ArticleBMC complementary medicine and therapies2026
Real-World patterns of Korean medicine and combined Korean-Western medicine use in patients with chronic cough at Korean medicine institutions: a nationwide cohort study.
Article in BMC complementary medicine and therapies, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundChronic cough impairs quality of life and increases healthcare utilization, yet no pharmacological treatment is formally approved. Korea’s dual healthcare system, which fully integrates Western medicine (WM) and Korean medicine (KM) under national insurance, provides a unique setting to examine real-world treatment patterns.
objectiveTo compare KM-only and integrative KM+WM care for chronic cough and describe the use of key KM modalities and multimodal treatment combinations.
methodsThis retrospective cohort study analyzed nationwide claims data from the Health Insurance Review and Assessment Service (HIRA), 2011–2020. Chronic cough was defined as ≥56 days with ≥3 outpatient visits. Patients diagnosed with cough (R05) in KM institutions were included and classified into KM-only or KM+WM groups based on WM encounters within ±30 days of the index episode. KM modalities (acupuncture, moxibustion, cupping, herbal medicine) and WM prescriptions were assessed, with comorbidities evaluated using the Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI).
resultsAmong 14,223 patients (mean age 58.6 years), 74.8% received KM-only care and 25.2% sought KM+WM care. Despite overall declines in KM utilization, the proportion of chronic cough patients among KM outpatients increased from 1.15% in 2011 to 2.76% in 2020. The KM+WM group had higher comorbidity burden (CCI ≥1: 43.7% vs. 32.8%) and more GERD (50.1% vs. 31.3%), allergic rhinitis (51.0% vs. 30.1%), and asthma (26.8% vs. 14.4%). Acupuncture was nearly universal (98.6%; mean 19.8 sessions), with cupping (59.3%) and hot–cold meridian therapy (42.9%) as common adjuncts. Herbal use was led by Samso-eum (35.0%) and So-cheong-ryong-tang (23.3%), whereas GERD-targeted formulas were rarely prescribed (Ojeok-san 3.3%, Saengmaek-san 2.7%).
conclusionsKM was the primary treatment option for chronic cough in Korea, while integrative KM+WM care was more common in patients with greater comorbidities. Acupuncture-centered multimodal approaches predominated, but the mismatch between GERD prevalence and GERD-targeted prescriptions highlights the need for standardized, evidence-based integrative guidelines. Findings reflect patients who initially sought KM care and should be interpreted within this context when informing policy and clinical practice.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.