Skip to main content
. 2003 Jul;93(7):1079–1080. doi: 10.2105/ajph.93.7.1079

TABLE 2—

Results of Multinomial Regression for Degree of Mobility Limitation, by Use of Complementary and Alternative Medicine: United States, 1999a

Relative Risk Ratiob (SE)
Mobility Function (With ICF Codes) and Degree of Limitation Did Not Use Any CAM Used CAM, but Not Prayer Used Prayer With or Without Other CAM
Changing and maintaining body position (ICF a410–a415)
    No limitation 1.00 0.52 (0.03) 0.49 (0.02)
    Mild–moderate limitation 1.00 2.13 (0.13) 2.07 (0.11)
    Severe–complete limitation 1.00 1.66 (0.12) 1.96 (0.12)
Carrying, moving, and handling objects (ICF a430–a449)
    No limitation 1.00 0.59 (0.03) 0.53 (0.03)
    Mild–moderate limitation 1.00 1.89 (0.13) 1.97 (0.13)
    Severe–complete limitation 1.00 1.44 (0.11) 1.81 (0.12)
Walking and moving around (ICF a450–a455)
    No limitation 1.00 0.92 (0.06) 0.71 (0.04)
    Mild–moderate limitation 1.00 1.15 (0.09) 1.33 (0.09)
    Severe–complete limitation 1.00 1.00 (0.09) 1.52 (0.11)

Note. CAM = complementary and alternative medicine; ICF = International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health.

aOther variables in models were sex (male, female), race and Hispanic origin (non-Hispanic White, Hispanic, non-Hispanic Black, Other), change in health in the past 12 months (better, same, worse), and age (18–24, 25–34, 35–44, 45–54, 55–64, and 65 years and older).

bRelative risk ratios are significantly different from the reference category (P < .05, 2-tailed test) unless italicized. In no case are the relative risk ratios for different degrees of limitation significantly different from each other.