Temporal Trends and Geographic Variations in the Supply of Clinicians Who Provide Spinal Manipulation to Medicare Beneficiaries: A Serial Cross-Sectional Study.

OBJECTIVE: Spinal manipulation (SM) is recommended for first-line treatment of patients with low back pain. Inadequate access to SM may result in inequitable spine care for older US adults, but the supply of clinicians who provide SM under Medicare is uncertain. The purpose of this study was to measure temporal trends and geographic variations in the supply of clinicians who provide SM to Medicare beneficiaries. METHODS: Medicare is a US government-administered health insurance program that provides coverage primarily for older adults and people with disabilities. We used a serial cross-sectional design to examine Medicare administrative data from 2007 to 2015 for SM services identified by procedure code. We identified unique providers by National Provider Identifier and distinguished between chiropractors and other specialties by Physician Specialty Code. We calculated supply as the number of providers per 100 000 beneficiaries, stratified by geographic location and year. RESULTS: Of all clinicians who provide SM to Medicare beneficiaries, 97% to 98% are doctors of chiropractic. The geographic supply of doctors of chiropractic providing SM services in 2015 ranged from 20/100 000 in the District of Columbia to 260/100 000 in North Dakota. The supply of other specialists performing the same services ranged from fewer than 1/100 000 in 11 states to 8/100 000 in Colorado. Nationally, the number of Medicare-active chiropractors declined from 47 102 in 2007 to 45 543 in 2015. The count of other clinicians providing SM rose from 700 in 2007 to 1441 in 2015. CONCLUSION: Chiropractors constitute the vast majority of clinicians who bill for SM services to Medicare beneficiaries. The supply of Medicare-active SM providers varies widely by state. The overall supply of SM providers under Medicare is declining, while the supply of nonchiropractors who provide SM is growing.

What Are the Costs of Cervical Radiculopathy Prior to Surgical Treatment?

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective, observational study. OBJECTIVE: To examine the costs associated with nonoperative management (diagnosis and treatment) of cervical radiculopathy in the year prior to anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF). SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: While the costs of operative treatment have been previously described, less is known about nonoperative management costs of cervical radiculopathy leading up to surgery. METHODS: The Humana claims dataset (2007-2015) was queried to identify adult patients with cervical radiculopathy that underwent ACDF. Outcome endpoint was assessment of cumulative and per-capita costs for nonoperative diagnostic (x-rays, computed tomographic [CT], magnetic resonance imaging [MRI], electromyogram/nerve conduction studies [EMG/NCS]) and treatment modalities (injections, physical therapy [PT], braces, medications, chiropractic services) in the year preceding surgical intervention. RESULTS: Overall 12,514 patients (52% female) with cervical radiculopathy underwent ACDF. Cumulative costs and per-capita costs for nonoperative management, during the year prior to ACDF was $14.3 million and $1143, respectively. All patients underwent at least one diagnostic test (MRI: 86.7%; x-ray: 57.5%; CT: 35.2%) while 73.3% patients received a nonoperative treatment. Diagnostic testing comprised of over 62% of total nonoperative costs ($8.9 million) with MRI constituting the highest total relative spend ($5.3 million; per-capita: $489) followed by CT ($2.6 million; per-capita: $606), x-rays ($0.54 million; per-capita: $76), and EMG/NCS ($0.39 million; per-capita: $467). Conservative treatments comprised of 37.7% of the total nonoperative costs ($5.4 million) with injections costs constituting the highest relative spend ($3.01 million; per-capita: $988) followed by PT ($1.13 million; per-capita: $510) and medications (narcotics: $0.51 million, per-capita $101; gabapentin: $0.21 million, per-capita $93; NSAIDs: 0.107 million, per-capita $47), bracing ($0.25 million; per-capita: $193), and chiropractic services ($0.137 million; per-capita: $193). CONCLUSION: The study quantifies the cumulative and per-capital costs incurred 1-year prior to ACDF in patients with cervical radiculopathy for nonoperative diagnostic and treatment modalities. Approximately two-thirds of the costs associated with cervical radiculopathy are from diagnostic modalities. As institutions begin entering into bundled payments for cervical spine disease, understanding condition specific costs is a critical first step. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3.

Trends in the use and cost of chiropractic spinal manipulation under Medicare Part B.

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Concern about improper payments to chiropractic physicians prompted the US Department of Health and Human Services to describe chiropractic services as a "significant vulnerability" for Medicare, but little is known about trends in the use and cost of chiropractic spinal manipulation provided under Medicare. PURPOSE: To quantify the volume and cost of chiropractic spinal manipulation services for older adults under Medicare Part B and identify longitudinal trends. STUDY DESIGN/SETTING: Serial cross-sectional design for retrospective analysis of administrative data. PATIENT SAMPLE: Annualized nationally representative samples of 5.0 to 5.4 million beneficiaries. OUTCOME MEASURES: Chiropractic users, allowed services, allowed charges, and payments. METHODS: Descriptive statistics were generated by analysis of Medicare administrative data on chiropractic spinal manipulation provided in the United States from 2002 to 2008. A 20% nationally representative sample of allowed Medicare Part B fee-for-service claims was merged, based on beneficiary identifier, with patient demographic data. The data sample was restricted to adults aged 65 to 99 years, and duplicate claims were excluded. Annualized estimates of outcome measures were extrapolated, per beneficiary and per user rates were estimated, and volumes were stratified by current procedural terminology code. RESULTS: The number of Medicare beneficiaries who used chiropractic spinal manipulation grew 13% from 2002 to 2004, remained flat through 2007, and then declined 5% through 2008. An estimated 1.7 million beneficiaries (6.9%) used 18.6 million allowed chiropractic services in 2008. In inflation-adjusted dollars, allowed charges per user increased 4% through 2005 and then declined by 17% through 2008; payments per user increased by 5% from 2002 to 2005 and then declined by 18% through 2008. Expenditures for chiropractic in 2008 totaled an estimated $420 million. Longitudinal trends in allowed claims for spinal manipulation varied by procedure: the relative frequency of treatment of one to two spinal regions declined from 43% to 29% of services, treatment of three to four regions increased from 48% to 62% of services, and treatment of five regions remained flat at 9% of services. CONCLUSIONS: Chiropractic claims account for less than 1/10th of 1% of overall Medicare expenditures. Allowed services, allowed charges, and fee-for-service payments for chiropractic spinal manipulation under Medicare Part B generally increased from 2002, peaked in 2005 and 2006, and then declined through 2008. Per user spending for chiropractic spinal manipulation also declined by 18% from 2006 to 2008, in contrast to 10% growth in total spending per beneficiary and 16% growth in overall Medicare spending.