The comparative effect of episodes of chiropractic and medical treatment on the health of older adults

Treatment Patterns and Population Characteristics of Nonpharmacological Management of Chronic Pain in the United States' Medicare Population: A Scoping Review

Background and Objectives

Clinical practice guidelines recommend noninvasive nonpharmacological pain therapies; however, reviews that assess the literature pertaining to nonpharmacological pain management among older adults and people with long-term disabilities who are disproportionately affected by pain are lacking. This scoping review aimed to systematically map and characterize the existing studies about the receipt of noninvasive, nonpharmacological pain therapies by Medicare beneficiaries.

Research Design and Methods

We conducted a literature search in MEDLINE (PubMed), CINAHL (EBSCO), SocINDEX (EBSCO), Cochrane Library, Web of Science citation indices, and various sources of gray literature. The initial search was conducted on November 2, 2021, and updated on March 9, 2022. Two independent reviewers screened titles, abstracts, and full texts for inclusion and extracted the characteristics of the studies, studied populations, and nonpharmacological pain therapies. Data were summarized using tabular and narrative formats.

Results

The final review included 33 studies. Of these, 24 were quantitative, 7 were qualitative, and 2 were mixed-methods studies. Of 32 studies that focused on Medicare beneficiaries, 10 did not specify the Medicare type, and all but one of the remaining studies were restricted to fee-for-service enrollees. Back and neck pain and arthritis were the most commonly studied pain types. Chiropractic care (n = 19) and physical therapy (n = 17) appeared frequently among included studies. The frequency and/or duration of nonpharmacological treatment were mentioned in 13 studies. Trends in the utilization of nonpharmacological pain therapies were assessed in 6 studies but none of these studies went beyond 2008.

Discussion and Implications

This scoping review found that manipulative therapies, mainly chiropractic, have been the most widely studied approaches for nonpharmacological pain management in the Medicare population. The review also identified the need for future research that updates trend data and addresses contemporary issues such as rising Medicare Advantage enrollment and promulgation of practice guidelines for pain management.

Three Patterns of Spinal Manipulative Therapy for Back Pain and Their Association With Imaging Studies, Injection Procedures, and Surgery: A Cohort Study of Insurance Claims

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the relationship between procedures and care patterns in back pain episodes by analyzing health insurance claims.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective cohort study of insurance claims data from a single Fortune 500 company. The 3 care patterns we analyzed were initial spinal manipulative therapy, delayed spinal manipulative therapy, and no spinal manipulative therapy. The 3 procedures analyzed were imaging studies, injection procedures, and back surgery. We considered "escalated care" to be any claims with diagnostic imaging, injection procedures, or back surgery. Modified-Poisson regression modeling was used to determine relative risk of escalated care.

RESULTS

There were 83 025 claims that were categorized into 10 372 unique patient first episodes. Spinal manipulative therapy was present in 2943 episodes (28%). Initial spinal manipulation was present in 2519 episodes (24%), delayed spinal manipulation was present in 424 episodes (4%), and 7429 (72%) had no evidence of spinal manipulative therapy. The estimated relative risk, adjusted for age, sex, and risk score, for care escalation (eg, imaging, injections, or surgery) was 0.70 (95% confidence interval 0.65-0.75, P < .001) for initial spinal manipulation and 1.22 (95% confidence interval 1.10-1.35, P < .001) for delayed spinal manipulation with no spinal manipulation used as the reference group.

CONCLUSION

For claims associated with initial episodes of back pain, initial spinal manipulative therapy was associated with an approximately 30% decrease in the risk of imaging studies, injection procedures, or back surgery compared with no spinal manipulative therapy. The risk of imaging studies, injection procedures, or back surgery in episodes in the delayed spinal manipulative therapy group was higher than those without spinal manipulative therapy.

Initial Choice of Spinal Manipulation Reduces Escalation of Care for Chronic Low Back Pain Among Older Medicare Beneficiaries

STUDY DESIGN

We combined elements of cohort and crossover-cohort design.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to compare longterm outcomes for spinal manipulative therapy (SMT) and opioid analgesic therapy (OAT) regarding escalation of care for patients with chronic low back pain (cLBP).

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Current evidence-based guidelines for clinical management of cLBP include both OAT and SMT. For long-term care of older adults, the efficiency and value of continuing either OAT or SMT are uncertain.

METHODS

We examined Medicare claims data spanning a five-year period. We included older Medicare beneficiaries with an episode of cLBP beginning in 2013. All patients were continuously enrolled under Medicare Parts A, B, and D. We analyzed the cumulative frequency of encounters indicative of an escalation of care for cLBP, including hospitalizations, emergency department visits, advanced diagnostic imaging, specialist visits, lumbosacral surgery, interventional pain medicine techniques, and encounters for potential complications of cLBP.

RESULTS

SMT was associated with lower rates of escalation of care as compared to OAT. The adjusted rate of escalated care encounters was approximately 2.5 times higher for initial choice of OAT vs. initial choice of SMT (with weighted propensity scoring: rate ratio 2.67, 95% confidence interval 2.64-2.69, P < .0001).

CONCLUSION

Among older Medicare beneficiaries who initiated long-term care for cLBP with opioid analgesic therapy, the adjusted rate of escalated care encounters was significantly higher as compared to those who initiated care with spinal manipulative therapy.Level of Evidence: 3.

Full-Coverage Chiropractic in Medicare: A Proposal to Eliminate Inequities, Improve Outcomes, and Reduce Health Disparities Without Increasing Overall Program Costs

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this article is to discuss evidence that supports the resolution of inequities for Medicare beneficiaries who receive chiropractic care.

DISCUSSION

Medicare covers necessary examinations, imaging, exercise instruction, and treatments for beneficiaries with back pain when provided by medical doctors, osteopaths, and their associated support staff such as nurse practitioners, physician assistants, clinical nurse specialists, and physical therapists. However, if the same patient with back pain presents to a chiropractor, then the only service that is covered by Medicare is manipulation of the spine. Current evidence does not support this inequity in Medicare beneficiary service coverage. There is no evidence to show an increase in serious risks associated with chiropractic treatment of neck or back pain in Medicare beneficiaries. Chiropractors support national public health goals and endorse safe, evidence-based practices. Chiropractic care for Medicare beneficiaries has been associated with enhanced clinical outcomes such as faster recovery, fewer back surgeries a year later, reduced opioid-associated disability, fewer traumatic injuries and falls, and slower declines in activities of daily living and disability over time. Further evidence points to lower costs, fewer medical physician visits for low back pain, less opioid-related expense, and less back-surgery expense with chiropractic utilization. Use is lower among vulnerable populations: seniors, lower income women, and black and Hispanic beneficiaries who may be most affected by current inequities associated with the limited coverage. In this era of evidence-based and patient-centered care, beneficiaries who receive chiropractic care are very satisfied with the care they receive.

CONCLUSION

The current evidence suggests a need for change in US policy toward chiropractic in Medicare and support for HR 3654. Ending inequities by providing patients full coverage for chiropractic services has the potential to enhance care outcomes and reduce health disparities without increasing program costs.

Moving towards a contemporary chiropractic professional identity

Since the inception of the chiropractic profession, debate has continued on differing practice objectives and philosophical approaches to patient care. While the political and academic leaders of the profession continue to dominate the discourse, little is known on the perspectives of the everyday practising chiropractor on their professional identity. In this paper, professional identity within the profession of chiropractic was evaluated using a systematised search strategy of the literature from the year 2000 through to May 2019. Initially 562 articles were sourced, of which 24 met the criteria for review. The review confirmed three previously stated professional identity subgroups; two polarised approaches and a centrist or mixed view. The musculoskeletal biomedical approach is in contrast to the vertebral subluxation vitalistic practice approach. Whilst these three main chiropractic identity subtypes exist, within the literature the terminology used to describe them differs. Research aimed at categorising the chiropractic profession identity into exclusive subtypes found that at least 20% of chiropractors have an exclusive vertebral subluxation focus. However, deeper exploration of the literature shows that vertebral subluxation is an important practice consideration for up to 70% of chiropractors. Patient care with a musculoskeletal spine focus is dominant in clinical practice. This review found that practising chiropractors consider themselves to be primary care or primary contact practitioners with a broad scope of practice across a number of patient groups not limited to musculoskeletal management. Across the research, there is a marked difference in the categories of practice objectives evaluated, and future research could examine the relatedness of these. Additionally, future research could explore the professional identity construct over time and within different practice contexts to help facilitate the progression of the profession.

Differences in Function and Comorbidities Between Older Adult Users and Nonusers of Chiropractic and Osteopathic Manipulation: A Cross-sectional Analysis of the 2012 National Health Interview Survey

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this cross-sectional study was to compare functional limitations and comorbidity prevalence between older adult users and nonusers of chiropractic and osteopathic (DC/DO) manipulation to inform provider training.

METHODS

We conducted a secondary analysis of the 2012 National Health Interview Survey data. Adults age 65 or older who responded to the survey were included. Descriptive statistics are reported for adults who used DC/DO manipulation (vs nonusers) regarding function, comorbidities, musculoskeletal complaints, and medical services. Weighted percentages were derived using SAS and compared with χ² tests.

RESULTS

The DC/DO users were more often female, overweight or obese, and of white race than nonusers. More DC/DO users reported arthritis (55.3% vs 47.0%, <0.01) or asthma (15.0% vs 10.0%, P < .01) than nonusers; hypertension (61.9% vs 55.5%, P = .02) and diabetes (20.3% vs 15.7%, P = .02) were more prevalent in nonusers; and other comorbidities were comparable. The DC/DO users reported more joint pain/stiffness (55.7% vs 44.8%), chronic pain (19.8% vs 14.2%), low back pain (27.8% vs 18.4%), low back with leg pain (18.8% vs 10.6%), and neck pain (24.2% vs 13.1%) than nonusers (all P < .01). Functional limitations affected two-thirds overall, but DC/DO users reported more difficulties stooping and bending; other limitations were comparable. One in 9 reported activities of daily living or instrumental activities of daily living limitations; nonusers were more affected. Surgery was more common among DC/DO users (26.1% vs 19.3%, <0.01); emergency room visits were comparable.

CONCLUSION

Differences existed between older adult manipulation users and nonusers, especially surgical utilization, musculoskeletal complaints, and comorbidities; functional differences were modest. Our findings highlight areas for provider training and awareness regarding comorbidity burden and management needs in older patients who may simultaneously use manipulation and medical care for musculoskeletal complaints.

Interdisciplinary Practice Models for Older Adults With Back Pain: A Qualitative Evaluation

Purpose

Older adults seek health care for low back pain from multiple providers who may not coordinate their treatments. This study evaluated the perceived feasibility of a patient-centered practice model for back pain, including facilitators for interprofessional collaboration between family medicine physicians and doctors of chiropractic.

Design and Methods

This qualitative evaluation was a component of a randomized controlled trial of 3 interdisciplinary models for back pain management: usual medical care; concurrent medical and chiropractic care; and collaborative medical and chiropractic care with interprofessional education, clinical record exchange, and team-based case management. Data collection included clinician interviews, chart abstractions, and fieldnotes analyzed with qualitative content analysis. An organizational-level framework for dissemination of health care interventions identified norms/attitudes, organizational structures and processes, resources, networks-linkages, and change agents that supported model implementation.

Results

Clinicians interviewed included 13 family medicine residents and 6 chiropractors. Clinicians were receptive to interprofessional education, noting the experience introduced them to new colleagues and the treatment approaches of the cooperating profession. Clinicians exchanged high volumes of clinical records, but found the logistics cumbersome. Team-based case management enhanced information flow, social support, and interaction between individual patients and the collaborating providers. Older patients were viewed positively as change agents for interprofessional collaboration between these provider groups.

Implications

Family medicine residents and doctors of chiropractic viewed collaborative care as a useful practice model for older adults with back pain. Health care organizations adopting medical and chiropractic collaboration can tailor this general model to their specific setting to support implementation.

The chiropractic profession: a scoping review of utilization rates, reasons for seeking care, patient profiles, and care provided

Background

Previous research has investigated utilization rates, who sees chiropractors, for what reasons, and the type of care that chiropractors provide. However, these studies have not been comprehensively synthesized. We aimed to give a global overview by summarizing the current literature on the utilization of chiropractic services, reasons for seeking care, patient profiles, and assessment and treatment provided.

Methods

Systematic searches were conducted in MEDLINE, CINAHL, and Index to Chiropractic Literature using keywords and subject headings (MeSH or ChiroSH terms) from database inception to January 2016. Eligible studies: 1) were published in English or French; 2) were case series, descriptive, cross-sectional, or cohort studies; 3) described patients receiving chiropractic services; and 4) reported on the following theme(s): utilization rates of chiropractic services; reasons for attending chiropractic care; profiles of chiropractic patients; or, types of chiropractic services provided. Paired reviewers independently screened all citations and data were extracted from eligible studies. We provided descriptive numerical analysis, e.g. identifying the median rate and interquartile range (e.g., chiropractic utilization rate) stratified by study population or condition.

Results

The literature search retrieved 14,149 articles; 328 studies (reported in 337 articles) were relevant and reported on chiropractic utilization (245 studies), reason for attending chiropractic care (85 studies), patient demographics (130 studies), and assessment and treatment provided (34 studies). Globally, the median 12-month utilization of chiropractic services was 9.1% (interquartile range (IQR): 6.7%-13.1%) and remained stable between 1980 and 2015. Most patients consulting chiropractors were female (57.0%, IQR: 53.2%-60.0%) with a median age of 43.4 years (IQR: 39.6-48.0), and were employed (median: 77.3%, IQR: 70.3%-85.0%). The most common reported reasons for people attending chiropractic care were (median) low back pain (49.7%, IQR: 43.0%-60.2%), neck pain (22.5%, IQR: 16.3%-24.5%), and extremity problems (10.0%, IQR: 4.3%-22.0%). The most common treatment provided by chiropractors included (median) spinal manipulation (79.3%, IQR: 55.4%-91.3%), soft-tissue therapy (35.1%, IQR: 16.5%-52.0%), and formal patient education (31.3%, IQR: 22.6%-65.0%).

Conclusions

This comprehensive overview on the world-wide state of the chiropractic profession documented trends in the literature over the last four decades. The findings support the diverse nature of chiropractic practice, although common trends emerged.

Patient-centered professional practice models for managing low back pain in older adults: a pilot randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Low back pain is a debilitating condition for older adults, who may seek healthcare from multiple providers. Few studies have evaluated impacts of different healthcare delivery models on back pain outcomes in this population. The purpose of this study was to compare clinical outcomes of older adults receiving back pain treatment under 3 professional practice models that included primary medical care with or without chiropractic care.

METHODS

We conducted a pilot randomized controlled trial with 131 community-dwelling, ambulatory older adults with subacute or chronic low back pain. Participants were randomly allocated to 12 weeks of individualized primary medical care (Medical Care), concurrent medical and chiropractic care (Dual Care), or medical and chiropractic care with enhanced interprofessional collaboration (Shared Care). Primary outcomes were low back pain intensity rated on the numerical rating scale and back-related disability measured with the Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire. Secondary outcomes included clinical measures, adverse events, and patient satisfaction. Statistical analyses included mixed-effects regression models and general estimating equations.

RESULTS

At 12 weeks, participants in all three treatment groups reported improvements in mean average low back pain intensity [Shared Care: 1.8; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.0 to 2.6; Dual Care: 3.0; 95% CI 2.3 to 3.8; Medical Care: 2.3; 95% CI 1.5 to 3.2)] and back-related disability (Shared Care: 2.8; 95% CI 1.6 to 4.0; Dual Care: 2.5; 95% CI 1.3 to 3.7; Medical Care: 1.5; 95% CI 0.2 to 2.8). No statistically significant differences were noted between the three groups on the primary measures. Participants in both models that included chiropractic reported significantly better perceived low back pain improvement, overall health and quality of life, and greater satisfaction with healthcare services than patients who received medical care alone.

CONCLUSIONS

Professional practice models that included primary care and chiropractic care led to modest improvements in low back pain intensity and disability for older adults, with chiropractic-inclusive models resulting in better perceived improvement and patient satisfaction over the primary care model alone.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinicaltrials.gov, NCT01312233 , 4 March 2011.

Essential literature for the chiropractic profession: Results and implementation challenges from a survey of international chiropractic faculty

OBJECTIVE

Scientific literature applicable to chiropractic practice proliferates in quantity, quality, and source. Chiropractic is a worldwide profession and varies in scope between states or provinces and from country to country. It is logical to consider that the focus and emphasis of chiropractic education varies between programs as well. This original research study endeavored to determine "essential literature" recommended by chiropractic faculty. The purpose of this article is (1) to share our results and (2) to promote discussion and explore means for future collaboration of chiropractic faculty through a worldwide platform.

METHODS

A 2-phase recruitment occurred initially at the institutional level and subsequently at the faculty level. A Web-based survey used qualitative data collection methods to gather bibliographic citations. Descriptive statistics were calculated for demographics, and citation responses were ranked per number of recommendations, grouped into categories, and tabulated per journal source and publication date.

RESULTS

Forty-one chiropractic programs were contacted, resulting in 30 participating chiropractic programs (16 US and 14 international). Forty-five faculty members completed the entire survey, submitting 126 peer-reviewed publications and 25 additional citations. Readings emphasized clinical management of spine pain, the science of spinal manipulation, effectiveness of manual therapies, teaching of chiropractic techniques, outcomes assessments, and professional issues.

CONCLUSION

A systematic approach to surveying educators in international chiropractic institutions was accomplished. The results of the survey provide a list of essential literature for the chiropractic profession. We recommend establishing a chiropractic faculty registry for improved communication and collaboration.

Regional Supply of Chiropractic Care and Visits to Primary Care Physicians for Back and Neck Pain

BACKGROUND

Whether availability of chiropractic care affects use of primary care physician (PCP) services is unknown.

METHODS

We performed a cross-sectional study of 17.7 million older adults who were enrolled in Medicare from 2010 to 2011. We examined the relationship between regional supply of chiropractic care and PCP services using Spearman correlation. Generalized linear models were used to examine the association between regional supply of chiropractic care and number of annual visits to PCPs for back and/or neck pain.

RESULTS

We found a positive association between regional supply of chiropractic care and PCP services (rs = 0.52; P <.001). An inverse association between supply of chiropractic care and the number of annual visits to PCPs for back and/or neck pain was apparent. The number of PCP visits for back and/or neck pain was 8% lower (rate ratio, 0.92; 95% confidence interval, 0.91-0.92) in the quintile with the highest supply of chiropractic care compared to the lowest quintile. We estimate chiropractic care is associated with a reduction of 0.37 million visits to PCPs nationally, at a cost of $83.5 million.

CONCLUSIONS

Greater availability of chiropractic care in some areas may be offsetting PCP services for back and/or neck pain among older adults.

Chiropractic use in the Medicare population: prevalence, patterns, and associations with 1-year changes in health and satisfaction with care

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to examine how chiropractic care compares to medical treatments on 1-year changes in self-reported function, health, and satisfaction with care measures in a representative sample of Medicare beneficiaries.

METHODS

Logistic regression using generalized estimating equations is used to model the effect of chiropractic relative to medical care on decline in 5 functional measures and 2 measures of self-rated health among 12170 person-year observations. The same method is used to estimate the comparative effect of chiropractic on 6 satisfaction with care measures. Two analytic approaches are used, the first assuming no selection bias and the second using propensity score analyses to adjust for selection effects in the outcome models.

RESULTS

The unadjusted models show that chiropractic is significantly protective against 1-year decline in activities of daily living, lifting, stooping, walking, self-rated health, and worsening health after 1 year. Persons using chiropractic are more satisfied with their follow-up care and with the information provided to them. In addition to the protective effects of chiropractic in the unadjusted model, the propensity score results indicate a significant protective effect of chiropractic against decline in reaching.

CONCLUSION

This study provides evidence of a protective effect of chiropractic care against 1-year declines in functional and self-rated health among Medicare beneficiaries with spine conditions, and indications that chiropractic users have higher satisfaction with follow-up care and information provided about what is wrong with them.