dc.contributor.author
Jeitler, Michael
dc.contributor.author
Ortiz, Miriam
dc.contributor.author
Brinkhaus, Benno
dc.contributor.author
Sigl, Mike
dc.contributor.author
Hoffmann, Rasmus
dc.contributor.author
Trübner, Miriam
dc.contributor.author
Michalsen, Andreas
dc.contributor.author
Wischnewsky, Manfred
dc.contributor.author
Kessler, Christian S.
dc.date.accessioned
2025-07-21T14:44:55Z
dc.date.available
2025-07-21T14:44:55Z
dc.identifier.uri
https://refubium.fu-berlin.de/handle/fub188/48298
dc.identifier.uri
http://dx.doi.org/10.17169/refubium-48021
dc.description.abstract
Background: Older representative surveys show that Traditional, Complementary and Integrative Medicine (TCIM) is used by about 60% of the German population. However, no data exists for the current nationwide situation. The main aim of this cross-sectional study is to investigate the current use and acceptance of TCIM in Germany.
Methods: This study is based on a representative sample of the German population aged 18–75 years. Participants were asked about the use and acceptance of TCIM. The survey was conducted online using Computer Assisted Web Interview (CAWI) in 2022 by three renowned German market research institutes on behalf of and in close coordination with the working group. The data set was analyzed descriptively and inferentially.
Results: In total, 4,065 participants (52% female, 48% male, 0.4% diverse) responded completely (response rate: 21.5%). Among participants, 70% stated that they had used TCIM at some point in their lives, with 32% doing so in the last 12 months and 18% currently. The most common reason given (17%) was musculoskeletal pain. For their own health, 39% stated that TCIM is important. Traditional European Medicine was rated as very/mainly effective by 27% of participants and as partly effective by 44% (conventional medicine: 69% very/mainly effective, 19% partly effective). As a complementary treatment strategy to conventional medicine, 35% considered TCIM to be optimal (“Complementary Medicine”), 33% in combination with conventional medicine (“Integrative Medicine”) and 5% without conventional medicine (“Alternative Medicine”). The majority of the participants were in favor of more research on TCIM and stated that the costs of TCIM services should be covered by health insurance companies (71% and 69%, respectively).
Conclusion: These results from a representative online-population suggest that the use of TCIM in Germany remains at a high level. The nationwide relevance of TCIM should be given greater consideration in German health care policy making. TCIM should be systematically investigated using appropriate study designs and methods including high quality randomized clinical trials to investigate their effectiveness, efficacy, therapeutic safety and costs in the future.
en
dc.rights.uri
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
dc.subject
traditional medicine
en
dc.subject
traditional European medicine
en
dc.subject
complementary medicine
en
dc.subject
integrative medicine
en
dc.subject
alternative medicine
en
dc.subject
online-representative
en
dc.subject
cross-sectional study
en
dc.subject
Naturheilkunde
en
dc.subject.ddc
600 Technik, Medizin, angewandte Wissenschaften::610 Medizin und Gesundheit::610 Medizin und Gesundheit
dc.title
Use and acceptance of traditional, complementary and integrative medicine in Germany—an online representative cross-sectional study
dc.type
Wissenschaftlicher Artikel
dcterms.bibliographicCitation.articlenumber
1372924
dcterms.bibliographicCitation.doi
10.3389/fmed.2024.1372924
dcterms.bibliographicCitation.journaltitle
Frontiers in Medicine
dcterms.bibliographicCitation.originalpublishername
Frontiers Media SA
dcterms.bibliographicCitation.volume
11
refubium.affiliation
Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin
refubium.resourceType.isindependentpub
no
dcterms.accessRights.openaire
open access
dcterms.bibliographicCitation.pmid
38545512
dcterms.isPartOf.eissn
2296-858X