 |
|
A Profile of Military Veterans in the Southwestern United States Who Use Complementary and Alternative Medicine
Implications for Integrated Care
Carol M. Baldwin, RN, PhD, HNC;
Kathi Long, RN, ANP;
Kendall Kroesen, PhD;
Audrey J. Brooks, PhD;
Iris R. Bell, MD, MD(H), PhD
Arch Intern Med. 2002;162:1697-1704.
ABSTRACT
| |
Background Complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) use and expenditures are
on the rise in the United States. Although civilian users of CAM have been
well described, little is known about military veteran users of CAM.
Objective To describe military veteran CAM users in the southwestern United States.
Methods The study population comprised 508 military veterans randomly selected
from Southern Arizona Veterans Administration Health Care System (Tucson)
primary care patient lists, who had agreed to participate in a telephone interview.
The  2 test was used to analyze CAM use by demographic characteristics,
military service, military-related health outcomes, and physician-diagnosed
health complaints. Logistic regression was used to determine predictor variables.
Results Of the 508 subjects, 252 (49.6%) reported CAM use. Military veteran
CAM users were significantly more likely to be non-Hispanic white, earn more
than $50 000 per year (both P<.05), and have
greater than 12 years of education (P<.01). Current
high daily stress, perceived negative impact of military life on physical
or mental health, and physician-diagnosed chronic illnesses (eg, gastrointestinal
problems, insomnia, and asthma) were statistically associated with CAM use.
Regression analysis provided adjusted odds ratios and indicated that ethnicity
(non-Hispanic white), higher education, greater current daily stress, and
overseas military experience were significant predictors of CAM use by these
veterans (each P<.05).
Conclusions Ethnicity, education, income, and several chronic health complaints
are consistent with civilian CAM use. Findings also suggest, however, that
physicians providing conventional medical care need to be aware of experiences
unique to CAM-using military veterans.
INTRODUCTION
COMPLEMENTARY AND alternative medicine (CAM), also referred to as unconventional
or unorthodox medicine in Western cultures, involves a number of treatment
modalities in tandem with a variety of definitions. Eisenberg et al1(p246) defined unconventional therapies as "interventions
not taught widely at US medical schools or generally available at US hospitals."
Treatment modalities often used to describe and sometimes define CAM include
body work (eg, massage therapy and Reiki), botanical and nutritional supplements
(eg, valerian and glucosamine sulfate), Chinese medical practices (eg, qi gong and tui na), chiropractic,
homeopathy, megavitamin therapy, naturopathy, reflexology, folk medicine (eg, curanderismo and Native American sweat lodges), therapeutic/healing
touch, and spiritual healing practices.2
A substantial increase in CAM use and expenditures has been reported
in the United States between the years 1990 and 1997.3
Out-of-pocket spending for CAM exceeded all expenditures for hospitalizations
in the United States, costs for CAM therapies were comparable with out-of-pocket
expenditures for all physician services, and when extrapolating to the US
population, CAM visits exceeded total visits to all primary care physicians
between 1990 and 1997.1, 3 Viewed
from a historical context, a recent study reported a trend of increased CAM
use over the past 50 years that portends a continued demand for CAM that will
influence health care delivery over the next 25 years.4
A number of CAM studies in the United States,3, 5-11
Canada,12 Europe,13-15
and Australia16-17 have provided
additional data on the prevalence and predictors of, and reasons for, CAM
use. Studies have suggested that prevalence rates for some form of CAM use
in the United States range from 30% to 50% of the adult population.18 Female sex, non-Hispanic white ethnicity, higher
education and income, and young to middle-aged groups have been associated
with, or cited as predictors of, CAM use.5-6,9-10,19
Reasons for CAM use in other studies include chronic conditions not otherwise
ameliorated or addressed by conventional medicine, including back or other
chronic pain, allergies, fatigue, arthritis, depression, anxiety, and concerns
regarding drug adverse effects.3, 5-7
In addition, some CAM users report seeking an emphasis on preventive medicine,
as well as a holistic approach to health (ie, health care that aligns with
their personal values and world view).5, 7, 11
At present, there is very little information available regarding the
prevalence rates of CAM use and characteristics of CAM users in US military
veterans. A survey study of CAM use was done at a family practice residency
program at an army medical center in Washington State that provides access
to no-cost care.9 Clients included active and
retired military personnel and their family members. Clients were asked if
they ever sought or were current users of CAM, and examples of CAM given were
acupuncture, chiropractic, and homeopathy. Results indicated that 50 (28.2%)
of 177 military veterans and their dependents eligible for care at the clinic
used some form of CAM, and typical users were more likely to be white, women,
better educated, aged 30 to 49 years, and middle income. Back pain (56%),
musculoskeletal pain (22%), and stress or psychosocial problems (20%) were
primary reasons cited for CAM use in the present study. The Drivdahl and Miser9 study, however, focused on a relatively small sample
of military veterans and their family members with access to free conventional
medical care.
The purpose of the present study is to describe (1) prevalence rates,
(2) demographics, (3) health behaviors and lifestyle, (4) military experience,
and (5) physician-diagnosed health complaints obtained from telephone survey
data on a randomly selected population of military veterans collected at one
of the Veterans Integrated Service Network (VISN) 18 health care facilities
and its satellite clinics. The VISN 18 of the Department of Veterans Affairs
(VA) Health Care System provides health care to military veterans in the southwestern
United States, especially Arizona.
SUBJECTS AND METHODS
RECRUITMENT
Subjects were recruited from the Southern Arizona VA Health Care System
(SAVAHCS), Tucson, primary care lists that are available on the hospital computer
network. The database is set up in Microsoft Access (Microsoft Corp, Redmond,
Wash) and is updated monthly with yearly summaries from the hospital's patient
tracking system. All patient encounters for fiscal year 1999 were queried
to include "snowbird" veterans, who lived in southern Arizona during the winter
months and lived outside of Arizona during the summer. Veterans without telephone
numbers were contacted by letter requesting that they call the research office
if they were interested in participating in the study. Subject selection was
accomplished using a computer-generated list of random numbers. A total of
1113 randomly selected subjects were contacted from a database of 20 465
military veterans seen over the 1-year period. Two random lists of subjects
were selected approximately 3 months apart. The first 500 participants were
organized on telephone contact lists according to primary care team, while
the second set of 613 subjects was randomized prior to telephone contact using
a set of computer-generated random numbers. All survey protocols were approved
by the Human Subjects Institutional Review Board of the University of Arizona
(Tucson) and SAVAHCS Research and Development Committee.
SUBJECTS
Of the 1113 subjects contacted, 700 answered or returned phone or letter
messages for a 62.9% response rate. Of the 700 respondents, 508 military veterans
agreed to participate in a telephone interview for a 72.6% respondent rate.
At the end of the telephone survey, subjects were asked if they would be willing
to participate in an extended survey of CAM use. The data reported herein
are from the telephone interview. All participants contacted were receiving
conventional care at SAVAHCS and several of its satellite clinics at Fort
Huachuca, Yuma, Safford, and Casa Grande, Ariz.
PROCEDURES
Data obtained via telephone included demographic information, military
service (branch, combat history, and overseas duty assignments), self-reported
military-related physical and mental health status, and physician-diagnosed
health complaints (from a list read to the veteran). In addition, subjects
were queried as to their CAM use (yes or no). Specifically, subjects were
asked, "Do you currently use or have you ever used complementary and alternative
medicine?" If a participant asked for clarification of CAM, the telephone
interviewers were then told to follow up with the scripted statement, "such
as acupuncture, aromatherapy, chiropractic, herbal remedies, or homeopathy."
All telephone interviewers used the same script and the same examples to reduce
the chance for eliciting biased responses to the CAM question. Although the
CAM examples appear disparate, our intent was to provide the caller with a
selection of treatment modalities from the following categories outlined by
the National Institutes of Health National Center on Complementary and Alternative
Medicine (NCCAM): (1) alternative medical systems (acupuncture and homeopathy),
(2) mind-body interventions (aromatherapy), (3) biological-based therapies
(herbal remedies), and (4) manipulative and body-based therapies (chiropractic).
ANALYSIS
Demographics, military service, military-related health outcomes, and
health complaints were cross-tabulated using the dichotomous CAM use question
as the dependent variable. SPSS for Windows statistical software (Version
10.0; SPSS Inc, Chicago, Ill) was used to perform 2 analyses.
Unadjusted odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated
when relevant. In some cases, categories were collapsed when the sample sizes
were too small for separate analysis. To adjust for confounders, a backward
elimination logistic regression was undertaken with CAM use as the dependent
variable and statistically significant variables from the 2
analyses as independent variables. The procedure was stopped when there were
no variables in the equation that satisfied the removal criteria of P>.10.
RESULTS
PREVALENCE RATES AND DEMOGRAPHICS
Demographic data (Table 1)
indicated that of the 508 military veterans surveyed, 252 (49.6%) reported
that they are currently using or have used CAM. Participants who reported
CAM use were significantly more likely to be non-Hispanic white (P<.05), have greater than 12 years of education (P<.01), and earned more than $50 000 per year (P<.05). Veterans using CAM were significantly more likely to have
never been married compared with nonusers (10.4% vs 4.7%; P<.05). No differences were found between groups for married or
cohabiting, separated or divorced, or widowed military veterans.
|
|
|
|
Table 1. Demographics of the Studied Population*
|
|
|
Borderline significant findings were seen for CAM use and occupation.
Service (eg, cook or janitor) and "other" (eg, homemaker) categories were
collapsed to provide a larger sample size as the referent for occupation.
Service and other occupational categories had relatively equal numbers of
subjects among CAM users and nonusers. Owing to the small sample size, the
clerical category (10 CAM users and 2 nonusers) was combined with the "professional"
category for comparison with the referent. Analyses indicated a borderline
significant trend for CAM-using veterans to be more likely employed in professional
(eg, computer programmer) and clerical (predominantly bookkeeper and data
entry) positions (29% vs 21.5%: P<.10) and less
likely employed in trade (eg, carpenter, electrician, or mechanic) occupations
(20.6% vs 30.9%; P<.10).
There were no significant differences for sex, mean ± SD age
of CAM users (61.9 ± 13.9 years) and nonusers (62.7 ± 13.6 years),
or age by group (younger than 30, 31-49, 50-69, and 70 years and older). There
were no significant differences between CAM and non-CAM users for primary
care team at SAVAHCS or the Fort Huachuca, Yuma, Safford, or Casa Grande clinics.
Neither were there any distinctions between CAM and non-CAM users for provider
type (physician or nurse practitioner).
HEALTH BEHAVIORS
Health behaviors and lifestyle characteristics of military veterans
who do and do not use CAM are displayed in Table 2. Military veterans who endorsed current or past CAM use
were significantly less likely to drink more than 2 alcoholic beverages per
day (3.2% vs 9.4%; P<.01) or consume more than
2 servings of caffeine (eg, cola, tea, coffee, chocolate, or caffeine pills)
on a daily basis (44% vs 53.9%; P<.05) compared
with non-CAM users. Military veterans using CAM were also significantly less
likely to be current smokers (18.3% vs 25.8%; P<.05).
More CAM users reported engaging in 20 minutes of daily exercise 4 or more
times per week (OR, 1.28); however, this finding was not significant.
|
|
|
|
Table 2. Health Behaviors and Lifestyle Characteristics of the Studied
Population*
|
|
|
LIFESTYLE
Military veterans using CAM were significantly more likely to report
high levels of stress in their daily lives compared with nonusers (46.8% vs
34.1%; P<.01). Veterans using CAM were also more
likely to have requested help in making decisions about CAM use (47.2%) compared
with non-CAM users (3.1%) (P<.001).
When analyzing spiritual or religious preference, both users and nonusers
of CAM were proportionally represented in the Protestant category, which was
used as the referent for comparison with other religious or spiritual preferences.
Users of CAM were significantly less likely to be Catholic compared with nonusers
(18.3% vs 28.9%; P<.05). Other religious or spiritual
preferences were reported infrequently, but of those reporting Buddhist or
Jewish preferences, there were higher numbers of CAM users. There were no
significant differences in CAM use for any other religious or spiritual preferences.
Of the respondents, 28 (11.1%) declined to report their spiritual or religious
preference.
Of the military veterans who indicated political preference, 34.6% endorsed
Democrat, 31.1% endorsed Republican, and 27.5% endorsed Independent, Libertarian,
no preference, or "other." Owing to small sample sizes for each of the CAM
and non-CAM use cells, the Independent, Libertarian, no preference, and "other"
political preference categories were collapsed and used as the referent. In
separate analyses, there were no significant differences noted for Independent,
Libertarian, no preference, or "other" categories. Although CAM users were
more likely to endorse Republican (OR, 1.15) and less likely to endorse Democrat
(OR, 0.77), these findings were not significant. Seventeen participants (6.8%)
declined reporting their political preference. No significant differences
were noted for degree of political preference (ie, conservative, moderate,
or liberal) between military veterans who do and do not use CAM.
MILITARY EXPERIENCE
Data for military experience are described in Table 3. Military veterans who use CAM were significantly more likely
to indicate the perceptions that their military service negatively affected
both their physical (60.7%) and mental health (28.9%) compared with veterans
who do not use CAM (50.6% and 20.5%, respectively; each P<.05). Military veterans using CAM also indicated that their overseas
military experiences influenced their use of CAM compared with nonusers (10%
vs 2%; P<.01). There were no significant differences,
however, by branch of military service (Air Force, Army, Marines, Navy, Coast
Guard, or National Guard), or by overseas assignments (eg, Europe or Asia).
Nearly 53% of this military veteran sample reported being in combat during
their military career; however, there were no significant differences for
CAM use between veterans who reported combat experience.
|
|
|
|
Table 3. Associations Between CAM Use and Military Service*
|
|
|
PHYSICIAN-DIAGNOSED HEALTH COMPLAINTS
Physician-diagnosed health problems associated with veterans' CAM use
are outlined in Table 4. Veterans
using CAM were significantly more likely to have been diagnosed by a medical
physician for back pain (50.2%; P<.01), medication
allergies (38.6%; P<.01), depression (34.9%; P<.05), gastrointestinal disorders (34.3%; P<.05), generalized pain (26.5%; P<.05),
anxiety (23%; P<.01), problems with sleep onset
(18.4%) and sleep maintenance (16.5%) (each P<.05),
asthma (16.1%; P<.05), posttraumatic stress disorder
(15.9%; P<.05), liver problems (11.5%; P<.05), and chronic fatigue syndrome (4.7%; P<.05). Borderline significant findings were also noted for hay fever
(43.1%; P = .07) and any hernia (36.9%; P = .06). There were no significant differences noted between groups
for other chronic health complaints, including arthritis, any type of cancer,
diabetes, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, headaches, heart disease,
hypertension, kidney, prostate or urinary problems, seizures, skin problems
(eg, eczema), or substance abuse.
|
|
|
|
Table 4. Physician-Diagnosed Health Complaints and CAM Use*
|
|
|
LOGISTIC REGRESSION FINDINGS
Results of the backward elimination logistic regression with adjusted
ORs and 95% CIs revealed 4 significant predictors and 4 borderline significant
predictors of CAM use in this veteran sample. Significant predictors of CAM
use included non-Hispanic white ethnicity (OR, 2.24; 95% CI, 1.29-3.92; P = .004), higher education (OR, 1.67; 95% CI, 1.06-2.63; P = .03), higher current daily stress levels (OR, 1.64;
95% CI, 1.03-2.61; P = .04) and overseas military
experience (OR, 4.21; 95% CI, 1.37-12.93; P = .01).
Of borderline significance as predictors of CAM use were physician-diagnosed
gastrointestinal complaints (OR, 1.62; 95% CI, 0.98-2.69; P = 0.06), asthma (OR, 1.91; 95% CI, 0.93-3.93; P = 0.08), and chronic fatigue syndrome (OR, 6.95; 95% CI, 0.77-63.00; P = .09). The consumption of more than 2 alcoholic beverages
per day was inversely related to CAM use (OR, 0.41; 95% CI, 0.16-1.04; P = .06), a borderline significant finding.
COMMENT
To our knowledge, there has been no systematic assessment of CAM use
among military veterans using the services of the VA Health Care System's
VISN. This study provides a profile of CAM users in a military veteran population
enrolled in a VISN 18 health care facility and several satellite clinics located
throughout southern Arizona.
Prevalence rates for CAM use among US military veterans in this telephone
survey (49.6%) are consistent with findings in civilian populations in the
United States.3, 5-6,10, 18
Non-Hispanic white ethnicity,3, 5, 9
education,1, 3, 5-6,9
and greater representation in higher income brackets3, 6
are also consistent with civilian CAM users and the CAM-using veterans in
the present study. Findings from the logistic regression indicate that ethnicity
(non-Hispanic white) and higher education are significant demographic predictor
variables of CAM use in this military population. Based on the results of
the logistic regression, education appears to play a greater role than income
in CAM-using veterans' choice of health care. Notably, education beyond high
school has been the most consistent finding associated with CAM use.1, 3, 5-6,9
Indeed, consistent with our sample of military veterans, education was the
leading sociodemographic predictor of CAM use in a national survey.5 Prior studies have suggested that higher education
is associated with healthier lifestyles,20
and persons with higher education may view CAM as an adjunct to more healthful
behaviors. Several chronic health conditions were also shared between veteran
and civilian CAM users, including back pain, generalized pain, gastrointestinal
complaints, anxiety, insomnia, fatigue, allergies, and depression.3, 5-6,8-10
In the 1997 study by Eisenberg et al,3
national rates for CAM use ranged from 32% to 54%. Elder et al10
reported a 50% (57 of 113 subjects) prevalence rate for past or current CAM
use, one of the highest reported in the literature, in 4 civilian family practice
clinics located in Oregon. An early study of CAM use in cancer care reported
a 54% prevalence rate.21 The nearly 50% prevalence
rate for CAM use in our study of military veterans is notable compared with
the 28% prevalence rate for CAM use among active duty personnel, retired veterans,
and their dependents receiving care at an army family practice clinic.9 The higher self-reported rate of CAM use in our study
is also noteworthy in that the sample comprises older military veterans (mean
age, 62 years), who traditionally are thought of as very conservative.
There are several potential explanations for the higher rates of CAM
use in our sample of military veterans. Of note, both bivariate and multivariate
analyses indicated that overseas military experience was a significant predictor
of CAM use. Thus, higher rates of CAM use may be related to exposure to CAM
from overseas experiences, developing relationships with persons from other
cultures, or both. Furthermore, military bases in southern Arizona reportedly
sell common herbal remedies (eg, Echinacea, Gingko biloba, and stinging nettles) and nutritional supplements (eg, chondroitin
sulfate, glucosamine, and melatonin) at a substantial discount. Providers
of CAM and specific treatment modalities of alternative care are well advertised
and promoted on radio and television and in health food stores and fitness
centers in southern Arizona. A number of military veterans also reported knowledge
of the Program in Integrative Medicine at the University of Arizona. Use of
CAM has also been found to be more common in the western United States (50.1%)
than elsewhere in the United States (42.1%).3
Most CAM-using veterans in this study indicated that they sought help
with their decisions. As this was a dichotomized question, resources for decision
making were not available. A number of veterans who completed this telephone
interview (381 of 508), however, agreed to complete a more extensive CAM survey
that included resources for making decisions regarding CAM use. Interestingly,
friends, family, newspaper articles, and medical references were cited as
the leading resources for CAM information.22
There were no differences noted by age group (young, middle, older age)
between CAM users and nonusers in this sample of military veterans. This finding
parallels some,5, 10 but not all,
studies.3, 6, 9 One
possible reason for the heterogeneity of CAM use by age could be related to
differences in exposure to CAM. Of military veterans using CAM, 1 in 10 reported
being influenced by their overseas experiences. Other factors could include
reasons for use, beliefs regarding efficacy, insurance coverage relevant to
military veterans,23 and other issues that
should receive future scrutiny using in-depth measures and multivariate methods
of analysis to determine predictor variables.
Some,3, 9 but not all, studies5, 10 have also indicated that women report
more CAM use. The mean age for the veterans sample in this study was 62 years.
Thus, most of our population served when the military was primarily recruiting
men (ie, World War II, Korea, Vietnam), which could account for the small
number of randomly selected women participants recruited for this study. Future
studies of CAM use by military veterans should oversample women who served
from the time of the Persian Gulf War to the present to determine if sex plays
a significant role in CAM use on the part of women veterans.
Military veterans using CAM in this study shared a number of physician-diagnosed
health complaints with civilians, including chronic back and generalized pain,
gastrointestinal complaints, depression and anxiety, asthma, insomnia, and
fatigue.3, 5-6,8-10
Specifically, regression analysis indicated that gastrointestinal problems,
asthma, and chronic fatigue syndrome were of borderline significance and may
be predictors of CAM use in this veteran population. These complaints are
consistent with reasons for CAM use in civilian populations.
Two additional health conditions noted in our study of military veterans
that have not been documented in civilian studies include posttraumatic stress
disorder and medication allergies. Although over half of the military veterans
reported combat experience, which was not related to CAM use, the CAM-using
military veterans were significantly more likely to report physician-diagnosed
posttraumatic stress disorder. It has been reported elsewhere that military
veterans have poorer physical and mental health status scores on quality-of-life
measures as well as greater numbers of comorbid conditions compared with nonveterans.23 Future studies of military veterans should assess
more fully their combat experience in relation to potential combat-related
health problems, such as posttraumatic stress disorder, in conjunction with
CAM modalities that the veteran may be using. This is of particular relevance
given that veterans who believed that their military service negatively affected
their physical and mental health were more likely to report CAM use.
Military veterans who said they used CAM also reported more medication
allergies, such as untoward adverse effects and/or sensitivities to narcotic
analgesics, antibiotics, or multiple drug regimens. A study of California
Medicare recipients, primarily aged between 65 and 85 years, found that CAM
was used by these elderly recipients owing, in part, to fear of drug adverse
effects.6 Interestingly, in a qualitative focus
group study of military veterans and their significant others, drug adverse
effects, prescription drug monitoring, and distrust of the pharmaceutical
industry were leading reasons for active duty and retired veterans, and their
dependents to turn to CAM.24 Given that military
veterans in the present study are older, they are also more likely to be receiving
several medications for multiple health problems. Future studies that incorporate
older veterans will need to distinguish further between "medication allergies"
and concerns regarding drug adverse effects.
There are several limitations to this study. The telephone interview
included only 1 dichotomized question regarding current and/or past use of
CAM and did not associate health complaints with specific CAM modalities.
To reduce subject burden during the telephone interview and simultaneously
determine whether participants were familiar with or used CAM, we limited
CAM items to 2 questions regarding the (1) use of CAM and (2) if there was
any help in decision making regarding CAM use. Other studies have used a similar
dichotomized question to describe differences between CAM users and nonusers
with results similar to our study.9-10
To further reduce subject burden, we did not query participants as to whether
they told their primary care provider about their CAM use, nor were they asked
about their level of satisfaction regarding their conventional and/or CAM
care. The intent was to provide a description of CAM use among a large sample
of veterans in the Southwest, and questions focused on CAM use, military service,
and service-related health complaints. Nevertheless, future, more expansive
studies regarding military veterans' use of CAM should address which specific
CAM modalities are used for specific health complaints to make additional
comparisons with civilian CAM users. Future studies should also determine
whether veterans inform their providers of their CAM use, as well as veterans'
satisfaction with their conventional and/or CAM care. This kind of information
could assist in enhancing patient-provider communication, thereby improving
health care delivery.
There was also potential for methodological drift in the implementation
of this study. The first 500 participants were organized on telephone contact
lists according to primary care team, while the second set of 613 subjects
was randomized prior to telephone contact using a set of computer-generated
random numbers. There were no significant differences, however, in the numbers
of CAM users and nonusers recruited from the SAVAHCS primary care teams or
the satellite clinics, which suggests that there was no resultant bias in
subject recruitment.
Studies in the United States and Europe have recently assessed associations
between CAM use and religious or spiritual and political preferences.7, 14 While our study did address these
preferences, we did not investigate the role that religion, spirituality,
or politics may play in CAM use, access to CAM, or health care. These issues
are of relevance to CAM and should be assessed more appropriately in future
studies of CAM use by veterans. Finally, the cross-sectional nature of this
study cannot imply a cause-and-effect relationship between the dependent and
independent variables. The present descriptive survey, however, is a precursor
to a larger empirical CAM study that will examine the relationship between
a number of predictor variables, such as quality of life, mood, and experiences
with conventional care to use of specific CAM modalities.
CONCLUSIONS
Separate from any limitations inherent in the present study, the findings
provide a number of contributions to our understanding of CAM use by US military
veterans in the Southwest. Prevalence rates for use of CAM in this sample
of military veterans are at the high end of use reported in civilian studies.
Demographics and health complaints between these CAM-using military veterans
and civilian users of CAM are also similar. However, given their military
experiences, this sample of military veterans comes with an additional set
of health issues. Veterans' benefits, including health coverage, are dependent
on their years of military service, combat action, and other criteria.23 Hence, some military veterans may receive partial
or full health care at the VA, while other military veterans may receive conventional
care outside the VA system. Health complaints voiced by military veterans
and mirrored in civilian samples are long-term and have been difficult for
conventional medicine to treat.8 This could
be a motivating factor for military veterans in the present study to endorse
seeking alternative care, as reported in civilian samples.1, 3, 5-6,8
Despite, or because of, CAM-using military veterans' perceived poorer
physical and mental health incurred by military service, as well their reported
higher daily stress levels, CAM users were noted to be more likely to engage
in health-promoting behaviors compared with their non-CAM–using cohorts.
Military veterans who endorsed CAM use were less likely to smoke or use alcohol
or caffeine. Notably, logistic regression modeling showed higher daily stress
to be a significant predictor of CAM use, yet these CAM-using veterans appear
less likely to report turning to alcohol in dealing with stress, a borderline
significant finding.
These health-promoting behaviors can be utilized to benefit further
CAM-using military veterans by integrating these behaviors into their medical
regimen in the conventional medical setting. A recent national survey indicated
that patients who combine both conventional and CAM approaches are less concerned
with physician disapproval of CAM use and more concerned with the physician's
inability to understand or incorporate CAM within the context of health care.25 It is important for physicians to become aware of
military veterans' CAM use as a potential adjunct to conventional care, whether
they are seen in or outside of the VA health care system. It is equally important
to recognize and understand the unique circumstances and experiences that
CAM-using military veterans bring into the physician's office, in view of
the fact that military veterans may be seeking conventional care for the very
reasons that they are using CAM.
AUTHOR INFORMATION
Accepted for publication December 18, 2001.
This study was funded by grant PCC98-033 from the VA Health Services
Research and Development and in part by grants AT00315-02 from the National
Institutes of Health National Center on Complementary and Alternative Medicine
(Dr Bell) and Cooperative Agreement Supplement U01HL53938-07 from the National
Institutes of Health National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (Dr Baldwin).
This study was presented as a poster at the jointly sponsored University
of California at San Francisco School of Medicine and the Harvard University
School of Medicine International Conference on Complementary, Alternative
and Integrative Medicine Research, San Francisco, Calif, May 17-19, 2001.
We wish to gratefully acknowledge the assistance of Maureen Lifton,
Maureen P. Kelly, MPH, Danelle Wallace, BS, and Tanya Grudniewski in the collection
of the telephone data, as well as the SAVAHCS librarians Lynn Flance, MLA,
and Karen Douglas, MLA, for their literature search support. We wish to thank
the SAVAHCS Health Services Research and Development staff and the Research
Services staff for their assistance throughout this study. We also wish to
commend the participants who made this study possible. Sincere appreciation
is extended to Stefano Guerra, MD, MPH, Research Specialist, and Margaret
Kurzius-Spencer, MPH, Research Specialist, University of Arizona Respiratory
Center, for their statistical assistance, as well as their reviews of the
data and manuscript.
Corresponding author: Carol M. Baldwin RN, PhD, HNC, University of
Arizona, Department of Medicine, 1501 N Campbell Ave, Tucson, AZ 85724-5030
(e-mail: carolb{at}resp-sci.arizona.edu).
From the Southern Arizona Veterans Administration Health Care Services
Research Service Line (Drs Baldwin, Kroesen, Brooks, and Bell and Ms Long);
and the Departments of Medicine (Drs Baldwin and Bell), Psychology (Drs Baldwin,
Brooks, and Bell), Psychiatry (Dr Bell), and Family and Community Medicine
(Dr Bell), Arizona Respiratory Center (Dr Baldwin), and the Program in Integrative
Medicine (Dr Bell), University of Arizona, Tucson.
REFERENCES
| |
1. Eisenberg DM, Kessler RC, Foster C, Norlock FE, Calkins DR, Delbanco TL. Unconventional medicine in the United States: prevalence, costs, and
patterns of use. N Engl J Med. 1993;328:246-252.
FREE FULL TEXT
2. Kaptchuk TJ, Eisenberg DM. Varieties of healing, II: a taxonomy of unconventional healing practices. Ann Intern Med. 2001;135:196-204.
FREE FULL TEXT
3. Eisenberg DM, Davis RB, Ettner SL, et al. Trends in alternative medicine use in the United States, 1990-1997:
results of a follow-up national survey. JAMA. 1998;280:1569-1575.
FREE FULL TEXT
4. Kessler RC, Davis RB, Foster DF, et al. Long-term trends in the use of complementary and alternative medical
therapies in the United States. Ann Intern Med. 2001;135:262-268.
FREE FULL TEXT
5. Astin JA. Why patients use alternative medicine: results of a national study. JAMA. 1998;279:1548-1553.
FREE FULL TEXT
6. Astin JA, Pelletier KR, Marie A, Haskell WL. Complementary and alternative medicine use among elderly persons: one-year
analysis of a Blue Shield Medicare supplement. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci. 2000;55:M4-M9.
7. Barrett B, Marchand L, Scheder J, Appelbaum D, Chapman M, Jacobs C. Bridging the gap between conventional and alternative medicine. J Fam Pract. 2000;49:234-239.
ISI
| PUBMED
8. Chez RA, Jonas WB. The challenge of complementary and alternative medicine. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1997;177:1156-1161.
FULL TEXT
|
ISI
| PUBMED
9. Drivdahl CE, Miser WF. The use of alternative health care by a family practice population. J Am Board Fam Pract. 1998;11:193-199.
ABSTRACT
10. Elder NC, Gillcrist A, Minz R. Use of alternative health care by family practice patients. Arch Fam Med. 1997;6:181-184.
FREE FULL TEXT
11. Owens JE, Taylor AG, Degood D. Complementary and alternative medicine and psychologic factors: toward
an individual differences model of complementary and alternative medicine
use and outcomes. J Altern Complement Med. 1999;5:529-541.
ISI
| PUBMED
12. Verhoef MJ, Russell ML, Love EJ. Alternative medicine use in rural Alberta. Can J Public Health. 1994;85:308-309.
ISI
| PUBMED
13. Fulder SJ, Munro RE. Complementary medicine in the United Kingdom: practitioners and consultations. Lancet. 1985;2:542-545.
FULL TEXT
|
ISI
| PUBMED
14. Furnham A, Forey J. The attitudes, behaviors and beliefs of patients of conventional vs
complementary (alternative) medicine. J Clin Psychol. 1994;50:458-469.
ISI
| PUBMED
15. Vincent C, Furnham A. Why do patients turn to complementary medicine? an empirical study. Br J Clin Psychol. 1996;35:37-48.
16. MacLennan AH, Wilson DH, Taylor AW. Prevalence and cost of alternative medicine in Australia. Lancet. 1996;347:569-573.
FULL TEXT
|
ISI
| PUBMED
17. Siahpush M. Why do people favour alternative medicine? Aust N Z J Public Health. 1999;23:266-271.
ISI
| PUBMED
18. Landmark Healthcare. The Landmark Report: Public Perception of Alternative
Care. Sacramento, Calif: Landmark Healthcare; 1998.
19. Blais R, Maiga A, Aboubacar A. How different are users and non-users of alternative medicine? Can J Public Health. 1997;88:159-162.
ISI
| PUBMED
20. Gallant MP, Dorn GP. Gender and race differences in the predictors of daily health practices
among older adults. Health Educ Res. 2001;16:21-31.
FREE FULL TEXT
21. Cassileth BR, Lusk EJ, Strouse TB, Bodenheimer BJ. Contemporary unorthodox treatments in cancer medicine. Ann Intern Med. 1984;101:105-112.
22. Baldwin CM, Long K, Kroesen KW, Brooks AJ, Lifton M, Bell IR. Reasons and resources for veterans' complementary and alternative medicine
use [abstract]. Altern Ther Health Med. 2001;7:S3.
23. Kazis LE, Miller DR, Clark J, et al. Health-related quality of life in patients served by the Department
of Veterans Affairs. Arch Intern Med. 1998;158:626-632.
FREE FULL TEXT
24. Kroesen K, Baldwin CM, Brooks AJ, Bell IR. US military veterans' perceptions of the conventional medical care
system and their use of complementary and alternative medicine. Fam Pract. 2002;19:57-64.
FREE FULL TEXT
25. Eisenberg DM, Kessler RC, Van Rompay MI, et al. Perceptions about complementary therapies relative to conventional
therapies among adults who use both: results from a national survey. Ann Intern Med. 2001;135:344-351.
FREE FULL TEXT
 CiteULike  Connotea  Del.icio.us  Digg  Reddit  Technorati  Twitter
What's this?
THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES
Efficacy of Frequent Mantram Repetition on Stress, Quality of Life, and Spiritual Well-Being in Veterans: A Pilot Study
Bormann et al.
J Holist Nurs 2005;23:395-414.
ABSTRACT
The Use of Complementary and Alternative Medicine Among California Adults With and Without Cancer
Goldstein et al.
Evid Based Complement Alternat Med 2005;2:557-565.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Biofeedback Treatment for Asthma
Lehrer et al.
Chest 2004;126:352-361.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
|
