Use of different medicinal systems of complementary and alternative medicine: A cross-sectional survey at a paediatric emergency department

• Published in: European journal of integrative medicine Vol. 1; no. 4; p. 202
• Main Authors: Simões-Wüst, A.P., Zuzak-Siegrist, I., Rist, L., Staubli, G., Zuzak, T.J.
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Elsevier GmbH 01.12.2009
• ISSN: 1876-3820; 1876-3839
• DOI: 10.1016/j.eujim.2009.08.114

Although a considerable part of the population from the German-speaking Switzerland uses complementary and alternative medicine (CAM), little information is available on the experiences being done with these therapies. A cross-sectional survey was performed on patients presenting to an urban, tertiary paediatric emergency department in Zurich; 68% (n=1143 questionnaires) of the distributed questionnaires could be used for data analysis. The respondents were asked on their experiences with CAM and with conventional medicine (CM). The respondents perceived the efficacy of the CAM-therapies to be comparable to that of CM. Respondents described that compliance to, frequency of use and direct costs to the patient of CAM and CM were similar. The majority (93%) of the respondents experienced no side effects upon CAM-therapies, whereas only 52% of the respondents stated the same about CM-therapies. Ten percent of the respondents reported “strong side effects” upon using CM-therapies, whereas the same was mentioned by only 1% of the respondents with respect to CAM. Homeopathy was used very frequently (77% of all CAM users), followed by herbal medicine (64%), anthroposophic medicine (24%), traditional Chinese medicine (13%), Ayurveda (5%) and others (34%). The respondents perceived and behaved towards CAM- and CM-therapies in comparable ways. Only the reported frequency and intensity of side effects were markedly lower in the case of CAM.