Support Chiropractic Research!

Frank M. Painter

About Frank M. Painter

I was introduced to Chiro.Org in early 1996, where my friend Joe Garolis helped me learn HTML, the "mark-up language" for websites. We have been fortunate that journals like JMPT have given us permission to reproduce some early important articles in Full-Text format. Maintaining the Org website has been, and remains, my favorite hobby.

Where to Start? A Two Stage Residual Inclusion Approach to Estimating Influence of the Initial Provider on Health Care Utilization and Costs for Low Back Pain in the US

By |May 28, 2022|Cost-Effectiveness of Chiropractic, Initial Provider|

Where to Start? A Two Stage Residual Inclusion Approach to Estimating Influence of the Initial Provider on Health Care Utilization and Costs for Low Back Pain in the US

The Chiro.Org Blog


SOURCE:   BMC Health Serv Res 2022 (May 23); 22 (1): 694

  OPEN ACCESS   


Kenneth J. Harwood, Jesse M. Pines, C. Holly A. Andrilla & Bianca K. Frogner

College of Health and Education,
Marymount University,
Arlington, VA, USA.



Background:   Diagnostic testing and treatment recommendations can vary when medical care is sought by individuals for low back pain (LBP), leading to variation in quality and costs of care. We examine how the first provider seen by an individual at initial diagnosis of LBP influences downstream utilization and costs.

Methods:   Using national private health insurance claims data, individuals age 18 or older were retrospectively assigned to cohorts based on the first provider seen at the index date of LBP diagnosis. Exclusion criteria included individuals with a diagnosis of LBP or any serious medical conditions or an opioid prescription recorded in the 6 months prior to the index date. Outcome measures included use of imaging, back surgery rates, hospitalization rates, emergency department visits, early- and long-term opioid use, and costs (out-of-pocket and total costs of care) twelve months post-index date. We used a two-stage residual inclusion (2SRI) estimation approach comparing copay for the initial provider visit and differential distance as the instrumental variable to reduce selection bias in the choice of first provider, controlling for demographics.

Results:   Among 3,799,593 individuals, cost and utilization varied considerably based on the first provider seen by the patient. Copay and differential distance provided similar results, with copay preserving a greater sample size. The frequency of early opioid prescription was significantly lower when care began with an acupuncturist or chiropractor, and highest for those who began with an emergency medicine physician or advanced practice registered nurse (APRN). Long-term opioid prescriptions were low across most providers except physical medicine and rehabilitation physicians and APRNs. The frequency and time to serious illness varied little across providers. Total cost of care was lowest when starting with a chiropractor ($5,093) or primary care physician ($5,660), and highest when starting with an orthopedist ($9,434) or acupuncturist ($9,205).

There is more like this @ our:

COST-EFFECTIVENESS Section and the:

INITIAL PROVIDER/FIRST CONTACT Section

(more…)

Limited Prognostic Value of Pain Duration in Non-specific Neck Pain Patients Seeking Chiropractic Care

By |May 21, 2022|Chronic Neck Pain|

Limited Prognostic Value of Pain Duration in Non-specific Neck Pain Patients Seeking Chiropractic Care

The Chiro.Org Blog


SOURCE:   European Journal of Pain 2022 (Apr 21) [EPUB]

  OPEN ACCESS   

David Guillén, Alexandros Guekos, Nadia Graf, Barry Kim Humphreys, Cynthia Peterson, Petra Schweinhardt

Faculty of Medicine,
University of Zurich,
Zurich, Switzerland.



Background:   Pain chronicity is considered an important prognostic factor for outcome. Here, it was investigated whether pain duration influences outcome when only chronic patients (pain >3 months) are considered. Secondary aims were to determine, in patients of any pain duration, how much variance in outcome is explained by pain duration and whether pain duration truly predicts outcomes, that is out-of-sample prediction in independent data.

Methods:   Secondary analysis of a cohort study of neck pain patients. Patients were assessed before start of treatment and at 1-week, 1-, 3-, 6- and 12-month follow-up. Outcomes were patient global impression of change (PGIC) and percent change in patients’ perceived pain intensity, rated on a numerical rating scale (NRS). Regression analyses (linear and logistic) and supervised machine learning were used to test the influence of pain duration on PGIC and percent NRS change at 1-week, 1-, 3-, 6- and 12-month follow-up within sample and out-of-sample. Separate analyses were performed for the full sample (n = 720) and for chronic patients (n = 238) only.

Results:   No relationship between pain duration and outcome was found for chronic patients only. For the full sample, statistical relationships between pain duration and outcomes were observed at all tested follow-up time points. However, the amount of variance in outcome explained by pain duration was low and no out-of-sample prediction was possible.

There are more articles like this @ our:

CHRONIC NECK PAIN Section

(more…)

Initial Choice of Spinal Manipulation Reduces Escalation of Care for Chronic Low Back Pain Among Older Medicare Beneficiaries

By |May 10, 2022|Chiropractic Management, Escalation of Care, Opioid Epidemic|

Initial Choice of Spinal Manipulation Reduces Escalation of Care for Chronic Low Back Pain Among Older Medicare Beneficiaries

The Chiro.Org Blog


SOURCE:   Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2021 (May 11) [EPUB]

James M Whedon, Anupama Kizhakkeveettil, Andrew W Toler, Serena Bezdjian, Daniel Rossi, Sarah Uptmor, Todd A MacKenzie, Jon D Lurie, Eric L Hurwitz, Ian Coulter, Scott Haldeman

Southern California University of Health Sciences,
Whittier, CA, USA

Geisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth,
Hanover, NH, USA.



Study design:   We combined elements of cohort and crossover-cohort design.

Objective:   The objective of this study was to compare long-term outcomes for Spinal Manipulative Therapy (SMT) and Opioid Analgesic Therapy (OAT) regarding escalation of care for patients with chronic low back pain (cLBP).

Summary of background data   : Current evidence-based guidelines for clinical management of cLBP include both OAT and SMT. For long-term care of older adults, the efficiency and value of continuing either OAT or SMT are uncertain.

Methods:   We examined Medicare claims data spanning a five-year period. We included older Medicare beneficiaries with an episode of cLBP beginning in 2013. All patients were continuously enrolled under Medicare Parts A, B, and D. We analyzed the cumulative frequency of encounters indicative of an escalation of care for cLBP, including hospitalizations, emergency department visits, advanced diagnostic imaging, specialist visits, lumbosacral surgery, interventional pain medicine techniques, and encounters for potential complications of cLBP.

Results:   SMT was associated with lower rates of escalation of care as compared to OAT. The adjusted rate of escalated care encounters was approximately 2.5 times higher for initial choice of OAT vs. initial choice of SMT (with weighted propensity scoring: rate ratio 2.67, 95% CI 2.64-2.69, p < .0001).

There are more like this @ our:

MEDICARE Section and the:

NON-PHARMACOLOGIC THERAPY Section

(more…)

Spinal Manipulative Therapy for Acute Neck Pain: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomised Controlled Trials

By |May 8, 2022|Acute Neck Pain, Chiropractic Care, Chronic Neck Pain|

Spinal Manipulative Therapy for Acute Neck Pain: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomised Controlled Trials

The Chiro.Org Blog


SOURCE:   J Clinical Medicine 2021 (Oct 28); 10 (21): 5011

Aleksander Chaibi, Knut Stavem and Michael Bjørn Russell

Head and Neck Research Group,
Division for Research and Innovation,
Akershus University Hospital,
1478 Oslo, Norway



Background:   Acute neck pain is common and usually managed by medication and/or manual therapy. General practitioners (GPs) hesitate to refer to manual therapy due to uncertainty about the effectiveness and adverse events (AEs)

Method:   To review original randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing the effect of spinal manipulative therapy (SMT) for acute neck pain. Data extraction was done in duplicate and formulated in tables. Quality and evidence were assessed using the Cochrane Back and

Results:   Six studies were included. The overall pooled effect size for neck pain was very large –1.37 (95% CI, –2.41, –0.34), favouring treatments with SMT compared with controls. A single study that showed that SMT was statistically significantly better than medicine (30 mg ketorolac im.) one day post-treatment, ((–2.8 (46%) (95% CI, –2.1, –3.4) vs. –1.7 (30%) (95% CI, –1.1, –2.3), respectively; p = 0.02)). Minor transient AEs reported included increased pain and headache, while no serious AEs were reported.

There is more like this @ our:

CHRONIC NECK PAIN Page and the:

NON-PHARMACOLOGIC THERAPY Page

(more…)

Spinal Manipulation vs Prescription Drug Therapy for Chronic Low Back Pain: Beliefs, Satisfaction With Care, and Qualify of Life Among Older Medicare Beneficiaries

By |April 10, 2022|Medicare|

Spinal Manipulation vs Prescription Drug Therapy for Chronic Low Back Pain: Beliefs, Satisfaction With Care, and Qualify of Life Among Older Medicare Beneficiaries

The Chiro.Org Blog


SOURCE:   J Manipulative Physiol Ther 2022 (Mar 26) [EPUB]

Anupama Kizhakkeveettil, PhD, Serena Bezdjian, PhD, Eric L. Hurwitz, PhD, Ian Coulter, PhD, Scott Haldeman, PhD, James M. Whedon, DC, MS et. al

Ayurveda Medicine Department,
Southern California University of Health Sciences,
Whittier, California.



  Davis (J Am Board Fam Med 2015)


Objective:   The objective of this study was to compare patients’ perspectives on the use of spinal manipulative therapy (SMT) compared to prescription drug therapy (PDT) with regard to health-related quality of life (HRQoL), patient beliefs, and satisfaction with treatment.

Methods:   Four cohorts of Medicare beneficiaries were assembled according to previous treatment received as evidenced in claims data: SMT, PDT, and 2 crossover cohorts (where participants experienced both types of treatments). A total of 195 Medicare beneficiaries responded to the survey. Outcome measures used were a 0–to–10 numeric rating scale to measure satisfaction, the Low Back Pain Treatment Beliefs Questionnaire to measure patient beliefs, and the 12–item Short Form Health Survey to measure HRQoL.

Results:   Recipients of SMT were more likely to be very satisfied with their care (84%) than recipients of PDT (50%; P = .002). The SMT cohort self-reported significantly higher HRQoL compared to the PDT cohort; mean differences in physical and mental health scores on the 12–item Short Form Health Survey were 12.85 and 9.92, respectively. The SMT cohort had a lower degree of concern regarding chiropractic care for their back pain compared to the PDT cohort’s reported concern about PDT (P = .03).

There are more articles like this @ our:

MEDICARE Section

(more…)