Cross-sectional study examines non-therapeutic TCM services utilization in middle-aged and older population, highlighting key influencing factors.
Background As an integral part of the “Healthy China” strategy, healthy aging emphasizes meeting the non-therapeutic health needs of middle-aged and older populations, which is highly consistent with Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM) concepts. However, empirical studies focusing on the utilization patterns and determinants of such services among the middle-aged and older population remain limited. This study aims to assess the utilization and influencing factors of non-therapeutic TCM services among middle-aged and older people in Guangzhou. Methods A cross-sectional survey was conducted from June to October 2025 among 557 individuals aged ≥45 years old in Guangzhou using a structured questionnaire. Chi-square tests and binary logistic regression analyses were used to identify influencing factors. Results The overall utilization rate of non-therapeutic TCM services in the past month was 69.7%. Specifically, the utilization rates of health education, preventive health care, chronic disease management, and rehabilitation services were 25.10, 32.70, 28.00, and 30.90%, respectively. Key influencing factors varied by service type: understanding of TCM culture and chronic diseases affected health education utilization; TCM belief, income (≥5,000 yuan/month) and chronic diseases promoted preventive healthcare use; TCM promotion exposure and service satisfaction were associated with chronic disease management; age (≥75 years), regular physical examinations and high-frequency TCM use were associated with rehabilitation service utilization. Conclusion Non-therapeutic TCM service utilization is relatively high among middle-aged and older populations in Guangzhou, with type-specific influencing factors. Targeted measures (expanding TCM culture promotion, strengthening chronic disease management, optimizing subsidy policies, and enhancing primary TCM service supply) are recommended to further improve service accessibility.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ren et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: