1
European Centre on Health of Societies in Transition, London School of
Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, 15-17 Tavistock Place, London WC1H 9SH,
UK
2 Stockholm Centre on Health of Societies in Transition (SCOHOST), Södertörn University, Huddinge 141 89, Sweden
3 European Observatory on Health System and Policies, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, 15-17 Tavistock Place, London, WC1H 9SH, UK
2 Stockholm Centre on Health of Societies in Transition (SCOHOST), Södertörn University, Huddinge 141 89, Sweden
3 European Observatory on Health System and Policies, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, 15-17 Tavistock Place, London, WC1H 9SH, UK
BMC Complementary and Alternative Medicine 2013, 13:83
doi:10.1186/1472-6882-13-83
The electronic version of this article is the complete one and can be found online at: http://www.biomedcentral.com/1472-6882/13/83
The electronic version of this article is the complete one and can be found online at: http://www.biomedcentral.com/1472-6882/13/83
| Received: | 22 September 2012 |
| Accepted: | 19 March 2013 |
| Published: | 11 April 2013 |
© 2013 Stickley et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Abstract
Background
Research suggests that since the collapse of the Soviet Union there has been a sharp
growth in the use of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) in some former Soviet
countries. However, as yet, comparatively little is known about the use of CAM in
the countries throughout this region. Against this background, the aim of the current
study was to determine the prevalence of using alternative (folk) medicine practitioners
in eight countries of the former Soviet Union (fSU) and to examine factors associated
with their use.
Methods
Data were obtained from the Living Conditions, Lifestyles and Health (LLH) survey
undertaken in eight former Soviet countries (Armenia, Belarus, Georgia, Kazakhstan,
Kyrgyzstan, Moldova, Russia and Ukraine) in 2001. In this nationally representative
cross-sectional survey, 18428 respondents were asked about how they treated 10 symptoms,
with options including the use of alternative (folk) medicine practitioners. Multivariate
logistic regression analysis was used to determine the factors associated with the
treatment of differing symptoms by such practitioners in these countries.
Results
The prevalence of using an alternative (folk) medicine practitioner for symptom treatment
varied widely between countries, ranging from 3.5% in Armenia to 25.0% in Kyrgyzstan.
For nearly every symptom, respondents living in rural locations were more likely to
use an alternative (folk) medicine practitioner than urban residents. Greater wealth
was also associated with using these practitioners, while distrust of doctors played
a role in the treatment of some symptoms.
Conclusions
The widespread use of alternative (folk) medicine practitioners in some fSU countries
and the growth of this form of health care provision in the post-Soviet period in
conditions of variable licensing and regulation, highlights the urgent need for more
research on this phenomenon and its potential effects on population health in the
countries in this region.
