Associations between demographics and clinical ideology, beliefs, and practice patterns: a secondary analysis of a survey of randomly sampled United States chiropractors.

BACKGROUND: The chiropractic profession in the United States (US) has a long history of intra-professional discourse surrounding ideology and beliefs. Large-scale efforts have evaluated 3 distinctive subgroups of US chiropractors focused on these areas of practice: spine/neuromusculoskeletal, primary care, and vertebral subluxation. To our knowledge, there have not been any prior studies exploring the factors associated with these ideology and belief characteristics of these subgroups. The purpose of this study was to explore, describe, and characterize the association of US chiropractors' ideology, beliefs, and practice patterns with: 1) chiropractic degree program of graduation, 2) years since completion of chiropractic degree, and 3) US geographic region of primary practice. METHODS: This was a secondary analysis of a cross-sectional survey of a random sample of US licensed chiropractors (n = 8975). A 10% random sample was extracted from each of the 50 states and District of Columbia chiropractic regulatory board lists. The survey was conducted between March 2018-January 2020. The survey instrument consisted of 7 items that were developed to elicit these differentiating ideologies, beliefs, and practice patterns: 1) clinical examination/assessment, 2) health conditions treated, 3) role of chiropractors in the healthcare system, 4) the impact of chiropractic adjustments [spinal manipulation] in treating patients with cancer, 5) vaccination attitudes, 6) detection of subluxation on x-ray, and 7) x-ray utilization rates. Multinomial regression was used to analyze associations between these 7 ideology and practice characteristic items from the survey (dependent variables) and the 3 demographic items listed above (independent variables). RESULTS: Data from 3538 respondents (74.6% male) were collected with an overall response rate of 39.4%. Patterns of responses to the 7 survey items for ideologies, beliefs, and practice characteristics were significantly different based on chiropractic degree program of graduation, years since completion of chiropractic degree, and geographic region of primary practice. CONCLUSIONS: Among US chiropractors, chiropractic program of graduation, years since completion of chiropractic degree, and geographic region of primary practice are associated with variations in clinical ideology, beliefs, and practice patterns. The wide variation and inconsistent beliefs of US chiropractors could result in public confusion and impede interprofessional integration.

Identifying and addressing patient substance use: a survey of chiropractic clinicians.

BACKGROUND: Chiropractors commonly encounter patients who present for spine pain with parallel substance use. There is currently no widespread training within the chiropractic profession to prepare chiropractors to recognize and address substance use in clinical practice. The purpose of this study was to examine chiropractors' confidence, self-perceptions, and interest in education associated with identifying and addressing patient substance use. METHODS: A 10-item survey was developed by the authors. The survey addressed chiropractors' assessment of their training, experiences, and educational interest/needs regarding identifying and addressing patient substance use. The survey instrument was uploaded to Qualtrics and was electronically distributed to chiropractic clinicians at active and accredited English-speaking Doctor of Chiropractic degree programs (DCPs) in the United States. RESULTS: A total of 175 individual survey responses were returned from a total of 276 eligible participants (63.4% response rate) from 16 out of 18 active and accredited English-speaking DCPs (88.8% of DCPs) in the United States. Nearly half of respondents strongly disagreed or disagreed (n = 77, 44.0%) that they were confident in their ability to identify patients who misuse prescription medication. The majority of respondents (n = 122, 69.7%) indicated that they did not have an established referral relationship with local clinical providers who provide treatment for individuals who use drugs or misuse alcohol or prescription medications. Most respondents strongly agreed or agreed (n = 157, 89.7%) that they would benefit from participating in a continuing education course on topics related to patients who use drugs or misuse alcohol or prescription medications. CONCLUSIONS: Chiropractors indicated a need for training to help them identify and address patient substance use. There is a demand among chiropractors to develop clinical care pathways for chiropractic referrals and collaboration with health care professionals who provide treatment for individuals who use drugs or misuse alcohol or prescription medications.

Disparities in chiropractic utilization by race, ethnicity and socioeconomic status: A scoping review of the literature.

BACKGROUND: Chiropractic is the largest complementary and alternative medicine profession in the United States, with increasing global growth. A preliminary literature review suggests a lack of widespread diversity of chiropractic patient profiles. OBJECTIVE: There have been no prior studies to comprehensively integrate the literature on chiropractic utilization rates by race, ethnicity, and socioeconomic status. The purpose of this scoping review is to identify and describe the current state of knowledge of chiropractic utilization by race, ethnicity, education level, employment status, and income and poverty level. SEARCH STRATEGY: Systematic searches were conducted in PubMed, Ovid MEDLINE, Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and Index to Chiropractic Literature from inception to May 2021. INCLUSION CRITERIA: Articles that reported race or ethnicity, education level, employment status, income or poverty level variables and chiropractic utilization rates for adults (≥18 years of age) were eligible for this review. DATA EXTRACTION AND ANALYSIS: Data extracted from articles were citation information, patient characteristics, race and ethnicity, education level, employment status, income and poverty level, and chiropractic utilization rate. A descriptive numerical summary of included studies is provided. This study provides a qualitative thematic narrative of chiropractic utilization with attention to race and ethnicity, education level, income and poverty level, and employment status. RESULTS: A total of 69 articles were eligible for review. Most articles were published since 2003 and reported data from study populations in the United States. Of the race, ethnicity and socioeconomic categories that were most commonly reported, chiropractic utilization was the highest for individuals identifying as European American/White/non-Hispanic White/Caucasian (median 20.00%; interquartile range 2.70%-64.60%), those with employment as a main income source (median utilization 78.50%; interquartile range 77.90%-79.10%), individuals with an individual or household/family annual income between $40,001 and $60,000 (median utilization 29.40%; interquartile range 25.15%-33.65%), and individuals with less than or equal to (12 years) high school diploma/general educational development certificate completion (median utilization 30.70%; interquartile range 15.10%-37.00%). CONCLUSION: This comprehensive review of the literature on chiropractic utilization by race, ethnicity and socioeconomic status indicates differences in chiropractic utilization across diverse racial and ethnic and socioeconomic populations. Heterogeneity existed among definitions of key variables, including race, ethnicity, education level, employment status, and income and poverty level in the included studies, reducing clarity in rates of chiropractic utilization for these populations. Please cite this article as: Gliedt JA, Spector AL, Schneider MJ, Williams J, Young S. Disparities in chiropractic utilization by race, ethnicity and socioeconomic status: A scoping review of the literature. J Integr Med. 2023; 21(2): 159-167.

The primary spine practitioner as a new role in healthcare systems in North America.

BACKGROUND: In an article published in 2011, we discussed the need for a new role in health care systems, referred to as the Primary Spine Practitioner (PSP). The PSP model was proposed to help bring order to the chaotic nature of spine care. Over the past decade, several efforts have applied the concepts presented in that article. The purpose of the present article is to discuss the ongoing need for the PSP role in health care systems, present persistent barriers, report several examples of the model in action, and propose future strategies. MAIN BODY: The management of spine related disorders, defined here as various disorders related to the spine that produce axial pain, radiculopathy and other related symptoms, has received significant international attention due to the high costs and relatively poor outcomes in spine care. The PSP model seeks to bring increased efficiency, effectiveness and value. The barriers to the implementation of this model have been significant, and responses to these barriers are discussed. Several examples of PSP integration are presented, including clinic systems in primary care and hospital environments, underserved areas around the world and a program designed to reduce surgical waiting lists. Future strategies are proposed for overcoming the continuing barriers to PSP implementation in health care systems more broadly. CONCLUSION: Significant progress has been made toward integrating the PSP role into health care systems over the past 10 years. However, much work remains. This requires substantial effort on the part of those involved in the development and implementation of the PSP model, in addition to support from various stakeholders who will benefit from the proposed improvements in spine care.

Non-operative treatment for lumbar spinal stenosis with neurogenic claudication: an updated systematic review.

OBJECTIVES: Neurogenic claudication due to lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) is a growing health problem in older adults. We updated our previous Cochrane review (2013) to determine the effectiveness of non-operative treatment of LSS with neurogenic claudication. DESIGN: A systematic review. DATA SOURCES: CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and Index to Chiropractic Literature databases were searched and updated up to 22 July 2020. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: We only included randomised controlled trials published in English where at least one arm provided data on non-operative treatment and included participants diagnosed with neurogenic claudication with imaging confirmed LSS. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Two independent reviewers extracted data and assessed risk of bias using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool 1. Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation was used for evidence synthesis. RESULTS: Of 15 200 citations screened, 156 were assessed and 23 new trials were identified. There is moderate-quality evidence from three trials that: Manual therapy and exercise provides superior and clinically important short-term improvement in symptoms and function compared with medical care or community-based group exercise; manual therapy, education and exercise delivered using a cognitive-behavioural approach demonstrates superior and clinically important improvements in walking distance in the immediate to long term compared with self-directed home exercises and glucocorticoid plus lidocaine injection is more effective than lidocaine alone in improving statistical, but not clinically important improvements in pain and function in the short term. The remaining 20 new trials demonstrated low-quality or very low-quality evidence for all comparisons and outcomes, like the findings of our original review. CONCLUSIONS: There is moderate-quality evidence that a multimodal approach which includes manual therapy and exercise, with or without education, is an effective treatment and that epidural steroids are not effective for the management of LSS with neurogenic claudication. All other non-operative interventions provided insufficient quality evidence to make conclusions on their effectiveness. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42020191860.

Promoting the use of a self-management strategy among novice chiropractors treating individuals with spine pain: A mixed methods pilot clustered-clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: The uptake of Self-Management Support (SMS) among clinicians is suboptimal. To date, few studies have tested knowledge translation (KT) interventions to increase the application of SMS in chiropractic teaching clinics. STUDY OBJECTIVE: Evaluate the feasibility of implementing a KT intervention to promote the use of a SMS strategy among chiropractic interns, their supervisors, and individuals with spine pain compared to controls. METHODS: Mixed methods pilot clustered-clinical trial. Clusters of 16 Patient Management Teams were allocated to a complex KT intervention (online and workshop training). Primary feasibility outcomes for clinicians, interns and patients were rates of recruitment, retention, and adherence to protocol. A nominal group technique and interviews were used to seek end-users' views on the implementation process, and generate possible solutions. RESULTS: In total, 16 (84%) clinicians, 65 (26%) interns and 42 patients agreed to participate. All clinicians in the intervention group completed all KT intervention components, 23 interns (85%) completed the online training and 14 interns (51.8%) attended the workshop training. All clinicians in the intervention and seven (78%) in the control group completed all outcome measures at baseline and 6-month follow-up, while 15 (55.6%) and 23 (60.5%) interns in the intervention and control groups completed the questionnaires at baseline and 6-month follow-up, respectively. Among patients, 10 (52.6%) and 12 (52.2%) in the intervention and control groups respectively completed the questionnaires at the end of the study. Based on interview findings, solutions to improve the feasibility of conducting a full trial include: making SMS a part of the internship, changing the time of introducing the study to the interns, and having more training on SMS. CONCLUSION: Recruitment and retention of chiropractic interns and patients for a larger implementation trial in a single outpatient teaching clinic may be challenging.

Evaluation of United States chiropractic professional subgroups: a survey of randomly sampled chiropractors.

BACKGROUND: Professional subgroups are common and may play a role in aiding professional maturity or impeding professional legitimization. The chiropractic profession in the United States has a long history of diverse intra-professional subgroups with varying ideologies and practice styles. To our knowledge, large-scale quantification of chiropractic professional subgroups in the United States has not been conducted. The purpose of this study was to quantify and describe the clinical practice beliefs and behaviors associated with United States chiropractic subgroups. METHODS: A 10% random sample of United States licensed chiropractors (n = 8975) was selected from all 50 state regulatory board lists and invited to participate in a survey. The survey consisted of a 7-item questionnaire; 6 items were associated with chiropractic ideological and practice characteristics and 1 item was related to the self-identified role of chiropractic in the healthcare system which was utilized as the dependent variable to identify chiropractic subgroups. Multinomial logistic regression with predictive margins was used to analyze which responses to the 6 ideology and practice characteristic items were predictive of chiropractic subgroups. RESULTS: A total of 3538 responses were collected (39.4% response rate). Respondents self-identified into three distinct subgroups based on the perceived role of the chiropractic profession in the greater healthcare system: 56.8% were spine/neuromusculoskeletal focused; 22.0% were primary care focused; and 21.2% were vertebral subluxation focused. Patterns of responses to the 6 ideologies and practice characteristic items were substantially different across the three professional subgroups. CONCLUSIONS: Respondents self-identified into one of three distinct intra-professional subgroups. These subgroups can be differentiated along themes related to clinical practice beliefs and behaviors.

Promoting the use of self-management in patients with spine pain managed by chiropractors and chiropractic interns: barriers and design of a theory-based knowledge translation intervention.

Background: The literature supports the effectiveness of self-management support (SMS) to improve health outcomes of patients with chronic spine pain. However, patient engagement in SMS programs is suboptimal. The objectives of this study were to: 1) assess participation in self-care (i.e. activation) among patients with spine pain, 2) identify patients' barriers and enablers to using SMS, and 3) map behaviour change techniques (BCTs) to key barriers to inform the design of a knowledge translation (KT) intervention aimed to increase the use of SMS. Methods: In summer 2016, we invited 250 patients with spine pain seeking care at the Canadian Memorial Chiropractic College in Ontario, Canada to complete the Patient Activation Measure (PAM) survey to assess the level of participation in self-care. We subsequently conducted individual interviews, in summer 2017, based on the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) in a subset of patients to identify potential challenges to using SMS. The interview guide included 20 open-ended questions and accompanying probes. Findings were deductively analysed guided by the TDF. A panel of 7 experts mapped key barriers to BCTs, designed a KT intervention, and selected the modes of delivery. Results: Two hundred and twenty-three patients completed the PAM. Approximately 24% of respondents were not actively involved in their care. Interview findings from 13 spine pain patients suggested that the potential barriers to using SMS corresponded to four TDF domains: Environmental Context and Resources; Emotion; Memory, Attention & Decision-Making; and Behavioural Regulation. The proposed theory-based KT intervention includes paper-based educational materials, webinars and videos, summarising and demonstrating the therapeutic recommendations including exercises and other lifestyle changes. In addition, the KT intervention includes Brief Action Planning, a SMS strategy based on motivational interviewing, along with a SMART plan and reminders. Conclusions: Almost one quarter of study participants were not actively engaged in their spine care. Key barriers likely to influence uptake of SMS among patients were identified and used to inform the design of a theory-based KT intervention to increase their participation level. The proposed multi-component KT intervention may be an effective strategy to optimize the quality of spine pain care and improve patients' health-outcomes.

Comparative Clinical Effectiveness of Nonsurgical Treatment Methods in Patients With Lumbar Spinal Stenosis: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) is the most common reason for spine surgery in older US adults. There is an evidence gap about nonsurgical LSS treatment options. Objective: To explore the comparative clinical effectiveness of 3 nonsurgical interventions for patients with LSS. Design, Setting, and Participants: Three-arm randomized clinical trial of 3 years' duration (November 2013 to June 2016). Analysis began in August 2016. All interventions were delivered during 6 weeks with follow-up at 2 months and 6 months at an outpatient research clinic. Patients older than 60 years with LSS were recruited from the general public. Eligibility required anatomical evidence of central canal and/or lateral recess stenosis (magnetic resonance imaging/computed tomography) and clinical symptoms associated with LSS (neurogenic claudication; less symptoms with flexion). Analysis was intention to treat. Interventions: Medical care, group exercise, and manual therapy/individualized exercise. Medical care consisted of medications and/or epidural injections provided by a physiatrist. Group exercise classes were supervised by fitness instructors in senior community centers. Manual therapy/individualized exercise consisted of spinal mobilization, stretches, and strength training provided by chiropractors and physical therapists. Main Outcomes and Measures: Primary outcomes were between-group differences at 2 months in self-reported symptoms and physical function measured by the Swiss Spinal Stenosis questionnaire (score range, 12-55) and a measure of walking capacity using the self-paced walking test (meters walked for 0 to 30 minutes). Results: A total of 259 participants (mean [SD] age, 72.4 [7.8] years; 137 women [52.9%]) were allocated to medical care (88 [34.0%]), group exercise (84 [32.4%]), or manual therapy/individualized exercise (87 [33.6%]). Adjusted between-group analyses at 2 months showed manual therapy/individualized exercise had greater improvement of symptoms and physical function compared with medical care (-2.0; 95% CI, -3.6 to -0.4) or group exercise (-2.4; 95% CI, -4.1 to -0.8). Manual therapy/individualized exercise had a greater proportion of responders (≥30% improvement) in symptoms and physical function (20%) and walking capacity (65.3%) at 2 months compared with medical care (7.6% and 48.7%, respectively) or group exercise (3.0% and 46.2%, respectively). At 6 months, there were no between-group differences in mean outcome scores or responder rates. Conclusions and Relevance: A combination of manual therapy/individualized exercise provides greater short-term improvement in symptoms and physical function and walking capacity than medical care or group exercises, although all 3 interventions were associated with improvements in long-term walking capacity. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01943435.

Promoting the use of self-management in novice chiropractors treating individuals with spine pain: the design of a theory-based knowledge translation intervention.

BACKGROUND: Clinical practice guidelines generally recommend clinicians use self-management support (SMS) when managing patients with spine pain. However, even within the educational setting, the implementation of SMS remains suboptimal. The objectives of this study were to 1) estimate the organizational readiness for change toward using SMS at the Canadian Memorial Chiropractic College (CMCC), Toronto, Ontario from the perspective of directors and deans, 2) estimate the attitudes and self-reported behaviours towards using evidence-based practice (EBP), and beliefs about pain management among supervisory clinicians and chiropractic interns, 3) identify potential barriers and enablers to using SMS, and 4) design a theory-based tailored Knowledge Translation (KT) intervention to increase the use of SMS. METHODS: Mixed method design. We administered three self-administered questionnaires to assess clinicians' and interns' attitudes and behaviours toward EBP, beliefs about pain management, and practice style. In addition, we conducted 3 focus groups with clinicians and interns based on the Theoretical Domain Framework (TDF) to explore their beliefs about using SMS for patients with spine pain. Data were analysed using deductive thematic analysis by 2 independent assessors. A panel of 7 experts mapped behaviour change techniques to key barriers identified informing the design of a KT intervention. RESULTS: Participants showed high level of EBP knowledge, positive attitude of EBP, and moderate frequency of EBP use. A number of barrier factors were identified from clinicians (N = 6) and interns (N = 16) corresponding to 7 TDF domains: Knowledge; Skills; Environmental context and resources; Emotion; Beliefs about Capabilities; Memory, attention & decision making; and Social Influence. To address these barriers, the expert panel proposed a multifaceted KT intervention composed of a webinar and online educational module on a SMS guided by the Brief Action Planning, clinical vignettes, training workshop, and opinion leader support. CONCLUSION: SMS strategies can help maximizing the health care services for patients with spine pain. This may in turn optimize patients' health. The proposed theory-based KT intervention may facilitate the implementation of SMS among clinicians and interns.

The biopsychosocial model and chiropractic: a commentary with recommendations for the chiropractic profession.

There is an increasing awareness, interest and acceptance of the biopsychosocial (BPS) model by all health care professionals involved with patient care. The areas of spine care and pain medicine are no exception, and in fact, these areas of health care are a major centerpiece of the movement from the traditional biomedical model to a BPS model of patient assessment and delivery of care. The chiropractic approach to health care has a history that is grounded in key aspects of the BPS model. The profession has inherently implemented certain features of the BPS model throughout its history, perhaps without a full understanding or realization. The purpose of this paper is to present an overview of the BPS model, its relationship with spine care and pain management, and to discuss the BPS model, particularly psychosocial aspects, in the context of its historical relationship with chiropractic. We will also provide recommendations for the chiropractic profession as it relates to successful adoption of a full integration of the BPS model.

Best Practices for Chiropractic Care for Older Adults: A Systematic Review and Consensus Update.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to update evidence-based recommendations on the best practices for chiropractic care of older adults. METHODS: The project consisted of a systematic literature review and a consensus process. The following were searched from October 2009 through January 2016: MEDLINE, Index to Chiropractic Literature, CINAHL (Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature), AMED (Allied and Complementary Medicine Database), Alt HealthWatch, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and Cochrane Registry of Controlled Trials. Search terms were: (manipulation, spinal OR manipulation, chiropractic OR chiropract*) AND (geriatric OR "older adult*"). Two reviewers independently screened articles and abstracts using inclusion and exclusion criteria. The systematic review informed the project steering committee, which revised the previous recommendations. A multidisciplinary panel of experts representing expertise in practice, research, and teaching in a variety of health professions serving older adults rated the revised recommendations. The RAND Corporation/University of California, Los Angeles methodology for a modified Delphi consensus process was used. RESULTS: A total of 199 articles were found; after exclusion criteria were applied, 6 articles about effectiveness or efficacy and 6 on safety were added. The Delphi process was conducted from April to June 2016. Of the 37 Delphi panelists, 31 were DCs and 6 were other health care professionals. Three Delphi rounds were conducted to reach consensus on all 45 statements. As a result, statements regarding the safety of manipulation were strengthened and additional statements were added recommending that DCs advise patients on exercise and that manipulation and mobilization contribute to general positive outcomes beyond pain reduction only. CONCLUSIONS: This document provides a summary of evidence-informed best practices for doctors of chiropractic for the evaluation, management, and manual treatment of older adult patients.

Does case misclassification threaten the validity of studies investigating the relationship between neck manipulation and vertebral artery dissection stroke? No.

BACKGROUND: The purported relationship between cervical manipulative therapy (CMT) and stroke related to vertebral artery dissection (VAD) has been debated for several decades. A large number of publications, from case reports to case-control studies, have investigated this relationship. A recent article suggested that case misclassification in the case-control studies on this topic resulted in biased odds ratios in those studies. DISCUSSION: Given its rarity, the best epidemiologic research design for investigating the relationship between CMT and VAD is the case-control study. The addition of a case-crossover aspect further strengthens the scientific rigor of such studies by reducing bias. The most recent studies investigating the relationship between CMT and VAD indicate that the relationship is not causal. In fact, a comparable relationship between vertebral artery-related stroke and visits to a primary care physician has been observed. The statistical association between visits to chiropractors and VAD can best be explained as resulting from a patient with early manifestation of VAD (neck pain with or without headache) seeking the services of a chiropractor for relief of this pain. Sometime after the visit the patient experiences VAD-related stroke that would have occurred regardless of the care received. This explanation has been challenged by a recent article putting forth the argument that case misclassification is likely to have biased the odds ratios of the case-control studies that have investigated the association between CMT and vertebral artery related stroke. The challenge particularly focused on one of the case-control studies, which had concluded that the association between CMT and vertebral artery related stroke was not causal. It was suggested by the authors of the recent article that misclassification led to an underestimation of risk. We argue that the information presented in that article does not support the authors' claim for a variety of reasons, including the fact that the assumptions upon which their analysis is based lack substantiation and the fact that any possible misclassification would not have changed the conclusion of the study in question. CONCLUSION: Current evidence does not support the notion that misclassification threatens the validity of recent case-control studies investigating the relationship between CMT and VAD. Hence, the recent re-analysis cannot refute the conclusion from previous studies that CMT is not a cause of VAD.

Variations in Patterns of Utilization and Charges for the Care of Headache in North Carolina, 2000-2009: A Statewide Claims' Data Analysis.

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of the study was to compare patterns of utilization and charges generated by medical doctors (MDs), doctors of chiropractic (DCs), and physical therapists (PTs) for the treatment of headache in North Carolina. METHODS: Retrospective analysis of claims data from the North Carolina State Health Plan for Teachers and State Employees from 2000 to 2009. Data were extracted from Blue Cross Blue Shield of North Carolina for the North Carolina State Health Plan using International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, diagnostic codes for headache. The claims were separated by individual provider type, combination of provider types, and referral patterns. RESULTS: The majority of patients and claims were in the MD-only or MD plus referral patterns. Chiropractic patterns represented less than 10% of patients. Care patterns with single-provider types and no referrals incurred the least charges on average for headache. When care did not include referral providers or services, MD with DC care was generally less expensive than MD care with PT. However, when combined with referral care, MD care with PT was generally less expensive. Compared with MD-only care, risk-adjusted charges (available 2006-2009) for patients in the middle risk quintile were significantly less for DC-only care. CONCLUSIONS: Utilization and expenditures for headache treatment increased from 2000 to 2009 across all provider groups. MD care represented the majority of total allowed charges in this study. MD care and DC care, alone or in combination, were overall the least expensive patterns of headache care. Risk-adjusted charges were significantly less for DC-only care.

Variations in Patterns of Utilization and Charges for the Care of Neck Pain in North Carolina, 2000 to 2009: A Statewide Claims' Data Analysis.

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of the study was to compare utilization and charges generated by medical doctors (MD), doctors of chiropractic (DC) and physical therapists (PT) by provider patterns of care for the treatment of neck pain in North Carolina. METHODS: This was an analysis of neck-pain-related closed claim data from the North Carolina State Health Plan for Teachers and State Employees (NCSHP) from 2000 to 2009. Data were extracted from Blue Cross Blue Shield of North Carolina for the NCSHP using ICD-9 diagnostic codes for uncomplicated neck pain (UNP) and complicated neck pain (CNP). RESULTS: Care patterns with single-provider types and no referrals incurred the least average charges for both UNP and CNP. When care did not include referral providers or services, for either UNP or CNP, MD care with PT was generally less expensive than MD care with DC care. However, when care involved referral providers or services, MD and PT care was on average more expensive than MD and DC care for either UNP or CNP. Risk-adjusted charges for patients in the middle quintile of risk (available 2006-2009) were lower for chiropractic patients with or without medical care or referral care to other providers. CONCLUSIONS: Chiropractic care alone or DC with MD care incurred appreciably fewer charges for UNP or CNP compared to MD care with or without PT care, when care included referral providers or services. This finding was reversed when care did not include referral providers or services. Risk-adjusted charges for UNP and CNP patients were lower for DC care patterns.

Variations in Patterns of Utilization and Charges for the Care of Low Back Pain in North Carolina, 2000 to 2009: A Statewide Claims' Data Analysis.

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of the study was to compare utilization and charges generated by medical doctors (MD), doctors of chiropractic (DC) and physical therapists (PT) by patterns of care for the treatment of low back pain in North Carolina. METHODS: This was an analysis of low-back-pain-related closed claim data from the North Carolina State Health Plan for Teachers and State Employees from 2000 to 2009. Data were extracted from Blue Cross Blue Shield of North Carolina for the North Carolina State Health Plan using International Classification of Diseases, 9th Revision diagnostic codes for uncomplicated low back pain (ULBP) and complicated low back pain (CLBP). RESULTS: Care patterns with single-provider types and no referrals incurred the least charges on average for both ULBP and CLBP. When care did not include referral providers or services, for ULBP, MD and DC care was on average $465 less than MD and PT care. For CLBP, MD and DC care averaged $965 more than MD and PT care. However, when care involved referral providers or services, MD and DC care was on average $1600 less when compared to MD and PT care for ULBP and $1885 less for CLBP. Risk-adjusted charges (available 2006-2009) for patients in the middle quintile of risk were significantly less for DC care patterns. CONCLUSIONS: Chiropractic care alone or DC with MD care incurred appreciably fewer charges for ULBP than MD care with or without PT care. This finding was reversed for CLBP. Adjusted charges for both ULBP and CLBP patients were significantly lower for DC patients.

Best Practices for Chiropractic Care of Children: A Consensus Update.

OBJECTIVE: Chiropractic care is the most common complementary and integrative medicine practice used by children in the United States, and it is used frequently by children internationally as well. The purpose of this project was to update the 2009 recommendations on best practices for chiropractic care of children. METHODS: A formal consensus process was completed based on the existing recommendations and informed by the results of a systematic review of relevant literature from January 2009 through March 2015. The primary search question for the systematic review was, "What is the effectiveness of chiropractic care, including spinal manipulation, for conditions experienced by children (<18 years of age)?" A secondary search question was, "What are the adverse events associated with chiropractic care including spinal manipulation among children (<18 years of age)?" The consensus process was conducted electronically, by e-mail, using a multidisciplinary Delphi panel of 29 experts from 5 countries and using the RAND Corporation/University of California, Los Angeles, consensus methodology. RESULTS: Only 2 statements from the previous set of recommendations did not reach 80% consensus on the first round, and revised versions of both were agreed upon in a second round. CONCLUSIONS: All of the seed statements in this best practices document achieved a high level of consensus and thus represent a general framework for what constitutes an evidence-based and reasonable approach to the chiropractic management of infants, children, and adolescents.

Evaluating the Psychometric Properties of the Evidence-Based Practice Attitude and Utilization Survey.

OBJECTIVE: Most health professions recognize the value of evidence-based practice (EBP), yet the uptake of EBP across most health disciplines has been suboptimal. To improve EBP uptake, it is important to first understand the many dimensions that affect EBP use. The Evidence-Based practice Attitude and utilization SurvEy (EBASE) was designed to measure the attitudes, skills, and use of EBP among practitioners of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM); however, the dimensionality of the instrument is not well understood. The aim of the current research was to examine the psychometric properties of the attitudes, skills, and use subscales of EBASE. DESIGN: This was a secondary analysis of data obtained from the administration of EBASE. Data were examined using principal components analyses and confirmatory methods. Internal consistency reliabilities of resultant subscales were also computed. PARTICIPANTS: 1314 U.S. chiropractors and 554 Canadian chiropractors. RESULTS: A unidimensional structure best fit the attitudes and use subscales. Skills subscale items were best represented by subscales with a multidimensional structure. Specifically, the skills construct was best modeled with three dimensions (identification of the research question, locating research, and application of EBP). All subscales had acceptable internal consistency reliability estimates. CONCLUSIONS: The findings support the modification of the scoring guidelines for the original EBASE. These changes are likely to result in a more accurate measure of EBP attitudes, skills, and use among chiropractors, and possibly CAM providers more generally.

Exploratory Analysis of Clinical Predictors of Outcomes of Nonsurgical Treatment in Patients With Lumbar Spinal Stenosis.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to explore potential baseline physical examination and demographic predictors of clinical outcomes in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis. METHODS: This was a secondary analysis of data obtained from a pilot randomized controlled trial. Primary and secondary outcome measures were the Swiss Spinal Stenosis (SSS) Questionnaire and visual analog scale (VAS) for leg pain. Multiple regression models were used to assess 2 different outcomes: SSS at completion of care and VAS at completion of care. Separate regression models were built for each of the 2 outcomes to identify the best subset of variables that predicted improvement. Predictors with a significant contribution were retained in a final "best" model. RESULTS: Three variables were identified as having an association with SSS score at completion of care: baseline SSS score, qualitative description of leg pain, and age (adjusted R(2) = 33.2). Four variables were identified as having an association with VAS score at completion of care: baseline VAS score, qualitative description of leg pain, body mass index, and age (adjusted R(2) = 38.3). CONCLUSION: This study provides preliminary evidence supporting an association between certain baseline characteristics and nonsurgical clinical outcomes in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis.