Related Experiment Videos
Use of complementary treatment by those hospitalised with acute illness
1Division of General Paediatrics, Starship Children's Health, Auckland Healthcare Limited, Department of Paediatrics, School of Medicine, University of Auckland, New Zealand.
Insights
Complementary treatments are used by 18% of hospitalised children, often alongside conventional care. This complementary treatment did not significantly impact clinical outcomes for common acute childhood illnesses.
Area of Science:
- Pediatric Medicine
- Complementary and Alternative Medicine
- Health Services Research
Background:
- Complementary treatments are increasingly used by pediatric patients.
- Understanding the utilization and impact of these therapies in hospitalized children is crucial.
Purpose of the Study:
- To determine the frequency of complementary treatment use in hospitalized children.
- To assess the impact of complementary treatment on clinical outcomes in this population.
Main Methods:
- A population-based random sample of children admitted to a general pediatric service was studied.
- Data were collected through parent interviews and medical record reviews.
- Eligibility included children with common acute illnesses like asthma, pneumonia, and gastroenteritis.
Main Results:
- 18% of enrolled children received complementary treatment during their hospital stay.
- Children receiving complementary treatment were more likely to have received prescribed medications prior to hospitalization.
- No significant differences were observed in illness severity, investigations, treatments, or length of stay between users and non-users.
Conclusions:
- A significant proportion of hospitalized children utilize complementary treatments as an adjunct to conventional care.
- Complementary treatment use did not demonstrate a significant effect on clinical outcomes for common acute pediatric illnesses.
- Further research may explore patient-reported outcomes and specific complementary modalities.
Aim:
To determine the frequency of use of complementary treatment and measure its impact on clinical outcomes in a hospitalised general paediatric population.
Methods:
A population based random sample of children admitted to the general paediatric service at a metropolitan children's hospital in Auckland, New Zealand from February to July 1998. Children with asthma, pneumonia, bronchiolitis, gastroenteritis, or fever were eligible. Data collected by personal interview with parents and by review of the medical records of these children.
Results:
251 of 511 eligible children admitted during the study period were enrolled. Forty four children (18%) had received complementary treatment during the hospitalising illness. Most children (77%) had been seen in primary care before hospitalisation. The proportion that were seen in primary care and the number of primary care visits before hospitalisation did not vary with receipt of complementary treatment. The proportion of children who were prescribed medications before hospitalisation was significantly greater for those who had received complementary treatment compared with those who had not (59% v 39%). There was no significant difference between users and non-users of complementary treatment in the severity of the illness at presentation, investigations performed, treatment administered, or length of inpatient stay.
Conclusion:
A substantial proportion of children hospitalised with acute medical illnesses have received complementary treatment. Alternative health care is used as an adjunct rather than an alternative to conventional health care. Receipt of complementary treatment has no significant effect on clinical outcomes for children hospitalised with common acute medical illnesses.