AJPH
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

This Article
Right arrow Extract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Purchase Article
Right arrow View Shopping Cart
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via ISI Web of Science (3)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Hendershot, G. E.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Hendershot, G. E.
July 2003, Vol 93, No. 7 | American Journal of Public Health 1079-1080
© 2003 American Public Health Association

RESEARCH AND PRACTICE

Mobility Limitations and Complementary and Alternative Medicine: Are People with Disabilities More Likely to Pray?

Gerry E. Hendershot, PhD

The author is a consultant on disability and health statistics.

Correspondence: Requests for reprints should be sent to Gerry E. Hendershot, 4437 Wells Pkwy, University Park, MD 20782 (e-mail: ghendershot{at}earthlink.net).

Attendance at religious services by persons with functional disabilities is related to subsequent improvement in functioning.1 One conceptual model for such relationships between religion and improved outcomes is "religious coping," ranging from general commitment to religious beliefs to application of religious beliefs to specific personal difficulties.2 One application of religious beliefs to personal difficulty is using prayer as complementary and alternative medicine (CAM). It may be hypothesized, therefore, that difficulty in physical functioning may be associated with the use of prayer as CAM. This study examines that hypothesis by asking (1) whether mobility limitation is related to the use of prayer as CAM, and (2) whether such a relationship can be attributed to other predictors of CAM use.

The data are from the National Health Interview Survey (NHIS), which conducts face-to-face interviews with nationally representative samples of community-dwelling families.3 In 1999, 1 adult in each family was asked about specific CAM services they used for their own health care during the previous year, including "prayer or spiritual healing." (The others were acupuncture, relaxation, massage, imagery [creating images or colors in the mind], diet, herbs, homeopathy, energy healing, biofeedback, and hypnosis.) From these data, 3 categories of CAM were created: did not use any CAM; used CAM, but not prayer; and used prayer with or without use of other CAM.

Mobility limitation was measured by asking questions about activities: "By yourself and without using any special equipment, how difficult is it for you to [name of activity; e.g., ‘sit for about 2 hours’]—not at all difficult, only a little difficult, somewhat difficult, very difficult, or can’t do it at all?" Measures were constructed of 3 mobility functions, as defined by the International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health (ICF).4 The ICF mobility functions and the NHIS questions about activities used to measure each are (1) "changing and maintaining body position," ICF codes a410–a415 (NHIS questions on standing, sitting, reaching, pushing, and stooping); (2) "carrying, moving, and handling objects," ICF codes a430–a439 (NHIS questions on carrying and grasping); and (3) "walking and moving around," ICF codes a450–a455 (NHIS questions on walking and climbing).

If any of the specific NHIS activities in an ICF functional type were reported to be "very difficult" or "unable to do," the degree of limitation for that type was coded "severecomplete." If the limitation was not coded severe-complete, but "a little" or "some" difficulty was reported for any of the activities defining a mobility type, the degree of limitation was coded "mild-moderate." The remaining cases reported no difficulty in any of the activities defining an ICF type, and were coded "no limitation" for that type.

Population statistics were estimated using Stata procedures that adjust for the complex sample design of the NHIS.5 Table 1Go shows the percentage distributions of adults by CAM use categories according to the type and degree of mobility limitation. In this brief report, attention is focused on the column headed "Used Prayer With or Without Other CAM." The main findings are that (1) persons with mobility limitations were significantly more likely than those without limitations to use prayer as CAM (2-tailed test, P < .05); (2) among persons with mobility limitations, there was no significant difference in the use of prayer as CAM between those with mild-moderate limitations and those with severe-complete limitations; (3) these findings applied to each of the 3 mobility types considered.


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		TABLE 1—— Degree of Mobility Limitation of American Adults, by Use of Complementary and Alternative Medicine: United States, 1999
 
Both functional status and the use of prayer as CAM are related to other personal characteristics, including gender, age, race/ethnicity, and health status.6,7 To investigate the possible confounding effects of these relationships, additional analyses were conducted using multinomial logistic regression. Models of CAM use were estimated for each of the 3 ICF mobility functions, with mobility limitations (none, mild-moderate, severe-complete) as the predictor variables, and controls for sex, age (18 to 24, 25 to 34, 35 to 44, 45 to 54, 55 to 64, and 65 years and older), Hispanic origin and race (non-Hispanic White, Hispanic, non-Hispanic Black, and Other), and change in health status in the past 12 months (better, same, worse). The relative risk ratios and their standard errors are shown in Table 2Go. The relative risk ratio is the "risk" of using the type of CAM in the column heading relative to the risk of using no CAM.


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		TABLE 2—— Results of Multinomial Regression for Degree of Mobility Limitation, by Use of Complementary and Alternative Medicine: United States, 1999a
 
Focusing on the use of prayer with or without other CAM, the findings are consistent with those from Table 1Go; that is, even with statistical controls for possible confounders, limitations on mobility function are associated with more frequent use of prayer for CAM; and among those with a limitation, the degree of limitation is not significantly related to the use of prayer.

In conclusion, using prayer as CAM is more common among persons with mobility limitations (approximately 20%) than among persons without such limitations (approximately 12%). Given this finding, providers who serve persons with mobility limitations should consider adopting an orientation of "religious pluralism."2 Further studies should examine the relationship of CAM to other functional limitations.


   Footnotes
 
Human Participant Protection

No protocol approval was needed for this study.

Peer Reviewed

Accepted for publication August 23, 2002.


   References
TOP
 References
 
1. Idler EL, Kasl SV. Religion among disabled and nondisabled persons, II: attendance at religion services as a predictor of the course of disability. J Gerontol.1997;52B:S306–S316.

2. Chatters LM. Religion and health: public health research and practice. Annu Rev Public Health.2000;21:335–367.[ISI][Medline]

3. Data File Documentation, National Health Interview Survey, 1999 [machine readable data file and documentation]. Hyattsville, Md: National Center for Health Statistics; 2001.

4. International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health. Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization; 2001.

5. Stata Statistical Software: Release 7.0 [computer program]. College Station, Tex: Stata Corp; 2001.

6. McNeil JM. Americans With Disabilities: 1991–1992. Washington, DC: Bureau of the Census; 1993:10–11. Current Population Reports.

7. Eisenberg DM, Davis RB, Ettner SL, et al. Trends in alternative medicine use in the United States, 1990–1997: results of a follow-up national survey. JAMA.2000;283:884–886.[Free Full Text]




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Evid Based Complement Alternat MedHome page
F. L. Bishop and G. T. Lewith
Who Uses CAM? A Narrative Review of Demographic Characteristics and Health Factors Associated with CAM Use
Evid. Based Complement. Altern. Med., March 13, 2008; (2008) nen023v1.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Research on Social Work PracticeHome page
D. R. Hodge
A Systematic Review of the Empirical Literature on Intercessory Prayer
Research on Social Work Practice, March 1, 2007; 17(2): 174 - 187.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Complementary Health Practice ReviewHome page
R. H. Feldman and R. Laura
The Use of Complementary and Alternative Medicine Practices Among Australian University Students
Complementary Health Practice Review, October 1, 2004; 9(3): 173 - 179.
[Abstract] [PDF]

This Article
Right arrow Extract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Purchase Article
Right arrow View Shopping Cart
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via ISI Web of Science (3)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Hendershot, G. E.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Hendershot, G. E.

HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 2003 by the American Public Health Association