The urban-rural divide in complementary and alternative medicine use: a longitudinal study of 10,638 women

Table 2 Rating of conventional health care providers by CAM user status (consulted with a CAM practitioner or not)

	Urban				Rural				Remote
Level of Satisfaction (1 = excellent ... 5 = poor)	CAM non-user		CAM user		CAM non-user		CAM user		CAM non-user		CAM user
	(n = 2,960)		(n = 1,157)		(n = 4,011)		(n = 1,866)		(n = 308)		(n = 131)
	mean	SD	mean	SD	mean	SD	mean	SD	mean	SD	mean	SD
Access to a medical specialist if needed ¹	1.93	0.95	2.02	1.03	2.50	1.15	2.48	1.13	3.11	1.28	3.14	1.31
Access to a female GP	2.24	1.22	2.30	1.25	2.76	1.37	2.74	1.35	3.39	1.40	3.44	1.39
Hours when a GP is available ^{■ 1}	2.65	1.10	2.80	1.09	2.90	1.14	2.97	1.14	3.22	1.12	3.34	1.20
Number of GPs you have to choose from ^{■ 1}	2.50	1.13	2.62	1.14	2.94	1.25	2.97	1.23	3.67	1.22	3.67	1.27
Ease of seeing GP of your choice ^{■ 1}	2.58	1.18	2.75	1.19	2.97	1.27	3.04	1.26	3.32	1.31	3.50	1.32
How long you wait to get a GP appointment ^{■ 1}	2.74	1.14	2.87	1.13	3.12	1.20	3.18	1.19	3.35	1.21	3.54	1.12
The outcomes of your medical care ^{■ 1 2} (how much you are helped)	2.27	0.96	2.41	0.99	2.45	0.98	2.54	0.99	2.67	0.96	2.81	1.03

Note: Student t-tests used to test for statistically significant differences.
^■ Statistically significant association for CAM user status (i.e. ignoring place of residence) (P < .005)
¹ Statistically significant association for urban residents (P < .005)
² Statistically significant association for rural residents (P < .005)
³ Statistically significant association for remote residents (P < .05)

ISSN: 2662-7671