Disparities in Provider Ordering Practices of Image-Guided Interventions and Surgery for Patients With Low Back Pain: A Cohort Study.

OBJECTIVE: To assess individual- and neighborhood-level sociodemographic factors associating with providers' ordering of nonpharmacologic treatments for patients with low back pain (LBP), specifically physical therapy, image-guided interventions, and lumbar surgery. METHODS: Our cohort included all patients diagnosed with LBP from 2000 to 2017 in a statewide database of all hospitals and ambulatory surgical facilities within Utah. We compared sociodemographic and clinical characteristics of (1) patients with LBP who received any treatment with those who received none and (2) patients with LBP who received invasive LBP treatments with those who only received noninvasive LBP treatments using the Student's t test, Wilcoxon's rank-sum tests, and Pearson's χ2 tests, as applicable, and two separate multivariate logistic regression models: (1) to determine whether sociodemographic characteristics were risk factors for receiving any LBP treatments and (2) risk factors for receiving invasive LBP treatments. RESULTS: Individuals in the most disadvantaged neighborhoods were less likely to receive any nonpharmacologic treatment orders (odds ratio [OR] 0.74 for most disadvantaged, P < .001) and received fewer invasive therapies (0.92, P = .018). Individual-level characteristics correlating with lower rates of treatment orders were female sex, Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander race (OR 0.50, P < .001), Hispanic ethnicity (OR 0.77, P < .001), single or unmarried status (OR 0.69, P < .001), and no insurance or self-pay (OR 0.07, P < .001). CONCLUSION: Neighborhood and individual sociodemographic variables associated with treatment orders for LBP with Area Deprivation Index, sex, race or ethnicity, insurance, and marital status associating with receipt of any treatment, as well as more invasive image-guided interventions and surgery.

Rates of Burnout in Female Orthopaedic Surgeons Correlate with Barriers to Gender Equity.

BACKGROUND: The primary purpose of this study was to investigate the relationships between career burnout and the barriers to gender equity identified by Canadian female orthopaedic surgeons. A secondary purpose was to assess relationships between the demographic characteristics of the female surgeons and career burnout and job satisfaction. METHODS: An electronic survey was distributed to 330 Canadian female orthopaedic surgeons. Demographic variables including age, stage and years in practice, practice setting, and marital status were collated. The survey included the Gender Bias Scale (GBS) questionnaire and 2 questions each about career burnout and job satisfaction. The Pearson r correlation coefficient evaluated the relationships among the higher- and lower-order factors of the GBS, burnout, and job satisfaction. Spearman rank correlation coefficient assessed relationships among burnout, job satisfaction, and demographic variables. RESULTS: Survey responses were received from 218 (66.1%) of the 330 surgeons. A total of 110 surgeons (50.5%) agreed or strongly agreed that they felt career burnout (median score = 4). Burnout was positively correlated with the GBS higher-order factors of Male Privilege (r = 0.215, p < 0.01), Devaluation (r = 0.166, p < 0.05), and Disproportionate Constraints (r = 0.152, p < 0.05). Job satisfaction (median = 4) was reported by 168 surgeons (77.1%), and 66.1% were also satisfied or very satisfied with their role in the workplace (median = 4). Burnout was significantly negatively correlated with surgeon age and job satisfaction. CONCLUSIONS: Half of the female orthopaedic surgeons reported symptoms of career burnout. Significant relationships were evident between burnout and barriers to gender equity. Identification of the relationships between gender-equity barriers and burnout presents an opportunity to modify organizational systems to dismantle barriers and reduce this occupational syndrome. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Given the relationships between gender inequity and career burnout in this study of female orthopaedic surgeons, actions to dismantle gender barriers and address systemic biases are necessary at all career stages to reduce burnout.

Management of Low back pain in Saudi Arabia healthcare system. A Qualitative Study.

BACKGROUND: Patients with chronic low back pain can contribute to a global socioeconomic burden. Current international recommendations emphasize that low back pain management should occur at the primary-care level. However, there is a lack of essential services for low back pain management at the primary-care level in Saudi Arabia. We explored the current state of low back pain management in Saudi Arabia from the perspective of spine surgeons and physiotherapists. METHODS: A qualitative study with semi-structured interviews was conducted on spine surgeons and physiotherapists. A total of 17 healthcare workers, 8 spine surgeons (age range 28-49 years) and 9 physiotherapists (age range 30-49 years) participated in the study. Data were recorded and analyzed thematically. RESULTS: Three main themes were identified from the interview data that outlined current low back pain management in Saudi Arabia: clinical guideline availability and pathways of care, utilization of primary care services, and overutilization of secondary care resources. CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests underutilization of primary care services and overutilization of secondary care services in Saudi Arabia. Therefore, the implementation of local clinical guidelines could improve patient care as well as reduce the cost of low back pain management.

Time Between an Emergency Department Visit and Initiation of Physical Therapist Intervention: Health Care Utilization and Costs.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to examine the association between the length of time between an emergency department (ED) visit and the subsequent initiation of physical therapist intervention for low back pain (LBP) on 1-year LBP-related health care utilization (ie, surgery, advanced imaging, injections, long-term opioid use, ED visits) and costs. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study focused on individuals who consulted the ED for an initial visit for LBP. Claims from a single statewide, all-payers database were used. LBP-related health care use and costs for the 12 months after the ED visit were extracted. Poisson and general linear models weighted with inverse probability treatment weights were used to compare the outcomes of patients who attended physical therapy early or delayed after the ED visit. RESULTS: Compared with the delayed physical therapy group (n = 94), the early physical therapy group (n = 171) had a lower risk of receiving lumbar surgery (relative risk [RR] = 0.47, 95% CI = 0.26-0.86) and advanced imaging (RR = 0.72, 95% CI = 0.55-0.95), and they were less likely to have long-term opioid use (RR = 0.45, 95% CI = 0.28-0.76). The early physical therapy group incurred lower costs (mean = $3,806, 95% CI = $1,998-$4,184) than those in the delayed physical therapy group (mean = $8,689, 95% CI = $4,653-$12,727). CONCLUSION: Early physical therapy following an ED visit was associated with a reduced risk of using some types of health care and reduced health care costs in the 12 months following the ED visit. IMPACT STATEMENT: The ED is an entry point into the health care system for patients with LBP. Until now, the impact of the length of time between an ED visit and physical therapy for LBP has not been well understood. This study shows that swift initiation of physical therapy following an ED visit for LBP is associated with lower LBP-related health utilization for some important outcomes and lower LBP-related health care costs.

The OPTIMIZE study: protocol of a pragmatic sequential multiple assessment randomized trial of nonpharmacologic treatment for chronic, nonspecific low back pain.

BACKGROUND: Low back pain is a prevalent condition that causes a substantial health burden. Despite intensive and expensive clinical efforts, its prevalence is growing. Nonpharmacologic treatments are effective at improving pain-related outcomes; however, treatment effect sizes are often modest. Physical therapy (PT) and cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) have the most consistent evidence of effectiveness. Growing evidence also supports mindfulness-based approaches. Discussions with providers and patients highlight the importance of discussing and trying options to find the treatment that works for them and determining what to do when initial treatment is not successful. Herein, we present the protocol for a study that will evaluate evidence-based, protocol-driven treatments using PT, CBT, or mindfulness to examine comparative effectiveness and optimal sequencing for patients with chronic low back pain. METHODS: The Optimized Multidisciplinary Treatment Programs for Nonspecific Chronic Low Back Pain (OPTIMIZE) Study will be a multisite, comparative effectiveness trial using a sequential multiple assessment randomized trial design enrolling 945 individuals with chronic low back pain. The co-primary outcomes will be disability (measured using the Oswestry Disability Index) and pain intensity (measured using the Numerical Pain Rating Scale). After baseline assessment, participants will be randomly assigned to PT or CBT. At week 10, participants who have not experienced at least 50% improvement in disability will be randomized to cross-over phase-1 treatments (e.g., PT to CBT) or to Mindfulness-Oriented Recovery Enhancement (MORE). Treatment will consist of 8 weekly sessions. Long-term outcome assessments will be performed at weeks 26 and 52. DISCUSSION: Results of this study may inform referring providers and patients about the most effective nonoperative treatment and/or sequence of nonoperative treatments to treat chronic low back pain. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study was prospectively registered on March 1, 2019, with Clinicaltrials.gov under the registration number NCT03859713 (https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03859713).

Physical Function in the Hospital Is Associated With Patient-Centered Outcomes in an Inpatient Rehabilitation Facility.

OBJECTIVE: Poor knowledge of the relationships between physical function (PF) in the hospital and patient outcomes in an inpatient rehabilitation facility (IRF) limits the identification of patients most appropriate for discharge to an IRF. This study aimed to test for independent associations between PF measured via the AM-PAC "6-clicks" basic mobility short form in the hospital and outcomes in an IRF. METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study. Primary data were collected from an acute hospital and IRF at 1 academic medical center. Associations were tested between PF at hospital admission or discharge and PF improvement in the IRF, discharge from the IRF to the community, and 30-day hospital events by estimating adjusted relative risk (aRR) using modified Poisson regression and the relative difference in IRF length of stay (LOS) using Gamma regression. RESULTS: A total of 1323 patients were included. Patients with moderately low, (aRR = 1.50; 95% CI = 1.15-1.93), moderately high (aRR = 1.52; 95% CI = 1.16-2.01), or high (aRR = 1.37; 95% CI = 1.02-1.85) PF at hospital discharge were more likely than those with very low PF to improve their PF while in the IRF. These same patients were more likely to discharge from IRF to the community and had significantly shorter IRF LOS. Hospital-measured PF did not differentiate risk for 30-day hospital events. CONCLUSION: Patients with moderate-but not very low or very high-PF measured near the time of acute hospital discharge were likely to achieve meaningful PF improvement in an IRF. They also had a shorter IRF LOS so may be ideal candidates for discharge to IRF. Prospective studies with larger samples are necessary to test this assertion. IMPACT: Providers in the hospital should identify patients with moderate PF near the time of hospital discharge as those who may benefit most from post-acute rehabilitation in an IRF.

Cost-Effectiveness of Operative Versus Nonoperative Management of Patients With Intra-articular Calcaneal Fractures.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the costs, health gains, and cost-effectiveness of operative versus nonoperative treatment of calcaneal fractures over a 5-year time horizon from both US societal and payer perspectives. METHODS: The societal perspective analysis included both direct medical costs and costs for missed work, whereas the health care payer perspective analysis included only direct medical costs associated with treatment and complications. A decision tree simulation model was developed to estimate the direct medical and indirect costs (2018 US$) and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) for treatment of patients sustaining intra-articular calcaneal fractures fixed with an extensile lateral approach. Direct medical costs were obtained from a large US health care system in Utah, Intermountain Healthcare, and indirect costs from the literature. Utility and probability parameters were also derived from the literature. Parameter uncertainty was explored using both one-way and probabilistic sensitivity analysis. RESULTS: From a US societal perspective, operative treatment costs less ($35,110 vs. $39,870) and yielded more QALYs (3.89 vs. 3.51) over 5 years compared with nonoperative treatment. At a willingness-to-pay threshold of $50,000 per QALY, operative fixation had an 89% probability of being cost-effective. From a health care payer perspective, operative management remained cost-effective as the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio is below the willingness-to-pay threshold of $50,000/QALY. CONCLUSION: From both US societal and health care payer perspectives, operative treatment of displaced intra-articular calcaneal fractures utilizing an extensile lateral approach is cost-effective at commonly accepted willingness-to-pay thresholds compared with nonoperative treatment over a 5-year time horizon. Patient variability may impact cost-effectiveness and should be explored in future research. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Economic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Observational retrospective study of the association of initial healthcare provider for new-onset low back pain with early and long-term opioid use.

OBJECTIVE: This study examined the association of initial provider treatment with early and long-term opioid use in a national sample of patients with new-onset low back pain (LBP). DESIGN: A retrospective cohort study of patients with new-onset LBP from 2008 to 2013. SETTING: The study evaluated outpatient and inpatient claims from patient visits, pharmacy claims and inpatient and outpatient procedures with initial providers seen for new-onset LBP. PARTICIPANTS: 216 504 individuals aged 18 years or older across the USA who were diagnosed with new-onset LBP and were opioid-naïve were included. Participants had commercial or Medicare Advantage insurance. EXPOSURES: The primary independent variable is type of initial healthcare provider including physicians and conservative therapists (physical therapists, chiropractors, acupuncturists). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Short-term opioid use (within 30 days of the index visit) following new LBP visit and long-term opioid use (starting within 60 days of the index date and either 120 or more days' supply of opioids over 12 months, or 90 days or more supply of opioids and 10 or more opioid prescriptions over 12 months). RESULTS: Short-term use of opioids was 22%. Patients who received initial treatment from chiropractors or physical therapists had decreased odds of short-term and long-term opioid use compared with those who received initial treatment from primary care physicians (PCPs) (adjusted OR (AOR) (95% CI) 0.10 (0.09 to 0.10) and 0.15 (0.13 to 0.17), respectively). Compared with PCP visits, initial chiropractic and physical therapy also were associated with decreased odds of long-term opioid use in a propensity score matched sample (AOR (95% CI) 0.21 (0.16 to 0.27) and 0.29 (0.12 to 0.69), respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Initial visits to chiropractors or physical therapists is associated with substantially decreased early and long-term use of opioids. Incentivising use of conservative therapists may be a strategy to reduce risks of early and long-term opioid use.

The Influence of a Guideline-Concordant Stepped Care Approach on Downstream Health Care Utilization in Patients with Spine and Shoulder Pain.

BACKGROUND: Stepped care approaches are emphasized in guidelines for musculoskeletal pain, recommending less invasive or risky evidence-based intervention, such as manual therapy (MT), before more aggressive interventions such as opioid prescriptions. The order and timing of care can alter recovery trajectories. OBJECTIVE: To compare one-year downstream health care utilization in patients with spine or shoulder disorders who received only MT vs MT and opioids. The secondary aim was to compare differences based on order and timing of opioids and MT. DESIGN: Retrospective observational cohort. METHODS: Patients with an initial consultation for a spine or shoulder disorder who received at least one visit for MT were included. Person-level data from the Military Health System Management and Reporting Tool (M2) database were aggregated by a senior health care analyst at Madigan Army Medical Center. Groups were created based on the order and timing of interventions provided. Outcomes included health care utilization (medical costs and visits) over the year following initial consultation. Control measures included metabolic, mental health, chronic pain, sleep, and substance abuse comorbidities, as well as prior opioid prescriptions. Generalized linear models with gamma log links were run due to the heavily skewed nature of cost data. RESULTS: From 1,876 unique patients with spine or shoulder disorders receiving MT, 1,162 (61.9%) also received prescription opioids. Mean one-year costs in the MT-only group ($5,410, 95% confidence interval [CI] = $5,109 to $5,730) were significantly lower than in the MT+opioid group ($10,498, 95% CI = $10,043 to $10,973). When patients had both treatments, mean one-year costs in the MT-first ($10,782, 95% CI = $10,050 to $11,567) were significantly lower (P = 0.030) than opioid-first ($11,938, 95% CI = $11,272 to $12,643), and MT-first had a significantly lower mean days' supply of opioids (34.2 vs 70.9, P < 0.001) and mean number of unique opioid prescriptions (3.1 vs 6.5, P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: MT alone resulted in lower downstream costs than with opioid prescriptions. Both the order of treatment (MT before opioid prescriptions) and the timing of treatment (MT < 30 days) resulted in a significant reduction of resources (costs, visits, and opioid utilization) in the year after initial consultation. Clinicians should consider the implications of first-choice decisions and the timing of care for treatment choices utilized for patients with spine and shoulder disorders.

Timing of physical therapy consultation on 1-year healthcare utilization and costs in patients seeking care for neck pain: a retrospective cohort.

BACKGROUND: Patients seek care from physical therapists for neck pain but it is unclear what the association of the timing of physical therapy (PT) consultation is on 1-year healthcare utilization and costs. The purpose of this study was to compare the 1-year healthcare utilization and costs between three PT timing groups: patients who consulted a physical therapist (PT) for neck pain within 14 days (early PT consultation), between 15 and 90 days (delayed PT consultation) or between 91 and 364 days (late PT consultation). METHODS: A retrospective cohort of 308 patients (69.2% female, ages 48.7[±14.5] years) were categorized into PT timing groups. Descriptive statistics were calculated for each group. In adjusted regression models, 1-year healthcare utilization of injections, imaging, opioids and costs were compared between groups. RESULTS: Compared to early PT consultation, the odds of receiving an opioid prescription (aOR = 2.79, 95%CI: 1.35-5.79), spinal injection (aOR = 4.36, 95%CI:2.26-8.45), undergoing an MRI (aOR = 4.68, 95%CI:2.25-9.74), X-ray (aOR = 2.97, 95%CI:1.61-5.47) or CT scan (aOR = 3.36, 95%CI: 1.14-9.97) were increased in patients in the late PT consultation group. Similar increases in risk were found in the delayed group (except CT and Opioids). Compared to the early PT consultation group, mean costs were $2172 ($557, $3786) higher in the late PT contact group and $1063 (95%CI: $ 138 - $1988) higher in the delayed PT consultation group. DISCUSSION: There was an association with the timing of physical therapy consultation on healthcare utilization and costs, where later consultation was associated with increases costs and healthcare utilization. This study examined the association of timing of physical therapy consultation on costs and healthcare utilization, but not the association of increased access to physical therapy consultation. Therefore, the findings warrant further investigation to explore the effects of increased access to physical therapy consultation on healthcare utilization and costs in a prospective study.

Associations Between Physical Therapy Continuity of Care and Health Care Utilization and Costs in Patients With Low Back Pain: A Retrospective Cohort Study.

Background: Patients who consult a physical therapist for low back pain (LBP) may receive initial and subsequent management from different therapists. The impact that physical therapy provider continuity has on health care use in patients with LBP is insufficiently studied. Objective: The objective of this study was to examine the impact of continuity of the physical therapy provider on health care use and costs in patients with LBP referred from primary care. Design: The study design included a retrospective analysis of claims data. Methods: Data from an all-payer claims database were examined. Logistic regression was used to evaluate the association between physical therapy provider continuity and health care use during the 1-year period following a visit with a primary care provider for LBP. Results: Patients who experienced greater physical therapy provider continuity had a decreased likelihood of receiving lumbar surgery. They also paid less (mean = ${\$}$1737 [95% confidence interval, ${\$}$1602-${\$}$1871]) than those who experienced less physical therapy provider continuity (mean = ${\$}$2577 [95% confidence interval, ${\$}$2008-${\$}$3145]). Limitations: The degree of causality between any predictor and outcome variables cannot be determined due to the observational nature of the study. Conclusions: Greater continuity of the physical therapy provider appears to be associated with a decreased likelihood of surgical treatment for LBP and lower health care costs related to LBP.

Implementation of an Alternative Pathway for Patients Seeking Care for Low Back Pain: A Prospective Observational Cohort Study.

Background: In the United States, low back pain (LBP) is among the most common symptoms prompting a health care visit. Patients can receive escalated care, such as advanced imaging or invasive procedures, before guideline-recommended options offered by physical therapists. A guideline-concordant alternative care pathway (RapidAccess) that emphasized early physical therapy for patients with LBP before they consulted a physiatrist was implemented. Evaluating the implementation of care pathways, such as RapidAccess using the RE-AIM (reach, effectiveness, adoption, implementation, and maintenance) framework, provides a broader understanding of the barriers to implementation. Objective: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the implementation of a guideline-concordant care pathway for patients with LBP using a RE-AIM framework. Design: This study used a prospective observational cohort design. Methods: Patients with a chief complaint of LBP who were scheduling a new appointment with physiatry were eligible. Eligible patients chose whether or not to participate in RapidAccess before a consultation with a physiatrist. Implementation outcomes were evaluated using the RE-AIM framework. Results: During the study period, 1556 patients with LBP called to schedule a new visit with a physiatrist. Of these, 400 (25.7%) were eligible for RapidAccess, and 124 (31% of those eligible) participated in the program (reach). Of the 400 eligible patients, 225 (56.3%) were offered RapidAccess (adoption). Compared with patients who were managed in physical therapy following a consultation with a physiatrist, RapidAccess participants demonstrated improvement in physical function with physical therapist management (effectiveness); 58.9% cancelled their physiatrist visit (implementation), and rates of imaging and injections were lower (effectiveness). Reach and adoption (maintenance) trended downward beyond the first 6 months of the project. Limitations: The results are from a single health system and might not be broadly generalizable. Conclusions: The RE-AIM framework was useful in evaluating the implementation of RapidAccess. Factors influencing reach and adoption must be further examined.

Prevention and treatment of low back pain: evidence, challenges, and promising directions.

Many clinical practice guidelines recommend similar approaches for the assessment and management of low back pain. Recommendations include use of a biopsychosocial framework to guide management with initial non-pharmacological treatment, including education that supports self-management and resumption of normal activities and exercise, and psychological programmes for those with persistent symptoms. Guidelines recommend prudent use of medication, imaging, and surgery. The recommendations are based on trials almost exclusively from high-income countries, focused mainly on treatments rather than on prevention, with limited data for cost-effectiveness. However, globally, gaps between evidence and practice exist, with limited use of recommended first-line treatments and inappropriately high use of imaging, rest, opioids, spinal injections, and surgery. Doing more of the same will not reduce back-related disability or its long-term consequences. The advances with the greatest potential are arguably those that align practice with the evidence, reduce the focus on spinal abnormalities, and ensure promotion of activity and function, including work participation. We have identified effective, promising, or emerging solutions that could offer new directions, but that need greater attention and further research to determine if they are appropriate for large-scale implementation. These potential solutions include focused strategies to implement best practice, the redesign of clinical pathways, integrated health and occupational interventions to reduce work disability, changes in compensation and disability claims policies, and public health and prevention strategies.

Relationship of Opioid Prescriptions to Physical Therapy Referral and Participation for Medicaid Patients with New-Onset Low Back Pain.

INTRODUCTION: Physical therapy (PT) early in the management of low back pain (LBP) is associated with reductions in subsequent health care utilization and LBP-related costs. The objectives of this study were to 1) Examine differences among newly consulting patients with LBP who received a PT referral and those who did not, 2) examine differences between patients who participated in PT to those who did not, and 3) compare the impact of a PT referral and PT participation on LBP-related health care utilization and costs over 1 year. METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study using electronic medical records and claims data. Participants were 454 Medicaid enrollees with new LBP consultations (mean age, 40.4 years; SD = 12.0; 70% women). Outcomes included advanced imaging, injections, emergency department visits, opioid prescriptions, surgery and LBP-related costs. Variables associated with a PT consult, PT participation, and subsequent outcomes were evaluated with multivariate models. RESULTS: A total of 251 (55%) participants received a PT consult within 7 days of the index LBP visit and 81 (19%) participated in PT. The odds of a PT consult were increased if patients were prescribed non-steroidal anti-inflammatories (aOR = 1.81; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.0 to 3.27; P = .05) or muscle relaxers (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 2.24; 95% CI, 1.03 to 4.87; P = .04). Whereas tobacco users and individual with multiple comorbidities were less likely to receive a PT consult (aOR = 0.52; 95% CI, 0.20 to 0.91) and 0.42 (95% CI, 0.23 to 0.78), respectively). Odds of participating in PT were higher for patients receiving an radiograph at baseline (odds ratio [OR] = 2.63; 95% CI, 1.25 to 5.53) or having multiple comorbidities (OR = 2.96; 95% CI, 1.20 to 7.20). The odds of receiving an opioid prescription over the year following the index visit reduced with a PT consult (aOR = 0.65; 95% CI, 0.43 to 1.00) and with PT participation (aOR = 0.47; 95% CI, 0.24 to 0.92). No differences in LBP related costs over 1 year were noted between any of the groups. CONCLUSIONS: Among Medicaid recipients with new-onset LBP, the index provider's prescription and imaging decisions and patient demographics were associated with PT referrals and participation. A referral to PT and subsequent PT participation was associated with reduced opioid prescriptions during follow-up. There was no difference in overall LBP-related health care costs.

Cost-Effectiveness of Primary Care Management With or Without Early Physical Therapy for Acute Low Back Pain: Economic Evaluation of a Randomized Clinical Trial.

STUDY DESIGN: Economic evaluation of a randomized clinical trial. OBJECTIVE: Compare costs and cost-effectiveness of usual primary care management for patients with acute low back pain (LBP) with or without the addition of early physical therapy. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Low back pain is among the most common and costly conditions encountered in primary care. Early physical therapy after a new primary care consultation for acute LBP results in small clinical improvement but cost-effectiveness of a strategy of early physical therapy is unknown. METHODS: Economic evaluation was conducted alongside a randomized clinical trial of patients with acute, nonspecific LBP consulting a primary care provider. All patients received usual primary care management and education, and were randomly assigned to receive four sessions of physical therapy or usual care of delaying referral consideration to permit spontaneous recovery. Data were collected in a randomized trial involving 220 participants age 18 to 60 with LBP <16 days duration without red flags or signs of nerve root compression. The EuroQoL EQ-5D health states were collected at baseline and after 1-year and used to compute the quality adjusted life year (QALY) gained. Direct (health care utilization) and indirect (work absence or reduced productivity) costs related to LBP were collected monthly and valued using standard costs. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was computed as incremental total costs divided by incremental QALYs. RESULTS: Early physical therapy resulted in higher total 1-year costs (mean difference in adjusted total costs = $580, 95% CI: $175, $984, P = 0.005) and better quality of life (mean difference in QALYs = 0.02, 95% CI: 0.005, 0.35, P = 0.008) after 1-year. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was $32,058 (95% CI: $10,629, $151,161) per QALY. CONCLUSION: Our results support early physical therapy as cost-effective relative to usual primary care after 1 year for patients with acute, nonspecific LBP. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 2.

Importance of the type of provider seen to begin health care for a new episode low back pain: associations with future utilization and costs.

RATIONALE, AIMS AND OBJECTIVE: Low back pain (LBP) care can involve many providers. The provider chosen for entry into care may predict future health care utilization and costs. The objective of this study was to explore associations between entry settings and future LBP-related utilization and costs. METHODS: A retrospective review of claims data identified new entries into health care for LBP. We examined the year after entry to identify utilization outcomes (imaging, surgeon or emergency visits, injections, surgery) and total LBP-related costs. Multivariate models with inverse probability weighting on propensity scores were used to evaluate relationships between utilization and cost outcomes with entry setting. RESULTS: 747 patients were identified (mean age = 38.2 (± 10.7) years, 61.2% female). Entry setting was primary care (n = 409, 54.8%), chiropractic (n = 207, 27.7%), physiatry (n = 83, 11.1%) and physical therapy (n = 48, 6.4%). Relative to primary care, entry in physiatry increased risk for radiographs (OR = 3.46, P = 0.001), advanced imaging (OR = 3.38, P < 0.001), injections (OR = 4.91, P < 0.001), surgery (OR = 4.76, P = 0.012) and LBP-related costs (standardized Β = 0.67, P < 0.001). Entry in chiropractic was associated with decreased risk for advanced imaging (OR = 0.21, P = 0.001) or a surgeon visit (OR = 0.13, P = 0.005) and increased episode of care duration (standardized Β = 0.51, P < 0.001). Entry in physical therapy decreased risk of radiographs (OR = 0.39, P = 0.017) and no patient entering in physical therapy had surgery. CONCLUSIONS: Entry setting for LBP was associated with future health care utilization and costs. Consideration of where patients chose to enter care may be a strategy to improve outcomes and reduce costs.

Use of Physical Therapy for Low Back Pain by Medicaid Enrollees.

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.

Implications of early and guideline adherent physical therapy for low back pain on utilization and costs.

BACKGROUND: Initial management decisions following a new episode of low back pain (LBP) are thought to have profound implications for health care utilization and costs. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the impact of early and guideline adherent physical therapy for low back pain on utilization and costs within the Military Health System (MHS). METHODS: Patients presenting to a primary care setting with a new complaint of LBP from January 1, 2007 to December 31, 2009 were identified from the MHS Management Analysis and Reporting Tool. Descriptive statistics, utilization, and costs were examined on the basis of timing of referral to physical therapy and adherence to practice guidelines over a 2-year period. Utilization outcomes (advanced imaging, lumbar injections or surgery, and opioid use) were compared using adjusted odds ratios with 99% confidence intervals. Total LBP-related health care costs over the 2-year follow-up were compared using linear regression models. RESULTS: 753,450 eligible patients with a primary care visit for LBP between 18-60 years of age were considered. Physical therapy was utilized by 16.3% (n = 122,723) of patients, with 24.0% (n = 17,175) of those receiving early physical therapy that was adherent to recommendations for active treatment. Early referral to guideline adherent physical therapy was associated with significantly lower utilization for all outcomes and 60% lower total LBP-related costs. CONCLUSIONS: The potential for cost savings in the MHS from early guideline adherent physical therapy may be substantial. These results also extend the findings from similar studies in civilian settings by demonstrating an association between early guideline adherent care and utilization and costs in a single payer health system. Future research is necessary to examine which patients with LBP benefit early physical therapy and determine strategies for providing early guideline adherent care.