Support Chiropractic Research!

Cost-Effectiveness

Cost-Effectiveness of Non-Invasive and Non-Pharmacological Interventions for Low Back Pain

By |August 24, 2016|Cost-Effectiveness, Low Back Pain|

Cost-Effectiveness of Non-Invasive and Non-Pharmacological Interventions for Low Back Pain:
A Systematic Literature Review

The Chiro.Org Blog


SOURCE:   Applied Health Econ & Health Policy 2016 (Aug 22)


Lazaros Andronis, Philip Kinghorn, Suyin Qiao,
David G. T. Whitehurst, Susie Durrell, Hugh McLeod

Health Economics Unit,
Public Health Building,
University of Birmingham,
Birmingham, B15 2TT, UK.
l.andronis@bham.ac.uk


BACKGROUND:   Low back pain (LBP) is a major health problem, having a substantial effect on peoples’ quality of life and placing a significant economic burden on healthcare systems and, more broadly, societies. Many interventions to alleviate LBP are available but their cost effectiveness is unclear.

OBJECTIVES:   To identify, document and appraise studies reporting on the cost effectiveness of non-invasive and non-pharmacological treatment options for LBP.

METHODS:   Relevant studies were identified through systematic searches in bibliographic databases (EMBASE, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Cochrane Library, CINAHL and the National Health Service Economic Evaluation Database), ‘similar article’ searches and reference list scanning. Study selection was carried out by three assessors, independently. Study quality was assessed using the Consensus on Health Economic Criteria checklist. Data were extracted using customized extraction forms.

RESULTS:   Thirty-three studies were identified. Study interventions were categorised as:

(1) combined physical exercise and psychological therapy,

(2) physical exercise therapy only,

(3) information and education, and

(4) manual therapy.

Interventions assessed within each category varied in terms of their components and delivery. In general, combined physical and psychological treatments, information and education interventions, and manual therapies appeared to be cost effective when compared with the study-specific comparators. There is inconsistent evidence around the cost effectiveness of physical exercise programs as a whole, with yoga, but not group exercise, being cost effective.

There are more articles like this @ our:

Low Back Pain and Chiropractic Page

and the:

Cost-Effectiveness of Chiropractic Page

(more…)

Variations in Patterns of Utilization and Charges for the Care of Low Back Pain in North Carolina, 2000 to 2009: A Statewide Claims’ Data Analysis

By |May 18, 2016|Cost-Effectiveness, Low Back Pain|

Variations in Patterns of Utilization and Charges for the Care of Low Back Pain in North Carolina, 2000 to 2009: A Statewide Claims’ Data Analysis

The Chiro.Org Blog


SOURCE:   J Manip Physiol Ther. 2016 (May); 39 (4): 252–262


Eric L. Hurwitz, DC, PhD, Dongmei Li, PhD,
Jenni Guillen, MS, Michael J. Schneider, DC, PhD,
Joel M. Stevans, DC, Reed B. Phillips, DC, PhD,
Shawn P. Phelan, DC, Eugene A. Lewis, DC, MPH,
Richard C. Armstrong, MS, DC,
Maria Vassilaki, MD, MPH, PhD

Office of Public Health Studies,
University of Hawai`i at M?noa,
Honolulu, HI.


OBJECTIVES:   The purpose of the study was to compare utilization and charges generated by medical doctors (MD), doctors of chiropractic (DC) and physical therapists (PT) by patterns of care for the treatment of low back pain in North Carolina.

METHODS:   This was an analysis of low-back-pain-related closed claim data from the North Carolina State Health Plan for Teachers and State Employees from 2000 to 2009. Data were extracted from Blue Cross Blue Shield of North Carolina for the North Carolina State Health Plan using International Classification of Diseases, 9th Revision diagnostic codes for:

uncomplicated low back pain   (ULBP) and
complicated low back pain   (CLBP).

RESULTS:   Care patterns with single-provider types and no referrals incurred the least charges on average for both ULBP and CLBP. When care did not include referral providers or services, for ULBP, MD and DC care was on average $465 less than MD and PT care. For CLBP, MD and DC care averaged $965 more than MD and PT care. However, when care involved referral providers or services, MD and DC care was on average $1600 less when compared to MD and PT care for ULBP and $1885 less for CLBP. Risk-adjusted charges (available 2006-2009) for patients in the middle quintile of risk were significantly less for DC care patterns.

There are more articles like this @ our:

Low Back Pain and Chiropractic Page

(more…)

Tracking Low Back Problems in a Major Self-Insured Workforce: Toward Improvement in the Patient’s Journey

By |July 31, 2014|Chiropractic Care, Cost-Effectiveness|

Tracking Low Back Problems in a Major Self-Insured Workforce:

Toward Improvement in the Patient’s Journey

The Chiro.Org Blog


SOURCE:   J Occup Environ Med. 2014 (Jun);   56 (6):   604-620


Allen, Harris PhD; Wright, Marcia PharmD; Craig, Terri PharmD; Mardekian, Jack PhD; Cheung, Raymond PhD; Sanchez, Robert PhD; Bunn, William B. III MD, JD, MPH; Rogers, William PhD

From the Harris Allen Group, LLC (Dr Allen), Brookline, Mass; US Medical Affairs (Dr Wright), Pfizer Integrated Health, Overland Park, Kans; Pfizer Primary Care Medical Affairs (Dr Craig), Lincoln, Nebr; Pfizer Inc (Dr Mardekian), New York; Pfizer Integrated Health (Drs Cheung and Sanchez), New York; Health, Safety, Security & Productivity, Navistar, Inc (Dr Bunn)


This comprehensive new study from the Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine reveals that chiropractic care costs significantly less than other forms of low back care, and appears to comply with guideline recommendations more closely than than any of the other 4 comparison groups.The authors came to these conclusions after an exhaustive analysis of an integrated database belonging to a giant, self-insured Fortune 500 manufacturer covering nine years of claims They evaluated the direct and indirect costs of LBP for all employees, looking in-depth at personnel characteristics, and medical, behavioral health, pharmaceutical, Workers Comp costs, disability, absenteeism, and lost productivity during the 2001 to 2009 period.

Thanks to Dynamic Chiropractic for some of the following comments.

Make sure to read their full article!

The study had four objectives:

  1. Identify all active employees reporting a back problem diagnosis during the study period.
  2. Define and classify their initial patterns of medical care and use of Rx medication.
  3. Track the effect of these patterns on direct and indirect cost outcomes.
  4. Further stratify these treatment patterns by measures of congruence with the previously described guideline aspects for LBP care and determine the effect on cost outcomes.

Through their database review, the authors identified five specific care patterns that were typical of employee experiences

  1. Information and Advice (“TalkInfo”):
    information gathering, office visit consults, lab tests, imaging (X-ray, ultrasound, CT, or MRI)
    but no other procedures.
    (59 percent of employees).
  2. Complex Medical Management (Complex MM):
    physician visits for nerve blocks, surgeries, or comparable procedures
    (2 percent of employees).
  3. Chiropractic (Chiro):
    more than one visit to a DC.
    (11 percent of employees)
  4. Physical therapy (PT):
    more than one visit to a PT.
    (11 percent of employees)
  5. “Dabble”:
    episodes with at most one visit for physician, chiropractic, or PT care,
    or at most one visit to two or more of these categories.
    (17 percent of employees)

The average overall costs for care were a real eye opener

Low Back/Neuro (three-year total)

(more…)

Costs of Routine Care for Infant Colic in the UK

By |July 21, 2014|Chiropractic Care, Colic, Cost-Effectiveness|

Costs of Routine Care for Infant Colic in the UK and Costs of Chiropractic Manual Therapy as a Management Strategy Alongside a RCT for this Condition

The Chiro.Org Blog


J Clinical Chiropractic Peds 2013 (Jun);   14 (1):   1063–1069


Joyce Miller, DC, FAC O, FCC, FEAC (Paeds)

Anglo-European College of Chiropractic,
Lead Tutor in Advanced Professional Practice (Paediatrics),
Bournemouth University,
United Kingdom


Background:   There is a small body of published research (six research studies and a Cochrane review) suggesting that manual therapy is effective in the treatment of infant colic. Research from the UK has shown that the costs of NHS treatment are high (£65million [USD100 million] in 2001) with no alleviation of the condition.

Objectives:   The objectives of this study were to: investigate the cost of the inconsolable nocturnal crying infant syndrome which is popularly known as infant colic in the first 20 weeks of life, estimate the costs of different types of treatment commonly chosen by parents for a colicky infant for a week of care or an episode of care, investigate the cost of chiropractic manual therapy intervention aimed at reducing the hours of infant crying alongside a randomised controlled trial (RCT) showing effectiveness of treatment

Design:   Economic evaluation incorporating a RCT

Methods:   A cost analysis was conducted using data from a RCT conducted in a three-armed single-blinded trial that randomized excessively crying infants into one of three groups: a) routine chiropractic manual therapy (CMT), b) CMT with parent blinded or c) no treatment control group with parent blinded. These costs were compared with costs of caring for infant colic from Unit Costs of Health and Social Care, UK, 2011. It has been widely estimated that 21% of infants in the UK present annually to primary care for excessive crying and this calculated to 167,000 infants (to the nearest 1,000) used in the cost analysis as there were 795,249 infants in the UK in mid-2010 according to the UK Office of National Statistics, 2011.

Results:   100 infants completed the RCT and this resulted in treatment costs of £58/child ($93). An additional cost of GP care of £27.50 was added for initial evaluation of the general health of the child and suitability for chiropractic management, totaling £85.50 per child in the RCT. Clinical outcomes are published elsewhere, but care showed both statistically and clinically significant efficacy in reduced crying time by an average of 2.6 hours resulting in a crying time of less than two hours a day (reaching “normal” levels which could be classified as non-colic behavior). Cost per child’s care was £85.50 extrapolated to £14,278,500 for the full cohort of 167,000. If chiropractic care had been given privately, costs were calculated as £164/child per episode of care and this equalled £27,388,000 for the entire cohort. Medical costs through a normal stream of care amounted to £1089.91 per child or £182,014,970 for the cohort (including all costs of care, not just NHS). No benefits of effectiveness were accrued from any of those types of treatment. If the Morris NHS data were extrapolated to 2010, applying wage inflation, the cost would be £118 million (USD180 million) yearly. An episode of an average of four treatments of chiropractic manual therapy with documented efficacy of CMT cost from 8% to 24% of NHS care or routine care.

Conclusion:   chiropractic manual therapy was a cost-effective option in this study. A much larger randomized study of routine medical care versus routine chiropractic care is recommended to determine whether there is confirmation of these findings.


 

From the Full-Text Article:

Introduction

As effective treatment for children with infant colic remains elusive, the costs of managing the condition is gaining increasing attention. Although it is uncommon for clinicians to be quizzed about the cost-effectiveness of their treatments, [1] particularly where the clinicians’ services are covered by a national health plan, it is increasingly appropriate to ask this question, when prudence in health care expenditure is required.

There are more articles like this @ our:

Chiropractic Pediatrics Page and the:

Infantile Colic and Chiropractic Page

(more…)

Cost-Effectiveness of Manual Therapy for the Management of Musculoskeletal Conditions: A Systematic Review and Narrative Synthesis of Evidence From Randomized Controlled Trials

By |July 9, 2014|Cost-Effectiveness|

Cost-Effectiveness of Manual Therapy for the Management of Musculoskeletal Conditions: A Systematic Review and Narrative Synthesis of Evidence From Randomized Controlled Trials

The Chiro.Org Blog


SOURCE:   J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 2014 (Jul); 37 (6): 343–362


Alexander Tsertsvadze, MD, MSc,
Christine Clar, PhD, Rachel Court, MA,
Aileen Clarke, MD, Hema Mistry, PhD,
Paul Sutcliffe, DPhil

Senior Research Fellow,
Warwick Medical School,
University of Warwick, Coventry, UK.


OBJECTIVES:   The purpose of this study was to systematically review trial-based economic evaluations of manual therapy relative to other alternative interventions used for the management of musculoskeletal conditions.

METHODS:   A comprehensive literature search was undertaken in major medical, health-related, science and health economic electronic databases.

RESULTS:   Twenty-five publications were included (11 trial-based economic evaluations). The studies compared cost-effectiveness and/or cost-utility of manual therapy interventions to other treatment alternatives in reducing pain (spinal, shoulder, ankle). Manual therapy techniques (eg, osteopathic spinal manipulation, physiotherapy manipulation and mobilization techniques, and chiropractic manipulation with or without other treatments) were more cost-effective than usual general practitioner (GP) care alone or with exercise, spinal stabilization, GP advice, advice to remain active, or brief pain management for improving low back and shoulder pain/disability. Chiropractic manipulation was found to be less costly and more effective than alternative treatment compared with either physiotherapy or GP care in improving neck pain.

(more…)

Prevention of Low Back Pain: Effect, Cost-effectiveness, and Cost-utility of Maintenance Care – Study Protocol for a Randomized Clinical Trial

By |June 8, 2014|Cost-Effectiveness, Low Back Pain, Maintenance Care, Randomized Controlled Trial|

Prevention of Low Back Pain: Effect, Cost-effectiveness, and Cost-utility of Maintenance Care – Study Protocol for a Randomized Clinical Trial

The Chiro.Org Blog


SOURCE:   Trials. 2014 (Apr 2);   15:   102


Andreas Eklund, Iben Axén, Alice Kongsted, Malin Lohela-Karlsson,
Charlotte Leboeuf-Yde, and Irene Jensen

Institute of Environmental Medicine,
Unit of Intervention and Implementation Research,
Karolinska Institutet, Nobels v13, S-171 77
Stockholm, Sweden. andreas.eklund@ki.se.


BACKGROUND:   Low back pain (LBP) is a prevalent condition and a socioeconomic problem in many countries. Due to its recurrent nature, the prevention of further episodes (secondary prevention), seems logical. Furthermore, when the condition is persistent, the minimization of symptoms and prevention of deterioration (tertiary prevention), is equally important. Research has largely focused on treatment methods for symptomatic episodes, and little is known about preventive treatment strategies.

METHODS/DESIGN:   This study protocol describes a randomized controlled clinical trial in a multicenter setting investigating the effect and cost-effectiveness of preventive manual care (chiropractic maintenance care) in a population of patients with recurrent or persistent LBP.Four hundred consecutive study subjects with recurrent or persistent LBP will be recruited from chiropractic clinics in Sweden. The primary outcome is the number of days with bothersome pain over 12 months. Secondary measures are self-rated health (EQ-5D), function (the Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire), psychological profile (the Multidimensional Pain Inventory), pain intensity (the Numeric Rating Scale), and work absence.The primary utility measure of the study is quality-adjusted life years and will be calculated using the EQ-5D questionnaire. Direct medical costs as well as indirect costs will be considered.

Subjects are randomly allocated into two treatment arms:

1) Symptom-guided treatment (patient controlled), receiving care when patients feel a need.

2) Preventive treatment (clinician controlled), receiving care on a regular basis.

 

Eligibility screening takes place in two phases: first, when assessing the primary inclusion/exclusion criteria, and then to only include fast responders, i.e., subjects who respond well to initial treatment. Data are collected at baseline and at follow-up as well as weekly, using SMS text messages.

There are more articles like this @ our:

Maintenance Care, Wellness and Chiropractic Page

 

(more…)