The demographics and economics of complementary alternative medicine

Abstract

Limitations of data in regard to complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) concern the tendency to lump types of CAM into broad areas and the lack of strong scientific evidence. Insurance benefit coverage is limited often to two or three types of CAM and is often consumer driven. Scientific evidence is used to justify noncoverage. Americans still are paying a large portion out-of pocket for CAM. Traditional medicine practitioners may find it difficult to recommend CAM treatments to patients given the cost,concern for quality control, side effects, and quality of scientific evidence.Regardless, consumers will continue to use CAM, particularly in chronic conditions, in which patients struggle to find any treatment that may cure their condition or improve their quality of life. Greater study of CAM is needed to determine efficacy, side effects, and cost-effectiveness of appropriate CAM treatments to increase.