Files and links (2)
Published (Version of record)CC BY V4.0, Open Access
Published (Version of record)CC BY V4.0, Open
Journal article
Conventional and complementary health care use and out-of-pocket expenses among Australians with a self-reported mental health diagnosis: a cross-sectional survey
BMC Health Services Research, Vol.21(1), pp.1-19
23/11/2021
PMCID: PMC8611990
PMID: 34814916
Metrics
22 File views/ downloads
17 Record Views
UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)
This output has contributed to the advancement of the following goals:
Source: InCites
Abstract
Background: Mental health disorders are a global health concern. In Australia, numerous national reports have found that the current mental healthcare system does not adequately meet the needs of Australians with mental illness. Consequently, a greater understanding of how people with a mental health disorder are using the broader healthcare system is needed. The aim of this paper is to explore conventional and complementary health care use and expenditure among Australian adults reporting a mental health disorder diagnosis.
Methods: A cross-sectional online survey of 2,019 Australian adults examined socio-demographic characteristics, complementary and conventional health care use and the health status of participants.
Results: 32 % (n = 641) of the total sample (N = 2019) reported a mental health disorder in the previous 3 years. Of these, 96 % reported consulting a general practitioner, 90.6 % reported using prescription medicines, 42.4 % consulted a complementary medicine practitioner, 56.9 % used a complementary medicine product and 23 % used a complementary medicine practice. The estimated 12-month out-of-pocket health care expenditure among Australians with a mental health disorder was AUD$ 4,568,267,421 (US$ 3,398,293,672) for conventional health care practitioners and medicines, and AUD$ 1,183,752,486 (US$ 880,729,891) for complementary medicine practitioners, products and practices. Older people (50–59 and 60 and over) were less likely to consult a CM practitioner (OR = 0.538, 95% CI [0.373, 0.775]; OR = 0.398, 95% CI [0.273, 0.581] respectively) or a psychologist/counsellor (OR = 0.394, 95% CI [0.243, 0.639]; OR = 0.267, 95% CI [0.160, 0.447] respectively). People either looking for work or not in the workforce were less likely to visit a CM practitioner (OR = 0.298, 95% CI [0.194, 0.458]; OR = 0.476, 95% CI [0.353, 0.642], respectively).
Conclusions: A substantial proportion of Australian adults living with a mental health disorder pay for both complementary and conventional health care directly out-of-pocket. This finding suggests improved coordination of healthcare services is needed for individuals living with a mental health disorder. Research examining the redesign of primary health care provision should also consider whether complementary medicine practitioners and/or integrative health care service delivery models could play a role in addressing risks associated with complementary medicine use and the unmet needs of people living with a mental health disorder.
Details
- Title
- Conventional and complementary health care use and out-of-pocket expenses among Australians with a self-reported mental health diagnosis: a cross-sectional survey
- Creators
- Erica McIntyre - University of Technology SydneyTracey Oorschot - University of Technology SydneyAmie Steel - University of Technology SydneyMatthew J Leach - University of Technology SydneyJon Adams - University of Technology SydneyJoanna Harnett - University of Technology Sydney
- Publication Details
- BMC Health Services Research, Vol.21(1), pp.1-19
- Publisher
- BioMed Central Ltd.
- Grant note
- This research was supported by funding from Endeavour College of Natural Health and the Australian Research Centre in Complementary and Integrative Medicine (University of Technology Sydney). TO was supported by an Australian Government Research Training Program Scholarship while working on this manuscript. JA was supported by an Australian Research Council Professorial Future Fellowship while working on this manuscript (Grant FT140100195). JH’s academic position was supported by a philanthropic donation from Blackmores Pty Ltd during the course of this study.
- Identifiers
- 991012982984002368
- Copyright
- © The Author(s). 2021 Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
- Academic Unit
- School of Health and Human Sciences; National Centre for Naturopathic Medicine; Faculty of Health
- Language
- English
- Resource Type
- Journal article