An International Comparison of Attitudes Toward Traditional and Modern Medicine in a Chinese and an American Clinic Setting
2011

Comparing Attitudes Toward Traditional and Modern Medicine in China and the US

Sample size: 255 publication Evidence: moderate

Author Information

Author(s): Adam Burke, Tony Kuo, Rick Harvey, Jun Wang

Primary Institution: Institute for Holistic Health Studies, San Francisco State University

Hypothesis

Patients from the United States and Mainland China would be similar in terms of biological characteristics and presenting complaints, but would differ in their attitudes toward traditional and allopathic medicine.

Conclusion

Patients in both countries reported higher satisfaction and perceived efficacy with traditional medicine compared to allopathic medicine.

Supporting Evidence

  • Patients in the US reported lower satisfaction with allopathic medicine compared to patients in China.
  • Musculoskeletal issues were the most common complaints in the US, while Chinese patients used TM for a wider range of conditions.
  • Both groups were more satisfied with traditional medicine than with allopathic medicine.

Takeaway

People in the US and China both like traditional medicine more than regular medicine, and they feel it works better for them.

Methodology

Data were collected from 128 patients in China and 127 patients in the US using a 28-item questionnaire at two traditional medicine clinics.

Potential Biases

Patients may have been culturally predisposed to TM, affecting their satisfaction and perceived efficacy.

Limitations

The samples were small, non-random, self-selected, and data were collected at comprehensive TM clinics, which may bias the results.

Participant Demographics

US participants were predominantly White and female, while Chinese participants were 100% Asian and more likely to be married.

Statistical Information

P-Value

P = .031 for initial AM treatment, P = .006 for continued AM treatment.

Statistical Significance

p<0.05

Digital Object Identifier (DOI)

10.1093/ecam/nen065

Want to read the original?

Access the complete publication on the publisher's website

View Original Publication