Experiences With Chiropractic Care for Patients With Low Back or Neck Pain

Patient Experience and Satisfaction With Chiropractic Care: A Systematic Review

Despite numerous studies that measure satisfaction in patients undergoing chiropractic care, these have not yet been systematically summarized. The aim of this study was to perform a systematic review of existing literature to identify factors that contribute to high levels of satisfaction in chiropractic care. A comprehensive search was conducted to identify quantitative, qualitative, or mixed-methods studies exploring patient experience with chiropractic care. Forty-three studies were included in the review. The findings showed that patient satisfaction was consistently high in comparison to other professions. The review identified key factors that contribute to patient experience, which were not limited to clinical outcomes, but also the clinical interaction and clinician attributes. The findings of this review provide a core insight into patient experience, identifying both positive and negative experiences not just within chiropractic care but in the wider healthcare sector. Further work should explore factors that impact patient satisfaction and how this understanding may further improve healthcare to enhance patient experience.

Predictors of Pain Management Strategies in Adults with Low-Back Pain: A Secondary Analysis of Amazon Mechanical Turk Survey Data

Objective: To evaluate the associations between baseline demographics, health conditions, pain management strategies, and health-related quality-of-life (HRQoL) measures with pain management strategies at 3-month follow-up in respondents reporting current low-back pain (LBP). Study design: Cohort study of survey data collected from adults with LBP sampled from Amazon Mechanical Turk crowdsourcing panel. Methods: Demographics, health conditions, and the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS)-10 were included in the baseline survey. Respondents reporting LBP completed a more comprehensive survey inquiring about pain management strategies and several HRQoL measures. Bivariate then multivariate logistic regression estimated odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for the association between baseline characteristics and pain management utilization at 3-month follow-up. Model fit statistics were evaluated to assess the predictive value. Results: The final cohort included 717 respondents with completed surveys. The most prevalent pain management strategy at follow-up was other care (n = 474), followed by no care (n = 94), conservative care only (n = 76), medical care only (n = 51), and medical and conservative care combined (n = 22). The conservative care only group had higher (better) mental and physical health PROMIS-10 scores as opposed to the medical care only and combination care groups, which had lower (worse) physical health scores. In multivariate models, estimated ORs (95% CIs) for the association between baseline and follow-up pain management ranged from 4.6 (2.7-7.8) for conservative care only to 16.8 (6.9-40.7) for medical care only. Additional significant baseline predictors included age, income, education, workman's compensation claim, Oswestry Disability Index score, and Global Chronic Pain Scale grade. Conclusions: This study provides important information regarding the association between patient characteristics, HRQoL measures, and LBP-related pain management utilization.

An investigation into chiropractic intern adherence to radiographic guidelines in clinical decisions with a descriptive comparison to clinical practitioners

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to assess chiropractic interns' knowledge and adherence to radiographic clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) and compare their clinical decisions to previous surveys of established practitioners in Canada and Australia.

METHODS

A clinical decision-making survey was administered to 88 interns. The survey contained clinical scenarios and vignettes with inquiries regarding indications for radiographic referral, the likelihood of referral, and the application of CPGs.

RESULTS

Forty-four percent (43.75%) of the interns were aware of CPGs, 38.75% were unsure, and 17.5% were not aware. When asked specific questions about the appropriateness of diagnostic imaging, the interns' responses were similar to those of practitioners in Canada and Australia. When interns evaluated a clinical vignette, there was lower compliance with CPGs.

CONCLUSION

The interns' clinical decisions regarding the use of diagnostic radiography did not significantly differ from those of practitioners who were surveyed in other related studies. Interns were inconsistent in applying their decision making in clinical cases. Notwithstanding the similarities with practitioners, some deviation from the guidelines indicates the need for further intern education to improve the implementation of CPGs for optimal cost-effective and clinically appropriate care.