scholarly journals Use of Physical Therapy for Low Back Pain by Medicaid Enrollees

2015 ◽  
Vol 95 (12) ◽  
pp. 1668-1679 ◽  
Author(s):  
Julie M. Fritz ◽  
Jaewhan Kim ◽  
Anne Thackeray ◽  
Josette Dorius

Background Medicaid insures an increasing proportion of adults in the United States. Physical therapy use for low back pain (LBP) in this population has not been described. Objective The study objectives were: (1) to examine physical therapy use by Medicaid enrollees with new LBP consultations and (2) to evaluate associations with future health care use and LBP-related costs. Design The study was designed as a retrospective evaluation of claims data. Methods A total of 2,289 patients with new LBP consultations were identified during 2012 (mean age=39.3 years [SD=11.9]; 68.2% women). The settings in which the patients entered care and comorbid conditions were identified. Data obtained at 1 year after entry were examined, and physical therapy use was categorized with regard to entry setting, early use (within 14 days of entry), or delayed use (>14 days after entry). The 1-year follow-up period was evaluated for use outcomes (imaging, injection, surgery, and emergency department visit) and LBP-related costs. Variables associated with physical therapy use and cost outcomes were evaluated with multivariate models. Results Physical therapy was used by 457 patients (20.0%); 75 (3.3%) entered care in physical therapy, 89 (3.9%) received early physical therapy, and 298 (13.0%) received delayed physical therapy. Physical therapy was more common with chronic pain or obesity comorbidities and less likely with substance use disorders. Entering care in the emergency department decreased the likelihood of physical therapy. Entering care in physical medicine increased the likelihood. Relative to primary care entry, physical therapy entry was associated with lower 1-year costs. Limitations A single state was studied. No patient-reported outcomes were included. Conclusions Physical therapy was used often by Medicaid enrollees with LBP. High rates of comorbidities were evident and associated with physical therapy use. Although few patients entered care in physical therapy, this pattern may be useful for managing costs.

2019 ◽  
Vol 11 (3) ◽  
pp. 113-119
Author(s):  
Howard S. Kim ◽  
Kyle J. Strickland ◽  
Daniel Pinto ◽  
Christina Arroyo ◽  
D. Mark Courtney ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
pp. bmjqs-2020-012337
Author(s):  
Danielle M Coombs ◽  
Gustavo C Machado ◽  
Bethan Richards ◽  
Chris Needs ◽  
Rachelle Buchbinder ◽  
...  

BackgroundOveruse of lumbar imaging is common in the emergency department (ED). Few trials have examined interventions to address this. We evaluated the effectiveness of a multifaceted intervention to implement guideline recommendations for low back pain in the emergency department.MethodsWe conducted a stepped-wedge, cluster-randomised trial in four EDs in New South Wales, Australia. After a 13-month control phase of usual care, the EDs received a multifaceted intervention to support guideline-endorsed care in a random order, based on a computer-generated random sequence, every 4 weeks over a 4-month period. All sites were followed up for at least 3 months. The primary outcome was the proportion of low back pain presentations receiving lumbar imaging. Secondary healthcare utilisation outcomes included prescriptions of opioid and non-opioid pain medicines, inpatient admissions, length of ED stay, specialist referrals and re-presentations. Clinician beliefs and knowledge about low back pain care were measured before and after the intervention. Patient-reported pain, disability, quality of life and satisfaction were measured at 1, 2 and 4 weeks post ED presentation.ResultsA total of 269 ED clinicians and 4625 episodes of care for low back pain (4491 patients) were included. The data did not provide clear evidence that the intervention reduced lumbar imaging (OR 0.77; 95% CI 0.47 to 1.26; p=0.29). It did reduce opioid use (OR 0.57; 95% CI 0.38 to 0.85; p=0.006) and improved clinicians’ beliefs (mean difference (MD), 2.85; 95% CI 1.85 to 3.85; p<0.001; on a scale from 9 to 45) and knowledge about low back pain care (MD, 0.48; 95% CI 0.13 to 0.83; p<0.01; on a scale from 0 to 11). There was no difference in pain scores at 1-week follow-up (MD, 0.04; 95% CI −1.00 to 1.08; p=0.94; on a scale from 0 to 10). A similar trend was observed for all other patient-reported outcomes and time points. This study found no effect on the other secondary healthcare utilisation outcomes.ConclusionIt is uncertain if a multifaceted intervention to implement guideline recommendations for low back pain care decreased lumbar imaging in the ED; however, it did reduce opioid prescriptions without adversely affecting patient outcomes.Trial registration number ACTRN12617001160325.


Author(s):  
Nima Khodakarami

Low back pain (LBP) is a pandemic and costly musculoskeletal condition in the United States. Patients with LBP may endure surgery, injections, and expensive visits to emergency departments. Some suggest that using physical therapy or chiropractic in the earlier stage of LBP reduces the utilization of expensive health services and lowers the treatment costs. Nevertheless, there is no consistent evidence to declare which one of these methods is a cost-effective treatment within a short (less than a year) period of time. The purpose of this study was to investigate the cost-effectiveness of chiropractic versus physical therapy in the United States. A decision tree analytic model was used for estimating the economic outcomes. The findings showed that in the chiropractic group, the total average cost was $48.56 lower than the physical therapy group, and daily adjusted life years (DALY) was 0.0043 higher than the physical therapy group. Chiropractic care was shown to be a cost-effective alternative compared with physical therapy for adults with at least three weeks of low back pain over six months.


Healthcare ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 44
Author(s):  
Nima Khodakarami

Low back pain (LBP) is a pandemic and costly musculoskeletal condition in the United States (U.S.). Patients with LBP may endure surgery, injections, and expensive visits to emergency departments. Some suggest that using physical therapy (PT) or chiropractic in the earlier stage of LBP reduces the utilization of expensive health services and lowers the treatment costs. Given that there are costs and benefits with each of these treatments, the remaining question is in a short period of time which of these treatments is optimal. The purpose of this study was to investigate the cost-effectiveness of chiropractic versus PT in the U.S. A decision tree analytic model was used for estimating the economic outcomes. The findings showed that the total average cost in the chiropractic group was $48.56 lower than the PT group. The findings also showed that the daily adjusted life years (DALY) in the chiropractic group was 0.0043 higher than the PT group. Chiropractic care was shown to be a cost-effective alternative compared with PT for adults with at least three weeks of LBP over six months.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document