Author:
Sasaki Yui,Park Jeong-Su,Park Sunju,Cheon Chunhoo,Shin Yong-Cheol,Ko Seong-Gyu,Jang Bo-Hyoung
Abstract
Abstract
Background
In Korea, conventional medicine (CM) and traditional Korean medicine (KM) are run as a dual healthcare system; however, the backgrounds and characteristics of the users of both medical services have not yet been compared. This study aimed to identify the differences in factors determining the use of CM and KM health services.
Methods
A secondary data analysis of a nationwide cross-sectional survey was conducted in this study. The Survey on the Experience with Healthcare Services 2017 asked participants about their most recent outpatient visit to a health service. Initially, a descriptive analysis was performed on respondents who visited the CM or KM health service in the last 12 months. Then, logistic regression analysis using Andersen’s behavioral model was performed, to identify the factors affecting health service selection, by classifying demographic variables into predisposing, enabling, and need factors. Respondents who replied they did not frequently use CM/KM and those with missing data were excluded.
Results
Of the total 11,098 respondents, 7,116 (64.1%) reported to have used CM/KM: 2,034 (18.3%), 4,475 (40.3%), and 607 (5.5%) for hospital CM, clinic CM, and KM, respectively. In logistic regression analysis, of the 2,723 (24.5%) respondents analyzed, 822 (7.4%) went to a hospital, 1,689 (15.2%) to a clinic, and 212 (1.9%) opted for KM service. Respondents with a higher number of chronic diseases were less likely to use KM (one disease, odds ratio: 0.52, 95% confidence interval: 0.36–0.76; two diseases: 0.51, 0.31–0.85; three to five diseases: 0.26, 0.10–0.69). Respondents with a high income were likely to go to the hospital (4Q vs. 1Q: 1.92, 1.35–2.72) and less likely to go to the clinic (4Q vs. 1Q: 0.49, 0.35–0.68).
Conclusions
Significant differences were observed on the enabling factor (income) for CM and need factors (number of chronic diseases) for KM. Our analysis suggests that through the healthcare policy, we should consider stratifying user backgrounds and needs for each medical service.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Complementary and alternative medicine
Reference17 articles.
1. Ministry of Health and Welfare, National Development Institute of Korean Medicine. Report on Usage and Consumption of Korean Medicine 2017; Basic report (for citizens). https://www.koms.or.kr/board/researchReport/view.do?post_no=45&menu_no=21. Accessed 23 Jan 2022. [In Korean]
2. Korea Institute of Oriental Medicine, Korea Oriental Medicine Association, Korean Traditional Medicine Foundation, Graduate School of Oriental Medicine, Pusan National University. 2018 Year Book of Traditional Korean Medicine. Daejeon Korea. https://www.kiom.re.kr/brdartcl/boardarticleView.do?menu_nix=WUNNW2Aq&brd_id=BDIDX_o9YEVvNb40b134N1Rt17aq&cont_idx=9. Accessed 23 Jan 2022. [In Korean]
3. Kim D, Lim B, Kim C. Relationship between patient satisfaction with medical doctors and the use of traditional Korean medicine in Korea. BMC Complement Altern Med. 2015;15:355.
4. Park JE., Kwon S. Determinants of the utilization of oriental medical services by the elderly. J Korean Oriental Med. 2011;32:97–108. [In Korean, English abstract].
5. Choi JH, Kang S, You CH, Kwon YD. The determinants of choosing traditional Korean medicine or conventional medicine: findings from the Korea Health Panel. Evid Based Complement Alternat Med. 2015;2015:147408.