Chiro.org - Chiropractic Resource Organization.     Support Chiropractic Research!

Cost-Effectiveness of Chiropractic

Home/Cost-Effectiveness of Chiropractic

Importance of the Type of Provider Seen to Begin Health Care for a New Episode Low Back Pain

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

whereas

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

(more…)

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

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

(more…)