Support Chiropractic Research!

Cost-Effectiveness of Chiropractic

The Use of Complementary and Integrative Health

By |March 25, 2020|Alternative Medicine, Cost-Effectiveness of Chiropractic|

The Use of Complementary and Integrative Health Approaches for Chronic Musculoskeletal Pain in Younger US Veterans: An Economic Evaluation

The Chiro.Org Blog

SOURCE:   PLoS One. 2019 (Jun 5); 14 (6): e0217831

Valerie F. Williams, MA, MS; Leslie L. Clark, PhD, MS; Mark G. McNellis, PhD

RAND Corporation,
Santa Monica, California,
United States of America.

OBJECTIVES:   To estimate the cost-effectiveness to the US Veterans Health Administration (VA) of the use of complementary and integrative health (CIH) approaches by younger Veterans with chronic musculoskeletal disorder (MSD) pain.

PERSPECTIVE:   VA healthcare system.

METHODS:   We used a propensity score-adjusted hierarchical linear modeling (HLM), and 2010-2013 VA administrative data to estimate differences in VA healthcare costs, pain intensity (0-10 numerical rating scale), and opioid use between CIH users and nonusers. We identified CIH use in Veterans’ medical records through Current Procedural Terminology, VA workload tracking, and provider-type codes.

There are more articles like this @ our:

Chiropractic Care For Veterans Page


Treatment of Patients with Low Back Pain

By |March 5, 2020|Cost-Effectiveness of Chiropractic|

Treatment of Patients with Low Back Pain: A Comparison of Physical Therapy and Chiropractic Manipulation

The Chiro.Org Blog

SOURCE:   Healthcare (Basel). 2020 (Feb 24); 8 (1): E44

Nima Khodakarami

Department of Health Policy and Management,
Texas A&M University,
College Station, TX 77843, USA.

Low back pain (LBP) is a pandemic and costly musculoskeletal condition in the United States (U.S.). Patients with LBP may endure surgery, injections, and expensive visits to emergency departments. Some suggest that using physical therapy (PT) or chiropractic in the earlier stage of LBP reduces the utilization of expensive health services and lowers the treatment costs. Given that there are costs and benefits with each of these treatments, the remaining question is in a short period of time which of these treatments is optimal. The purpose of this study was to investigate the cost-effectiveness of chiropractic versus PT in the U.S. A decision tree analytic model was used for estimating the economic outcomes. The findings showed that the total average cost in the chiropractic group was $48.56 lower than the PT group. The findings also showed that the daily adjusted life years (DALY) in the chiropractic group was 0.0043 higher than the PT group. Chiropractic care was shown to be a cost-effective alternative compared with PT for adults with at least three weeks of LBP over six months.

KEYWORDS:   Keywords: chiropractic; physical therapy; treatment outcome; low back pain; therapy; economics; patient satisfaction; recurrence; health care costs; illness

There are more articles like this @ our:

Cost-Effectiveness of Chiropractic Page


Chiropractic Integration Within a Community Health Centre

By |October 7, 2019|Cost-Effectiveness of Chiropractic|

Chiropractic Integration Within a Community Health Centre: A Cost Description and Partial Analysis of Cost-utility from the Perspective of the Institution

The Chiro.Org Blog

SOURCE:   J Can Chiropr Assoc. 2019 (Aug); 63 (2): 64–79

Peter C Emary, DC, MSc, Amy L Brown, DC, Douglas F Cameron, DC, and Alexander F Pessoa, DC

Private Practice,
Cambridge, ON, Canada.

OBJECTIVE:   To evaluate costs and consequences of a new back pain service provided by chiropractors integrated into a Community Health Centre in Cambridge, Ontario. The study sample included 95 consecutive patients presenting between January 2014 to January 2016 with a mixture of sub-acute and chronic back pain.

METHODS:   A secondary cost-utility analysis was performed and conducted from the perspective of the healthcare institution. Cost-utility was calculated as cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained over a time horizon of 90 days.

RESULTS:   According to the EuroQol 5 Domain questionnaire, nearly 70% of patients improved. The mean number of treatment sessions was 8.4, and an average of 0.21 QALYs were gained at an average cost per QALY of $1,042. Seventy-seven percent of patients did not visit their primary care provider over the 90-day period, representing potential cost savings to the institution of between $2,022.23 and $6,135.82.

There are more articles like this @ our:

Cost-Effectiveness of Chiropractic Page


Importance of the Type of Provider Seen

By |August 11, 2018|Cost-Effectiveness of Chiropractic|

Importance of the Type of Provider Seen to Begin Health Care for a New Episode Low Back Pain: Associations with Future Utilization and Costs

The Chiro.Org Blog

SOURCE:   J Eval Clin Pract. 2016 (Apr); 22 (2): 247–252

Julie M. Fritz PhD PT FAPTA, Jaewhan Kim PhD, and Josette Dorius BSN MPH

Department of Physical Therapy,
College of Health,
University of Utah,
Salt Lake City, UT, USA.

Editorial Comment

This article is the perfect example of how mis-leading an Abstract can be, when it fails to reflect what the study actually reveals.
(see it below)

The RESULTS portion of this Abstract only partially discusses the findings, comparing 3 different professions’ treatment, costs, and outcomes for low back pain.

In it they only mention the costs associated with medical management, while in reviewing chiropractic care vs. physical thereapy portions, they choose to emphasize:

Entry in chiropractic was associated with
an increased episode of care duration


Entry in physical therapy
no patient entering in physical therapy had surgery.

That *seems* to suggest that physical therapy *may* entail less expense, or shorter durations of care, or that chiropractic patients are more likely to end up with surgery.   None of that is true.   Their own Table 2 plainly reveals that chiropractic care was the least expensive form of care provided to the 3 groups.

There are more articles like this @ our:

The Cost-Effectiveness of Chiropractic Page


Comparative Effectiveness of Usual Care With or Without

By |July 9, 2018|Cost-Effectiveness of Chiropractic|

Comparative Effectiveness of Usual Care With or Without Chiropractic Care in Patients with Recurrent Musculoskeletal Back and Neck Pain

The Chiro.Org Blog

SOURCE:   J Gen Intern Med. 2018 (Jun 25) [Epub]

Charles Elder, MD MPH, Lynn DeBar, PhD MPH, Cheryl Ritenbaugh, PhD MPH, John Dickerson, PhD, William M. Vollmer, PhD, Richard A. Deyo, MD MPH, Eric S. Johnson, PhD, and Mitchell Haas, DC MA

Kaiser Permanente Center for Health Research,
Portland, OR, USA.

BACKGROUND:   Chiropractic care is a popular alternative for back and neck pain, with efficacy comparable to usual care in randomized trials. However, the effectiveness of chiropractic care as delivered through conventional care settings remains largely unexplored.

OBJECTIVE:   To evaluate the comparative effectiveness of usual care with or without chiropractic care for patients with chronic recurrent musculoskeletal back and neck pain.

STUDY DESIGN:   Prospective cohort study using propensity score-matched controls.

PARTICIPANTS:   Using retrospective electronic health record data, we developed a propensity score model predicting likelihood of chiropractic referral. Eligible patients with back or neck pain were then contacted upon referral for chiropractic care and enrolled in a prospective study. For each referred patient, two propensity score-matched non-referred patients were contacted and enrolled. We followed the participants prospectively for 6 months.

MAIN MEASURES:   Main outcomes included pain severity, interference, and symptom bothersomeness. Secondary outcomes included expenditures for pain-related health care.

KEY RESULTS:   Both groups’ (N = 70 referred, 139 non-referred) pain scores improved significantly over the first 3 months, with less change between months 3 and 6. No significant between-group difference was observed. (severity – 0.10 (95% CI – 0.30, 0.10), interference – 0.07 (– 0.31, 0.16), bothersomeness – 0.1 (– 0.39, 0.19)). After controlling for variances in baseline costs, total costs during the 6–month post-enrollment follow-up were significantly higher on average in the non-referred versus referred group ($1,996 [SD = 3874] vs $1,086 [SD = 1212], p = .034). Adjusting for differences in age, gender, and Charlson comorbidity index attenuated this finding, which was no longer statistically significant (p = .072).

There are more articles like this @ our:

Cost-Effectiveness of Chiropractic Page