BLOG – Page 20 – Chiropractic Resource Organization

Risk Factors Associated With Transition From Acute to Chronic Low Back Pain in US Patients Seeking Primary Care

By Frank M. Painter|January 12, 2022|Chronic Low Back Pain|

Risk Factors Associated With Transition From Acute to Chronic Low Back Pain in US Patients Seeking Primary Care

SOURCE: JAMA Netw Open 2021 (Feb 1); 4 (2): e2037371

Joel M. Stevans, DC, PhD, Anthony Delitto, PT, PhD, Samannaaz S. Khoja, PT, PhD, Charity G. Patterson, PhD, Clair N. Smith, MS, Michael J. Schneider, DC, PhD, Janet K. Freburger, PT, PhD, et. al.

School of Health and Rehabilitation Sciences,
University of Pittsburgh,
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania

Importance: Acute low back pain (LBP) is highly prevalent, with a presumed favorable prognosis; however, once chronic, LBP becomes a disabling and expensive condition. Acute to chronic LBP transition rates vary widely owing to absence of standardized operational definitions, and it is unknown whether a standardized prognostic tool (ie, Subgroups for Targeted Treatment Back tool [SBT]) can estimate this transition or whether early non-guideline concordant treatment is associated with the transition to chronic LBP.

Objective: To assess the associations between the transition from acute to chronic LBP with SBT risk strata; demographic, clinical, and practice characteristics; and guideline nonconcordant processes of care.

Design, setting, and participants: This inception cohort study was conducted alongside a multisite, pragmatic cluster randomized trial. Adult patients with acute LBP stratified by SBT risk were enrolled in 77 primary care practices in 4 regions across the United States between May 2016 and June 2018 and followed up for 6 months, with final follow-up completed by March 2019. Data analysis was conducted from January to March 2020.

Exposures: SBT risk strata and early LBP guideline nonconcordant processes of care (eg, receipt of opioids, imaging, and

Main outcomes and measures: Transition from acute to chronic LBP at 6 months using the National Institutes of Health Task Force on Research Standards consensus definition of chronic LBP. Patient demographic characteristics, clinical factors, and LBP process of care were obtained via electronic medical records.

There are more articles like this @ our:

LOW BACK PAIN Section

(more…)

0

Doctors of Chiropractic Working with or within Integrated Healthcare Delivery Systems: A Scoping Review Protocol

By Frank M. Painter|January 11, 2022|Chiropractic Management, Integrative Care|

Doctors of Chiropractic Working with or within Integrated Healthcare Delivery Systems: A Scoping Review Protocol

The Chiro.Org Blog

SOURCE: BMJ Open 2021 (Jan 25); 11 (1): e043754

Eric J Roseen, Bolanle Aishat Kasali, Kelsey Corcoran, Kelsey Masselli, Lance Laird, Robert B Saper, Daniel P Alford, Ezra Cohen, Anthony Lisi, Steven J Atlas, Jonathan F Bean, Roni Evans, André Bussières

Department of Family Medicine,
Boston University School of Medicine and
Boston Medical Center,
Boston, MA, USA

Introduction: Back and neck pain are the leading causes of disability worldwide. Doctors of chiropractic (DCs) are trained to manage these common conditions and can provide non-pharmacological treatment aligned with international clinical practice guidelines. Although DCs practice in over 90 countries, chiropractic care is rarely available within integrated healthcare delivery systems. A lack of DCs in private practice, particularly in low-income communities, may also limit access to chiropractic care. Improving collaboration between medical providers and community-based DCs, or embedding DCs

Methods and analyses: This scoping review will map studies of DCs working with or within integrated healthcare delivery systems. We will use the recommended six-step approach for scoping reviews. We will search three electronic data bases including Medline, Embase and Web of Science. Two investigators will independently review all titles and abstracts to identify relevant records, screen the full-text articles of potentially admissible records, and systematically extract data from selected articles. We will include studies published in English from 1998 to 2020 describing medical settings that have established formal relationships with community-based DCs (eg, shared medical record) or where DCs practice in medical settings. Data extraction and reporting will be guided by the Proctor Conceptual Model for Implementation Research, which has three domains: clinical intervention, implementation strategies and outcome measurement. Stakeholders from diverse clinical fields will offer feedback on the implications of our findings via a web-based

There is more like this @ our:

INTEGRATED HEALTH CARE Section and the:

NON-PHARMACOLOGIC THERAPY Section and the:

CHIROPRACTIC CARE FOR VETERANS Section

(more…)

0

Clinical Effectiveness and Efficacy of Chiropractic Spinal Manipulation for Spine Pain

By Frank M. Painter|January 10, 2022|Chronic Neck Pain, Cost-Effectiveness of Chiropractic, Low Back Pain, Spinal Pain Management|

Clinical Effectiveness and Efficacy of Chiropractic Spinal Manipulation for Spine Pain

The Chiro.Org Blog

SOURCE: Frontiers in Pain Ressearch 2021 (Oct 25); 2: 765921

Carlos Gevers-Montoro, Benjamin Provencher, Martin Descarreaux, Arantxa Ortega de Mues and Mathieu Piche

Department of Anatomy,
Université du Québec à Trois-Rivières,
Trois-Rivières, QC, Canada

Spine pain is a highly prevalent condition affecting over 11% of the world’s population. It is the single leading cause of activity limitation and ranks fourth in years lost to disability globally, representing a significant personal, social, and economic burden. For the vast majority of patients with back and neck pain, a specific pathology cannot be identified as the cause for their pain, which is then labeled as non-specific. In a growing proportion of these cases, pain persists beyond 3 months and is referred to as chronic primary back or neck pain. To decrease the global burden of spine pain, current data suggest that a conservative approach may be preferable. One of the conservative management options available is spinal manipulative

The aim of this narrative review is to highlight the most relevant and up-to-date evidence on the effectiveness (as it compares to other interventions in more pragmatic settings) and efficacy (as it compares to inactive controls under highly controlled conditions) of SMT for the management of neck pain and low back pain. Additionally, a perspective on the current recommendations on SMT for spine pain and the needs for future research will be

In summary, SMT may be as effective as other recommended therapies for the management of non-specific and chronic primary spine pain, including standard medical care or physical therapy. Currently, SMT is recommended in combination with exercise for neck pain as part of a multimodal approach. It may also be recommended as a frontline intervention for low back pain. Despite some remaining discrepancies, current clinical practice guidelines almost universally recommend the use of SMT for spine pain. Due to the low quality of evidence, the efficacy of SMT compared with a placebo or no treatment remains uncertain. Therefore, future research is needed to clarify the specific effects of SMT to further validate this intervention. In addition, factors that predict these effects remain to be determined to target patients who are more likely to obtain positive outcomes from SMT.

There is more like this @ our:

LOW BACK PAIN Section and the:

CHRONIC NECK PAIN Section and the:

COST-EFFECTIVENESS Section and the:

SPINAL PAIN MANAGEMENT Section

(more…)

0

Efficiency of Primary Spine Care as Compared to Conventional Primary Care: A Retrospective Observational Study at an Academic Medical Center

By Frank M. Painter|January 8, 2022|Cost-Effectiveness of Chiropractic, Primary Spine Care|

Efficiency of Primary Spine Care as Compared to Conventional Primary Care: A Retrospective Observational Study at an Academic Medical Center

The Chiro.Org Blog

SOURCE: Chiropractic & Manual Therapies 2022 (Jan 6); 30 (1): 1

Serena Bezdjian, James M. Whedon, Robb Russell, Justin M. Goehl & Louis A. Kazal Jr.

Southern California University of Health Sciences,
Whittier, CA, 90604, USA.

Opioid use was 389% higher in the Medical group than the PSC group,
who’s care was provided by a Doctor of Chiropractic.

Background: Primary Spine Care (PSC) is an innovative model for the primary management of patients with spine-related disorders (SRDs), with a focus on the use of non-pharmacological therapies which now constitute the recommended first-line approach to back pain. PSC clinicians serve as the initial or early point of contact for spine patients and utilize evidence-based spine care pathways to improve outcomes and reduce escalation of care (EoC) [e.g., spinal injections, diagnostic imaging, hospitalizations, referrals to a specialist]. The present study examined 6-month outcomes to evaluate the efficiency of care for patients who received PSC as compared to conventional primary care. We h

Methods: This was a retrospective observational study. We evaluated 6-month outcomes for two groups seen and treated for an SRD between February 01, 2017 and January 31, 2020. Patient groups were comprised of N = 1,363 PSC patients (Group A) and N = 1,329 PC patients (Group B). We conducted Pearson chi-square and logistic regression (adjusting for patient characteristics that were unbalanced between the two groups) to determine associations between the two groups and 6-month outcomes.

Results: Within six months of an initial visit for an SRD, a statistically significantly smaller proportion of PSC patients utilized healthcare resources for spine care as compared to the PC patients. When adjusting for patient characteristics, those who received care from the PSC clinician were less likely within 6 months of an initial visit to be

hospitalized (OR = .47, 95% CI .23-.97),
fill a prescription for an opioid analgesic (OR = .43; 95% CI .29-.65),
receive a spinal injection (OR = .56, 95% CI .33-.95), or
have a visit with a specialist (OR = .48, 95% CI .35-.67)

as compared to those who received usual primary care.

There is more like this @ our:

LOW BACK PAIN Section and the:

COST-EFFECTIVENESS Section

(more…)

0

Are Nonpharmacologic Interventions for Chronic Low Back Pain More Cost Effective Than Usual Care? Proof of Concept Results From a Markov Model

By Frank M. Painter|December 27, 2021|Chiropractic Management, Nonpharmacologic Therapies|

Are Nonpharmacologic Interventions for Chronic Low Back Pain More Cost Effective Than Usual Care? Proof of Concept Results From a Markov Model

The Chiro.Org Blog

SOURCE: Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2019 (Oct 15); 44 (20): 1456–1464

Patricia M. Herman, ND, PhD; Tara A. Lavelle, PhD; Melony E. Sorbero, PhD; Eric L. Hurwitz, DC, PhD; Ian D. Coulter, PhD

RAND Corporation,
Santa Monica, CA

Study design: Markov model.

Objective: Examine the 1-year effectiveness and cost-effectiveness (societal and payer perspectives) of adding nonpharmacologic interventions for chronic low back pain (CLBP) to usual care using a decision analytic model-based approach.

Summary of background data : Treatment guidelines now recommend many safe and effective nonpharmacologic interventions for CLBP. However, little is known regarding their effectiveness in subpopulations (e.g., high-impact chronic pain patients), nor about their cost-effectiveness.

Methods: The model included four health states: high-impact chronic pain (substantial activity limitations); no pain; and two others without activity limitations, but with higher (moderate-impact) or lower (low-impact) pain. We estimated intervention-specific transition probabilities for these health states using individual patient-level data from 10 large randomized trials covering 17 nonpharmacologic therapies. The model was run for nine 6-week cycles to approximate a 1-year time horizon. Quality-adjusted life-year weights were based on six-dimensional health state short form scores; healthcare costs were based on 2003 to 2015 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey data; and lost productivity costs used in the societal perspective were based on reported absenteeism. Results were generated for two target populations: (1) a typical baseline mix of patients with CLBP (25% low-impact, 35% moderate-impact, and 40% high-impact chronic pain) and (2) high-impact chronic pain patients.

There is more like this @ our:

LOW BACK PAIN Section and the:

COST-EFFECTIVENESS Section and the:

NON-PHARMACOLOGIC THERAPY Section

(more…)

0

Effectiveness of Chiropractic Manipulation Versus Sham Manipulation for Recurrent Headaches in Children Aged 7-14 Years – A Randomised Clinical Trial

By Frank M. Painter|December 25, 2021|Headache, Pediatrics|

Effectiveness of Chiropractic Manipulation Versus Sham Manipulation for Recurrent Headaches in Children Aged 7-14 Years – A Randomised Clinical Trial

The Chiro.Org Blog

SOURCE: Chiropractic & Manual Therapies 2021 (Jan 7); 29: 1

Susanne Lynge, Kristina Boe Dissing, Werner Vach, Henrik Wulff Christensen, and Lise Hestbaek

Department of Sports Science and Clinical Biomechanics,
University of Southern Denmark,
Campusvej 55, 5230, Odense M, Denmark.

Background: To investigate the effectiveness of chiropractic spinal manipulation versus sham manipulation in children aged 7–14 with recurrent headaches.

Methods: Design: A two-arm, single-blind, superiority randomised controlled trial.

Setting: One chiropractic clinic and one paediatric specialty practice in Denmark, November 2015 to August 2020.

Participants: 199 children aged 7 to 14 years, with at least one episode of headache per week for the previous 6 months and at least one musculoskeletal dysfunction identified.

Interventions: All participants received standard oral and written advice to reduce headaches. In addition, children in the active treatment group received chiropractic spinal manipulation and children in the control group received sham manipulation for a period of 4 months. Number and frequency of treatments were based on the chiropractor’s individual evaluation in the active treatment group; the children in the control group received approximately eight visits during the treatment period.

Primary outcome measures: ‘Number of days with headache’, ‘pain intensity’ and ‘medication’ were reported weekly by text messages, and global perceived effect by text message after 4 months. A planned fixed sequence strategy based on an initial outcome data analysis was used to prioritize outcomes. ‘Number of days with headache’ and ‘pain intensity’ were chosen as equally important outcomes of highest priority, followed by

Results: Chiropractic spinal manipulation resulted in significantly fewer days with headaches (reduction of 0.81 vs. 0.41, p = 0.019, NNT = 7 for 20% improvement) and better global perceived effect (dichotomized into improved/not improved, OR = 2.8 (95% CI: 1.5–5.3), NNT = 5) compared with a sham manipulation procedure. There was no difference between groups for pain intensity during headache episodes. Due to methodological shortcomings, no conclusions could be drawn about medication use.

There is more like this @ our:

HEADACHE Section and the:

PEDIATRICS Section

(more…)

1