Abstract
Complementary therapy (CT) has become increasingly popular with the general public and interest from the health professions has been rising. There has been no study focusing on the pattern of availability of CT within urban and inner-city general practice. We aimed to describe the prevalence and pattern of access to complementary therapy in this setting, identifying the characteristics of practices offering CT and the perceived barriers to service provision. We sent a postal questionnaire to all 254 general practices on the Birmingham Family Health Services Authority list. Practices were asked whether they offered any access to CTs, how services were organized and which therapies were available and to identify any barriers to provision. 175 practices (68.9%) responded. Half of the practices offered access to CT. Of these, half offered an in-house service, usually provided by the doctor (81.8%). Of GPs practising therapies themselves, 58% began in or after 1990. Seventeen separate therapies were offered, most commonly acupuncture, osteopathy, chiropractic, hypnotherapy and homoeopathy. Practices significantly more likely to offer access to CT were of larger list size and training or teaching practices. They were equally likely to be fundholders or non-fundholders. Practices offering an in-house service tended to be fundholding, training and of larger list size. Finance was perceived as the major barrier. In the area studied, many patients now have some access to CT within primary care, often within their own practice. In the main, therapies offered are the 'medically acceptable face' of complementary medicine.
Full text
PDF
Selected References
These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.
- Anderson E., Anderson P. General practitioners and alternative medicine. J R Coll Gen Pract. 1987 Feb;37(295):52–55. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Brewin T. B. Fraternizing with fringe medicine. Br J Gen Pract. 1994 Jun;44(383):243–244. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Murray J., Shepherd S. Alternative or additional medicine? An exploratory study in general practice. Soc Sci Med. 1993 Oct;37(8):983–988. doi: 10.1016/0277-9536(93)90432-4. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Paterson C. Complementary medicine. Br J Gen Pract. 1996 Jul;46(408):440–440. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Paterson C. Complementary practitioners as part of the primary health care team: consulting patterns, patient characteristics and patient outcomes. Fam Pract. 1997 Oct;14(5):347–354. doi: 10.1093/fampra/14.5.347. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Paterson C., Peacock W. Complementary practitioners as part of the primary health care team: evaluation of one model. Br J Gen Pract. 1995 May;45(394):255–258. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Perkin M. R., Pearcy R. M., Fraser J. S. A comparison of the attitudes shown by general practitioners, hospital doctors and medical students towards alternative medicine. J R Soc Med. 1994 Sep;87(9):523–525. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Peters D., Davies P., Pietroni P. Musculoskeletal clinic in general practice: study of one year's referrals. Br J Gen Pract. 1994 Jan;44(378):25–29. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Salinsky J., Jenkins G. C. Counselling in general practice. Br J Gen Pract. 1994 May;44(382):194–195. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Thomas K. J., Carr J., Westlake L., Williams B. T. Use of non-orthodox and conventional health care in Great Britain. BMJ. 1991 Jan 26;302(6770):207–210. doi: 10.1136/bmj.302.6770.207. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- White A. R., Resch K. L., Ernst E. Complementary medicine: use and attitudes among GPs. Fam Pract. 1997 Aug;14(4):302–306. doi: 10.1093/fampra/14.4.302. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]