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.
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.
Authors: Adam C Powell; Teresa L Rogstad; Sarah W Elliott; Stephen E Price; James W Long; Uday U Deshmukh; M Hassan Murad; Mark W Steffen Journal: J Am Board Fam Med Date: 2019 Nov-Dec Impact factor: 2.657
Authors: Kelsey L Corcoran; Lori A Bastian; Craig G Gunderson; Catherine Steffens; Alexandria Brackett; Anthony J Lisi Journal: Pain Med Date: 2020-02-01 Impact factor: 3.750
Authors: Roger Chou; Judith A Turner; Emily B Devine; Ryan N Hansen; Sean D Sullivan; Ian Blazina; Tracy Dana; Christina Bougatsos; Richard A Deyo Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 2015-02-17 Impact factor: 25.391
Authors: Mark R Jones; Ken P Ehrhardt; Juan G Ripoll; Bharat Sharma; Ira W Padnos; Rachel J Kaye; Alan D Kaye Journal: Curr Pain Headache Rep Date: 2016-04
Authors: James M Whedon; Andrew W J Toler; Louis A Kazal; Serena Bezdjian; Justin M Goehl; Jay Greenstein Journal: Pain Med Date: 2020-12-25 Impact factor: 3.750
Authors: Sidney M Rubinstein; Annemarie de Zoete; Marienke van Middelkoop; Willem J J Assendelft; Michiel R de Boer; Maurits W van Tulder Journal: BMJ Date: 2019-03-13
Authors: Ingred Merllin Batista de Souza; Tina Fujii Sakaguchi; Susan Lee King Yuan; Luciana Akemi Matsutani; Adriana de Sousa do Espírito-Santo; Carlos Alberto de Bragança Pereira; Amélia Pasqual Marques Journal: Clinics (Sao Paulo) Date: 2019-10-28 Impact factor: 2.365