J Chiropractic Humanities 2013 (Oct 24); 20 (1): 19–26 ~ FULL TEXT
David R. Seaman, DC, MS, Jonathan R. Soltys, DC, MS
National University of Health Sciences,
Pinellas Park, FL.
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this commentary is to discuss potential 5 factors within straight chiropractic philosophy and practice that may prevent Medicare compliance.
DISCUSSION: The national Medicare Benefit Policy Manual and the Florida Local Coverage Determination were reviewed to identify documentation and conceptual issues regarding chiropractic practice. Five Medicare positions were contrasted with tenets of straight chiropractic philosophy. Based on Medicare's documentation requirements, Medicare defines subluxation and chiropractic practice from the perspective of treating spinal pain and related functional disability. In contrast, traditional straight chiropractic philosophy is not based on the treatment of spinal pain and disability or other symptomatic presentations. In this context, 5 potential areas of conflict are discussed.
CONCLUSION: The Medicare version of chiropractic practice is not consistent with traditional straight chiropractic philosophy, which may play a role in preventing Medicare compliance. The chiropractic profession may need to consider the fashion in which "philosophy" as it relates to technique and practice is presented to students and doctors to facilitate compliance with the documentation requirements of Medicare.
KEYWORDS: Back pain; Chiropractic; Manipulation; Medicare; Philosophy; Spinal
Return to MEDICARE
Return to SUBLUXATION