<?xml version='1.0' encoding='UTF-8'?><xml><records><record><source-app name="HighWire" version="7.x">Drupal-HighWire</source-app><ref-type name="Journal Article">17</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Kanodia, Anup K.</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Legedza, Anna T. R.</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Davis, Roger B.</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Eisenberg, David M.</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Phillips, Russell S.</style></author></authors><secondary-authors></secondary-authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Perceived Benefit of Complementary and Alternative Medicine (CAM) for Back Pain: A National Survey</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">The Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine</style></secondary-title></titles><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2010</style></year><pub-dates><date><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2010-05-01 00:00:00</style></date></pub-dates></dates><pages><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">354-362</style></pages><doi><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">10.3122/jabfm.2010.03.080252</style></doi><volume><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">23</style></volume><issue><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">3</style></issue><abstract><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Background: Complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) is commonly used to treat back pain, but little is known about factors associated with improvement.Methods: We used data from the 2002 National Health Interview Survey to examine the associations between the perceived helpfulness of various CAM therapies for back pain.Results: Approximately 6% of the US population used CAM to treat their back pain in 2002. Sixty percent of respondents who used CAM for back pain perceived a “great deal” of benefit. Using multivariable logistic regression, the factor associated with perceived benefit from CAM modalities was reporting that a reason for using CAM was that “conventional medical treatment would not help” (odds ratio [OR], 1.46; 95% CI, 1.14–1.86). The 2 factors associated with less perceived benefit from CAM modalities were fair to poor self-reported health status (OR, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.41–0.82) and referral by a conventional medical practitioner for CAM (OR, 0.7; 95% CI, 0.54–0.92). Using chiropractic as a reference, massage (OR, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.46–0.83), relaxation techniques (OR, 0.25; 95% CI, 0.14–0.45), and herbal therapy (OR, 0.3; 95% CI, 0.19–0.46) were all associated with less perceived benefit whereas those with similar perceived benefit included yoga/tai chi/qi gong (OR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.41–1.22) and acupuncture (OR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.37–1.38).Conclusions: The majority of respondents who used CAM for back pain perceived benefit. Specific factors and therapies associated with perceived benefit warrant further investigation.</style></abstract></record></records></xml>