Complementary medicine for the management of knee and hip osteoarthritis - A patient perspective.

Kim C, Stebbings S, Sundberg T, Munk N, Lauche R, Ward L. Complementary medicine for the management of knee and hip osteoarthritis - A patient perspective. Musculoskeletal care. 2020 Mar 1; 18(1):53-63.

Dimensions for VA is a web-based tool available to VA staff that enables detailed searches of published research and research projects.

If you have VA-Intranet access, click here for more information vaww.hsrd.research.va.gov/dimensions/

VA staff not currently on the VA network can access Dimensions by registering for an account using their VA email address.    Search Dimensions for VA for this citation
* Don't have VA-internal network access or a VA email address? Try searching the free-to-the-public version of Dimensions

Search for Abstract from PubMed

---

Abstract:

BACKGROUND: Complementary medicines and therapies (CMT) are recommended in osteoarthritis (OA) treatment guidelines; however, there are few studies on CMT use in the community. The present study explored the use and perceptions of CMT for OA management in a New Zealand population. METHODS: Nineteen middle- to older-aged adults with hip or knee OA, recruited from a public hospital research database, engaged in focus groups exploring CMT knowledge, factors influencing CMT use, and the role of medical professionals in the decision-making process. Participants were organized into four groups, further to explore the impact of age or OA duration on CMT use. RESULTS: Thematic analysis resulted in five themes, consistent across all groups: participants' perceptions of CMT; reasons for taking CMT; reasons for not taking CMT; sources and credibility of CMT information; and medical professionals' role in CMT use. Participants indicated a range of CMT use, yet were unclear what defined a product as 'CMT'. CMT use was influenced by symptom severity, previous experiences of themselves or trusted others, and perceived CMT effectiveness. General practitioners were identified as participants' preferred source of CMT information, owing to both their professional knowledge and lack of commercial gain from promoting CMT use. CONCLUSION: Participants supported CMT for OA management, based on evidence and/or experience of effectiveness. Proactive general practitioner dialogue and subsidized CMT products recommended as part of a clinical treatment plan would encourage further CMT uptake. Additionally, the development of standardized CMT terminology would facilitate patient-doctor communication regarding CMT use and promote inter-professional dialogue regarding multidisciplinary patient treatment.