatic conditions in the United States in 1997: Total and incremental estimates

Yelin¹,

Cisternas²,

Pasta³

et al. 2004

Arthritis & Rheumatism

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Not surprisingly, given the persistent and chronic nature of the disease and the potential side effects associated with many pharmacologic approaches, persons with RA tend to be particularly high users of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) therapies (8). For example, a recent survey (9) found that 46% of RA patients being seen in rheumatology clinics across the country reported using some form of CAM.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Psychological interventions for rheumatoid arthritis: A meta‐analysis of randomized controlled trials

Astin¹,

Beckner²,

Soeken³

et al. 2002

Arthritis & Rheumatism

294

184

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective. To carry out a systematic review of the literature examining the efficacy of psychological interventions (e.g., relaxation, biofeedback, cognitive-behavioral therapy) in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Methods. Studies that met the following criteria were included: random assignment, wait-list or usual care control condition; publication in peer-reviewed journals; treatment that included some psychological component beyond simply providing education information; and separate data provided for patients with RA if subjects with conditions other than RA were included. Two investigators independently extracted data on study design, sample size and characteristics, type of intervention, type of control, direction and nature of the outcome(s). Results. Twenty-five trials met the inclusion criteria. Methodologic quality was assessed, and effect sizes were calculated for 6 outcomes. Significant pooled effect sizes were found postintervention for pain (

show abstract

“…Satisfaction with the therapeutic encounter was markedly greater with CAM practitioners than with GPs. 40 Again, satisfaction with the time spent on the patient was 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 To improve the current situation, we should consider ways of maximising the benefits of nonspecific therapeutic effects within the realm of mainstream medicine. A recent systematic review qualitatively synthesised the relevant evidence in relation to cancer care.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Use of complementary therapies by individuals with ‘arthritis’

Cited by 56 publications

References 6 publications

Medical care expenditures and earnings losses of persons with arthritis and other rheumatic conditions in the United States in 1997: Total and incremental estimates

Medical care expenditures and earnings losses of persons with arthritis and other rheumatic conditions in the United States in 1997: Total and incremental estimates

Psychological interventions for rheumatoid arthritis: A meta‐analysis of randomized controlled trials

The public’s enthusiasm for complementary and alternative medicine amounts to a critique of mainstream medicine

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About