Who uses Australian chiropractic services?
- Authors: French, Simon , Densley, Konstancja , Charity, Melanie , Gunn, Jane
- Date: 2013
- Type: Text , Journal article
- Relation: Chiropractic and Manual Therapies Vol. 21, no. 1 (2013), p.
- Full Text: false
- Reviewed:
- Description: Background: The use of chiropractic services is widespread, however, little is known about the characteristics of people who seek chiropractic care in Australia. This study compared the characteristics of users and non-users of chiropractic services from a cohort of patients sourced from general medical practice in Victoria, Australia.Methods: This is a secondary analysis of baseline screening data from a prospective adult cohort study beginning in 2005. Thirty randomly selected Australian general medical practices mailed out surveys to 17,780 of their patients. Differences were examined between chiropractic users and others, and between chiropractic users who reported a back problem to those who did not.Results: Of 7,519 respondents, 15% indicated they had visited a chiropractor in the last 12 months. Chiropractic users were more likely to have their GP located in a rural location and to be born in Australia; they were less likely to be in the older age group (55-76), to be unemployed or to have a pension/benefit as their main source of income. Chiropractic users were more likely to: have a back problem; use complementary or alternative medication; visit another type of complementary health practitioner or a physiotherapist. They were less likely to take medication for certain health problems (e.g. for high blood pressure, high cholesterol or asthma). No important differences were seen between chiropractic users and non-users for other health problems. People who visited a chiropractor and reported a back problem were more likely to: be a current smoker; have a number of other chronic conditions, including arthritis, hypertension, chronic sinusitis, asthma, dermatitis, depression and anxiety; report taking medications, including antidepressants, analgesics (painkillers and arthritis medication) and complementary or alternative medications.Conclusions: This large cross-sectional study of general medical practice attendees suggests that chiropractors are the most commonly consulted complementary health profession. Chiropractors should ensure they are aware of their patients' health conditions other than musculoskeletal problems and should ensure they are appropriately managed. © 2013 French et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.
Can the severity of dependence scale be usefully applied to 'ecstasy'?
- Authors: Bruno, Raimondo , Matthews, Allison , Topp, Libby , Degenhardt, Louisa , Gomez, Rapson , Dunn, Matthew
- Date: 2009
- Type: Text , Journal article
- Relation: Neuropsychobiology Vol. 60, no. 3-4 (2009), p. 137-147
- Full Text: false
- Reviewed:
- Description: Background/Aims: Although use of 'ecstasy' (drugs sold as containing 3,4-methylenedioxymethamphetamine) is prevalent, it is typically infrequent, and treatment presentations involving ecstasy as a principal problem drug are relatively rare. Human case reports and animal literature suggest dependence potential, although there may be some unique aspects to this syndrome for ecstasy in comparison to other substances. The Severity of Dependence Scale (SDS) was examined to determine whether this could usefully identify 'dependent' ecstasy consumers. Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional survey of 1,658 frequent (at least monthly) ecstasy consumers across Australia, assessing drug use, associated harms and risk behaviours. Dependence was evaluated with the SDS, using a cut-off of ≥4 to identify potential 'dependence'. Results: One fifth of the participants were screened as potentially dependent. These individuals used ecstasy more frequently, in greater amounts, engaged more extensively in risk behaviours and reported greater role interference than other participants. These findings were independent of methamphetamine use or dependence. The underlying structure of the ecstasy SDS was bifactorial. Conclusions: The SDS has demonstrated construct validity as a screening tool to identify ecstasy users at elevated risk of experiencing adverse consequences, including features of dependence. The underlying structure of dependence symptoms differs for ecstasy compared to other drug classes, and some dependent consumers use the drug infrequently. The unique neurotoxic potential and entactogenic effects of ecstasy may require a distinct nosological classification for the experience of dependence associated with the drug. Copyright © 2009 S. Karger AG, Basel.