Diagnostic and management procedures for compensable back injuries without serious associated injuries. Modeling of the 1991 injury cohort from a major Michigan compensation insurer

An economic model of one-level lumbar arthroplasty versus fusion

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

Degenerative disc disease (DDD) is a cause of low back pain commonly requiring surgical intervention. The option of lumbar total disc replacement (TDR) represents an advance in the surgical treatment of DDD. However, new treatments, particularly those that include the use of new implants, may lead to increased costs to both hospitals and payers. Therefore, it is both necessary and appropriate to examine the potential costs associated with a new procedure such as total disc replacement compared with traditional treatments for a specific pathology.

PURPOSE

To perform an economic analysis of lumbar TDR versus three different techniques for lumbar fusion.

STUDY DESIGN/SETTING

A cost-minimization model.

METHODS

An economic model examining hospital and payer cost perspectives was developed to compare costs of TDR with the CHARITE Artificial Disc to three spinal fusion procedures: anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) with iliac crest bone graft (ICBG); ALIF with INFUSE Bone Graft and LT-Cages, and instrumented posterior lumbar interbody fusion (IPLIF) with ICBG. The hospital perspective compares direct medical costs during the index hospitalization. The payer perspective considers direct medical costs of the index hospitalization and those incurred in the following two-year period. The model contains a Diagnostic Related Group (DRG) arm based strictly on DRG coding and payment, and a per-diem arm that includes a device carve-out cost and payment.

RESULTS

In the DRG and per-diem arms of the model, compared with TDR, hospital costs are 12.0% higher for ALIF with ICBG, 36.5% higher for ALIF with INFUSE, and 36.5% higher for IPLIF. For payers, in the per-diem arm compared with TDR, ALIF with ICBG has 4.4% lower cost, whereas ALIF with INFUSE and IPLIF have costs of 16.1% and 27.1% higher, respectively. In the DRG arm compared with TDR, payer cost is 87.1% higher for ALIF with ICBG, 82.8% higher for ALIF with INFUSE, and 99.0% higher for IPLIF.

CONCLUSIONS

The model shows that the overall economic effect of one-level TDR procedures on hospitals and payers is likely to be less than or at worse equivalent to one-level lumbar fusion procedures.

Office-based medical care for work-related conditions: findings from the National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey, 1997-1998

Data from the 1997 and 1998 National Ambulatory Medical Care Surveys were analyzed to describe nationally representative patterns of office-based ambulatory medical care for work-related injuries and illnesses. Key dimensions of care included patient demographics, diagnoses, utilization of services, provider and payer information, and characteristics of the clinical setting in which care was delivered. Multivariate analyses revealed that compared to visits for nonwork related conditions, ambulatory care visits for work-related conditions are more likely to involve x-rays, injury prevention counseling, and physiotherapy. Surgical procedures, mental health counseling, prescription drug medication, and the taking of blood pressure were found to be relatively less common. Additionally, authorization for care was required considerably more often at visits for work-related conditions, and the provider for patients with work-related conditions was less likely to be the patient's regular primary care physician.

Patients' views on importance and usefulness of plain radiography for low back pain

STUDY DESIGN

Quantitative and qualitative cross-sectional interview study.

OBJECTIVES

To investigate how patients who are referred for plain radiography because of low back pain perceive the importance and usefulness of the examination.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Up to 50% of plain radiography examinations for low back pain may be unnecessary based on clinical criteria. However, many patients have great confidence in these examinations. A further exploration of the patients' views may indicate how their needs can be met without unnecessary use of radiography.

METHODS

Ninety-nine patients (65 women, 34 men) 14-91 years of age who were referred from Norwegian general practitioners for plain radiography of the lumbosacral spine were asked to rate the examination as slightly/fairly or very important (93 responded). Chi-squared tests were used to evaluate differences in rating according to age, gender, clinical history, and clinical appropriateness of the examination, as determined by comparing information in the referral form with Norwegian (NR) and British (BR) recommendations for use of radiography. Each of the 99 patients also underwent a semistructured interview that was based on questions about importance, usefulness, and reasons for the radiography referral. Answers were categorized and described using a qualitative method (template analysis).

RESULTS

Seventy-two percent (68 of 93) of patients rated radiography as very important. The proportion was higher for men than women (85% vs. 65%, P = 0.04), higher for those with worsening than those with improving/unchanged symptoms (86% vs. 65%, P = 0.03), and higher for inappropriately than appropriately referred patients (NR: 76% vs. 61%, P = 0.17; BR: 81% vs. 56%, P = 0.01). The qualitative analysis showed that the patients related their views on the importance and usefulness of receiving radiography to seven different issues: symptoms and clinical history, information and advice (especially from health care providers), need for emotional support from the physician, need for certainty and reassurance, need for symptom explanation and diagnosis, reliability of radiography compared with clinical evaluation, and expected practical consequences of the radiologic examination.

CONCLUSIONS

The finding that inappropriately referred patients tended to rate their radiography referral as more important than appropriately referred patients indicates that the patient's view may be a substantial barrier to appropriate use of radiography. The study identified seven issues underlying the patients' views on importance and usefulness of receiving radiography. Strategies to prevent unnecessary use of plain radiography for low back pain that address these issues are suggested.

The effects of common medical interventions on pain, back function, and work resumption in patients with chronic low back pain: A prospective 2-year cohort study in six countries

STUDY DESIGN

A prospective cohort study with identical questionnaires and inclusion criteria was performed.

OBJECTIVES

To compare in six different countries the frequencies and effects of the common medical interventions used for patients with low back pain who are work incapacitated.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Low back pain is a huge problem with increasing costs for health care, industry, and society.

METHODS

Cohorts of employed men and women ages 18 to 59 years who had been sick-listed (100%) for a minimum of 90 days because of low back pain were recruited in Denmark, Germany, Israel, Sweden, the Netherlands, and the United States. The subjects received three separate questionnaires with identical questions after 90 days, 1 year, and 2 years. The questionnaires included separate questions about background factors, treatment, and the like, as well as validated scales such as the Hannover Activities of Daily Living, von Korff pain score, Short Form-36, and Karasek-Theorell. Working status was obtained from registers. Main outcome measures were working/not working, back function, and pain.

RESULTS

All three questionnaires were completed by 2080 subjects in the six countries. With few exceptions, there were great similarities in the appointments, examinations, and treatments in the different countries. Considerable differences were found between the back surgery rates, which ranged from 6% in Sweden to 32% in the United States during the first 90 days of the study. Very few of the interventions had any noticeable positive effects on work resumption, pain, or back function. Back surgery in Sweden was a striking exception, positively affecting all three outcome measures. The frequencies of work resumption within the first year ranged from 73% in the Netherlands to 32% in Denmark.

CONCLUSIONS

Almost none of the commonly occurring and frequently practiced medical interventions for patients who are sick-listed because of low back pain had any positive effects on either the recorded health measures or work resumption.

Clinical practices in the management of new-onset, uncomplicated, low back workers' compensation disability claims

Recent consensus guidelines delineate what appears to be the most successful and cost-effective management of low back pain (LBP), and some recent studies have suggested that better outcomes occur with the least aggressive forms of medical intervention. The purpose of this study was to describe how practitioners manage new-onset, uncomplicated low back workers' compensation (WC) disability cases. A sample of cases was randomly selected from a large insurance carrier's national data source. An effort was made to select only uncomplicated cases, which would be expected to have relatively minimal need for medical intervention. There was an apparent overuse of diagnostic and treatment modalities. Diagnostic imaging was overutilized, not only in terms of the number of studies done (65% had plain films, 22% had magnetic resonance imaging scans) but also in the time frame in which they were performed (38% had plain films on the first clinic visit). Ninety percent received at least one medication, and 38% received more than one prescription for opioid analgesics. Expensive non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs were prescribed more often than acetaminophen (61% versus 6%, respectively). Sixty-two percent received physical therapy that often included modalities with as yet unproven efficacy. Overutilization of either diagnostic or treatment procedures increases the likelihood of iatrogenic complications, is not cost-effective, and may adversely impact clinical and occupational outcomes.

Healthcare utilization and referral patterns in the initial management of new-onset, uncomplicated, low back workers' compensation disability claims

Most episodes of low back pain are considered non-specific in nature, with the vast majority resolving within 2 weeks and almost all resolving within 6 weeks regardless of the medical intervention. Recently published clinical guidelines have clearly delineated a limited set of circumstances that would indicate the need for specialist referral. The purpose of this study was to describe the healthcare utilization and physician referral patterns for new-onset, uncomplicated, low back workers' compensation disability cases randomly selected from a large insurance carrier data source. The provision of care in urgent care centers and emergency departments for both initial and main sources of care occurred more frequently than was probably indicated. For this selected group of uncomplicated low back pain cases, specialist care was provided more commonly than would be expected or indicated (36% of the sample was seen by a surgeon, while only 2% received surgery). In addition, referral to specialists (other than occupational medicine specialists) was often made sooner than would be expected or indicated, with a median of 13 days for such referrals. Such overutilization of resources can reasonably be expected to increase overall medical costs.

Claim rates of compensable back injuries by age, gender, occupation, and industry. Do they relate to return-to-work experience?

STUDY DESIGN

A retrospective cohort study of Michigan workers' compensation cases involving back injuries in 1986 and 1987 with incidence and outcome data.

OBJECTIVE

To determine claim rates by age, gender, and industry or occupation for compensable back injuries and to investigate the relation between occupation and return to work.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

The cohort of 24,094 Michigan workers' compensation cases from 1986 and 1987 in which claimants were compensated for back injuries was reviewed. Compensation eligibility requires more than 7 days' disability after injury.

METHODS

Claim rates for back injuries by age, gender, and industry or occupation using employment data interpolated from 1980 and 1990 Census 1% Public Use Microdata Samples. Cox proportional hazards analysis was performed for return to work in the first 8 weeks after injury, with occupation coded at the three-digit level.

RESULTS

All-age claim rates for Michigan compensable back injuries by occupation ranged between 0.03% and 1.7% annually (0.39% for all cases) and were generally higher in women in white collar occupations and in men in blue collar occupations. The claim rate peaked in men in the 25-34 year range, with the highest rates in manual labor occupations. The peak claim rates by age were less marked in women, tending to occur broadly throughout the 25-44-year range. Similar all-age values were recorded by industry. The male-to-female risk ratio over all occupations does not vary by age and is approximately 1.4:1. As the classification of occupation became more detailed, large differences in risk were documented within major occupation groups. The highest risk in this study was approximately 6% annually for 25-44 year old men in driver-sales (beverage truck drivers and delivery workers). Only 7 of 40 occupation categories showed a significant relative hazard for return to work in the first 8 weeks after injury, and these were blue collar occupations with earlier return than the reference sales category. For Michigan compensable back injuries, a rough estimate of the true annual incidence of new claims is 94% of the reported claim rate.

CONCLUSIONS

The relative risk of compensable back injury is generally higher for females in white collar occupations, higher for males in blue collar occupations and approximately equal in service occupations. Although the risk of back injury is related to occupation, the same occupational factors do not operate as a barrier to return to work.