Associations Between Complementary and Alternative Medicine and Health Care Expenditures Among Adults With Chronic Back Pain.

BACKGROUND: Although complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) has been associated with reduced morbidity among adults with chronic back pain, less is known about the association between CAM use and health care expenditures. OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to first estimate health care expenditures of adult CAM users and nonusers with chronic back pain and then assess CAM's influence on health care expenditures. RESEARCH DESIGN: This was an ambidirectional cohort study. DATA: Linked National Health Interview Survey (2012) and Medical Expenditure Panel Survey (2013-2014). MEASURES: CAM use was defined as 3 or more visits to a practitioner in the 12 months before the National Health Interview Survey interview. Covariates included age, sex, race-ethnicity, and body mass index. The outcome was annual health care expenditures (overall and within 8 categories, including office-based visits and prescription medication). ANALYSES: Survey-weighted, covariate adjusted predicted marginal means models were applied to quantify health care expenditures. Survey-weighted, covariate adjusted linear and logistic regression models were used to investigate CAM's influence on expenditures, and the Z mediation test statistic was applied to quantify the independent effects of CAM. RESULTS: Overall, health care expenditures were significantly lower among CAM users with chronic back pain compared with non-CAM users for both 2013 and 2014: $8402 versus $9851 for 2013; $7748 versus $10,227 in 2014, annual differences of -$1499 (95% confidence interval: -$1701 to -$1197) and -$2479 (95% confidence interval: -$2696 to -$2262), respectively (P<0.001). Adult CAM users also had significantly lower prescription medication as well as outpatient expenses (P<0.001). CAM use was identified as a partial mediator to health care expenditures. CONCLUSION: CAM use is associated with lower overall health care expenditures, driven primarily by lower prescription and outpatient expenditures, among adults with chronic back pain in the United States.

Chiropractic maintenance care - what's new? A systematic review of the literature.

Background: Maintenance Care is a traditional chiropractic approach, whereby patients continue treatment after optimum benefit is reached. A review conducted in 1996 concluded that evidence behind this therapeutic strategy was lacking, and a second review from 2008 reached the same conclusion. Since then, a systematic research program in the Nordic countries was undertaken to uncover the definition, indications, prevalence of use and beliefs regarding Maintenance Care to make it possible to investigate its clinical usefulness and cost-effectiveness. As a result, an evidence-based clinical study could be performed. It was therefore timely to review the evidence. Method: Using the search terms "chiropractic OR manual therapy" AND "Maintenance Care OR prevention", PubMed and Web of Science were searched, and the titles and abstracts reviewed for eligibility, starting from 2007. In addition, a search for "The Nordic Maintenance Care Program" was conducted. Because of the diversity of topics and study designs, a systematic review with narrative reporting was undertaken. Results: Fourteen original research articles were included in the review. Maintenance Care was defined as a secondary/tertiary preventive approach, recommended to patients with previous pain episodes, who respond well to chiropractic care. Maintenance Care is applied to approximately 30% of Scandinavian chiropractic patients. Both chiropractors and patients believe in the efficacy of Maintenance Care. Four studies investigating the effect of chiropractic Maintenance Care were identified, with disparate results on pain and disability of neck and back pain. However, only one of these studies utilized all the existing evidence when selecting study subjects and found that Maintenance Care patients experienced fewer days with low back pain compared to patients invited to contact their chiropractor 'when needed'. No studies were found on the cost-effectiveness of Maintenance Care. Conclusion: Knowledge of chiropractic Maintenance Care has advanced. There is reasonable consensus among chiropractors on what Maintenance Care is, how it should be used, and its indications. Presently, Maintenance Care can be considered an evidence-based method to perform secondary or tertiary prevention in patients with previous episodes of low back pain, who report a good outcome from the initial treatments. However, these results should not be interpreted as an indication for Maintenance Care on all patients, who receive chiropractic treatment.

Navy Medicine Introduces Value-Based Health Care.

In 2016 the newly appointed surgeon general of the Navy launched a value-based health care pilot project at Naval Hospital Jacksonville to explore whether multidisciplinary care teams (known as integrated practice units, or IPUs) and measurement of outcomes could improve the readiness of active duty personnel and lower the cost of delivering care to them, their dependents, and local retirees. This article describes the formation of the project's leadership structure, the selection of four conditions to be treated (low back pain, osteoarthritis, diabetes, and high-risk pregnancy), the creation of the care team for each condition, outcomes and costs measured, and the near-term changes in outcomes during the twelve-month pilot period. Patient outcomes improved for three of the four conditions. We describe factors that contributed to the project's success. After the pilot concluded, the Navy combined the back pain and osteoarthritis IPUs into a single musculoskeletal clinical unit and established a similar IPU at another naval hospital and its clinics. The diabetes IPU was continued, but the high-risk pregnancy IPU was not. We offer several observations on the elements that were key to the success of the project, explore challenges and opportunities, and suggest that the pilot described here could be taken to greater scale in the Military Health System and elsewhere.

Cost-Effectiveness of a Team-Based Integrative Medicine Approach to the Treatment of Back Pain.

OBJECTIVES: To report the results of health economic analyses comparing two treatment approaches for chronic low back pain (CLBP). DESIGN: Observational prospective cohort study comparing effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of CLBP care provided at an integrative care clinic with that provided in other clinics within the same hospital. CLBP-related medical utilization, function, quality of life, and days of work incapacity were self-reported at baseline, 3, 6, and 12 months. SETTINGS/LOCATION: Osher Clinical Center (OCC) based at a tertiary academic hospital (Brigham and Women's Hospital [BWH]) and other clinics at BWH. SUBJECTS: CLBP patients seeking care at OCC or non-OCC BWH clinics. INTERVENTIONS: Integrative or conventional care for CLBP as prescribed by the treating clinician(s). OUTCOME MEASURES: Quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) were estimated per treatment approach based on the SF-12. Cost per QALY gained was evaluated using an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). ICERs based on CLBP-specific effectiveness measures (Roland Disability Questionnaire [RDQ] and bothersomeness of pain [BOP]) were exploratory outcomes. RESULTS: Total adjusted annual CLBP-related costs per patient were greater in the OCC versus non-OCC group ($11,526.73 vs. $6,810.63). Between group differences in QALYs were small and ICER estimate of cost per QALY gained was high ($436,676). However, unadjusted mean direct costs per patient decreased over time in the OCC group. Savings in direct costs of $391 (95% confidence interval: -1,078 to 1,861) were observed in the OCC group for the 6- to 12-month period, driven primarily by reduced medication usage. ICERs based on adjusted RDQ and BOP group differences showed cost of $2,073 and $4,203 for a one-point reduction per respective scale. CONCLUSIONS: When adjusted for baseline differences, self-reported costs were higher in the OCC group with only small effects on QALYs. However, trends toward decreased direct expenditures and medication usage over time warrant further investigation. Future studies evaluating potential benefits of integrative care models for the management of CLBP should employ randomized designs, longer observational periods, and explore multiple metrics of cost-effectiveness.

Traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) collaborative care for patients with axial spondyloarthritis (AcuSpA): protocol for a pragmatic randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Axial spondyloarthritis (AxSpA) is a chronic disease which results in fatigue, pain, and reduced quality of life (QoL). Traditional Chinese medicine (TCM), especially acupuncture, has shown promise in managing pain. Although a TCM collaborative model of care (TCMCMC) has been studied in cancer, there are no randomized controlled trials investigating TCM in AxSpA. Therefore, we will conduct a pragmatic trial to determine the clinical effectiveness, safety, and cost-effectiveness of TCMCMC for patients with AxSpA. We define TCMCMC as standard TCM history taking and physical examination, acupuncture, and TCM non-pharmacological advice and communications with rheumatologists in addition to usual rheumatologic care. The purpose of this paper is to describe the rationale for and methodology of this trial. METHODS/DESIGN: This pragmatic randomized controlled trial will recruit 160 patients who are diagnosed with AxSpA and have inadequate response to non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs). Simple randomization to usual rheumatologic care or the intervention (TCMCMC) with a 1:1 allocation ratio will be used. Ten 30-min acupuncture sessions will be provided to patients assigned to the TCMCMC arm. All participants will continue to receive usual rheumatologic care. The primary endpoint - spinal pain - will be evaluated at week 6. Secondary endpoints include clinical, quality of life, and economic outcome measures. Patients will be followed up for up to 52 weeks, and adverse events will be documented. DISCUSSION: This trial may provide evidence regarding the clinical effectiveness, safety, and cost-effectiveness of a TCMCMC for patients with AxSpA. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03420404 . Registered on 14 February 2018.

Structured physiotherapy including a work place intervention for patients with neck and/or back pain in primary care: an economic evaluation.

A cluster-randomized controlled trial, WorkUp, was conducted for working-aged patients at risk of sick leave or on short-term sick leave due to acute/subacute neck and/or back pain in Sweden. The purpose of WorkUp was to facilitate participants to stay at work or in case of sick leave, return-to-work. The aim of this study was to study whether the WorkUp trial was cost-effective. Patients in the intervention and reference group received structured evidence-based physiotherapy, while patients in the intervention group also received a work place dialogue with the employer as an add-on. The participants, 352 in total, were recruited from 20 physiotherapeutic units in primary healthcare in southern Sweden. The economic evaluation was performed both from a healthcare and a societal perspective with a 12-month time frame with extensive univariate sensitivity analyses. Results were presented as incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER) with outcomes measured as quality-adjusted life-years (QALY) and proportion working for at least 4 weeks in a row without reported sick leave at 12-month follow-up. From the healthcare perspective, the ICER was €23,606 (2013 price year) per QALY gain. From the societal perspective the intervention was dominating, i.e.. less costly and more effective than reference care. Bootstrap analysis showed that the probability of the intervention to be cost-effective at €50,000 willingness-to-pay per QALY was 85% from the societal perspective. Structured evidence-based physiotherapeutic care together with workplace dialogue is a cost-effective alternative from both a societal and a healthcare perspective for acute/subacute neck and/or back pain patients.Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02609750.

[Differences in chronic back pain and joint disorders among health insurance funds : Results of a cross-sectional study based on the data of the Socioeconomic Panel from 2013]. / Kassenunterschiede bei chronischen Rückenschmerzen und Gelenkerkrankungen : Ergebnisse einer Querschnittsstudie auf Grundlage der Daten des sozioökonomischen Panels von 2013.

BACKGROUND: Health services research uses increasingly data from health insurance funds. It is well known that the funds differ with regard to sociodemographic characteristics and morbidity. It is uncertain if there are also differences in the prevalence of musculoskeletal disorders. OBJECTIVE: To compare the sociodemographic characteristics in various health insurance funds and the prevalence of joint disorders and chronic back pain. METHOD: The 30th wave (2013) of the German Socioeconomic Panel served as a database. Average age, sex distribution, nationality, education, and employment status were evaluated according to the health insurance funds. The prevalence of joint disorders and chronic back pain were also stratified according to the insurance funds and standardized according to age and sex. RESULTS: A total of 19,146 participants were included. Most participants (4,934) were insured by AOK, followed by BKK (2,632) and BARMER GEK (2,398). There were huge differences among the health insurance funds with regard to the sociodemographic characteristics. For example, the proportion of unemployed insurants was between 33.3 % (IKK) and 50.6 % (AOK). The prevalence of joint disorders standardized according to age and sex (20.7 %; 95 % CI: 20.1-21.3) was between 17.4 % (95 % CI: 15.8-19.0; PKV) and 22.4 % (95 % CI: 21.1-23.6; AOK). The prevalence of chronic back pain (18.0 %; 95 % CI: 17.4-18.5) was between 13.5 % (95 % CI: 12.2-14.9; PKV) and 20.6 % (95 % CI: 19.4-21.8; AOK). CONCLUSION: There are differences in the prevalence of musculoskeletal disorders among health insurance funds. The extrapolation of analyses of one health insurance fund to the German population is thus limited.

Association Between the Type of First Healthcare Provider and the Duration of Financial Compensation for Occupational Back Pain.

Objective To compare the duration of financial compensation and the occurrence of a second episode of compensation of workers with occupational back pain who first sought three types of healthcare providers. Methods We analyzed data from a cohort of 5511 workers who received compensation from the Workplace Safety and Insurance Board for back pain in 2005. Multivariable Cox models controlling for relevant covariables were performed to compare the duration of financial compensation for the patients of each of the three types of first healthcare providers. Logistic regression was used to compare the occurrence of a second episode of compensation over the 2-year follow-up period. Results Compared with the workers who first saw a physician (reference), those who first saw a chiropractor experienced shorter first episodes of 100 % wage compensation (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] = 1.20 [1.10-1.31], P value < 0.001), and the workers who first saw a physiotherapist experienced a longer episode of 100 % compensation (adjusted HR = 0.84 [0.71-0.98], P value = 0.028) during the first 149 days of compensation. The odds of having a second episode of financial compensation were higher among the workers who first consulted a physiotherapist (OR = 1.49 [1.02-2.19], P value = 0.040) rather than a physician (reference). Conclusion The type of healthcare provider first visited for back pain is a determinant of the duration of financial compensation during the first 5 months. Chiropractic patients experience the shortest duration of compensation, and physiotherapy patients experience the longest. These differences raise concerns regarding the use of physiotherapists as gatekeepers for the worker's compensation system. Further investigation is required to understand the between-provider differences.

[Quality Assurance using routine data: Overdiagnosis by radiological imaging for back pain]. / Überdiagnostik mit Bildgebung bei Rückenschmerzen.

UNLABELLED: Background and Problem: Acute nonspecific back pain disorders are typically self-limiting. According to the national guideline low back pain, only in case of clinical suspicion of a serious course radiological imaging should take place immediately. Otherwise, the guideline recommends waiting at least six weeks. PATIENTS AND METHODOLOGY: Using Statutory Health Insurance (SHI) routine data of the Techniker Krankenkasse we analyzed how many of the insured persons suffering from acute back pain for the first time with no indication of a serious outcome received a non-indicated diagnostic imaging. RESULTS: In about 10 % diagnostic imaging is conducted after initial diagnosis. If an imaging is carried out, roughly one third of these cases takes place ahead of time or is completely unnecessary. Methodically this is a very conservative estimation, thus it seems likely that the extent of overdiagnosis in actual medical care situation is even larger. CONCLUSIONS: Every third patient who received radiological diagnostics due to first acute nonspecific back pain underwent the procedure more quickly than recommended (less than six weeks). Overdiagnosis is not only economically problematic but also with respect to patient orientation and patient safety. It may cause substantial damage to patients - either by the use of diagnostics itself or by means of therapies initiated after diagnostics.

[Multimodal pain therapy]. / Multimodale Schmerztherapie.

Chronic pain has both high prevalence and a significant economic impact in Germany. The most common chronic pain types are low back pain and headache. On the one hand, the management of chronic pain patients is incomplete, yet it is often overtreated in orthopaedic surgical settings with interventional procedures. The reason for this is the structure of outpatient management and the way it is paid for in Germany. Pain management of patients with private insurance cover is no better because of "doctor shopping". Medical guidelines could be of some help in improving the situation, but they are widely unknown, and have still to demonstrate whether they have any impact on GP treatment pathways. The "gold standard" multimodal pain therapy shows significant improvement in many studies compared to monomodal therapy regimes and interventional regimes, but is too rarely recommended by the patients' physicians, whether GPs or specialists. Because of the huge number of institutions nowadays that, for the sake of form, offer such multimodal therapies, these need to be differentiated in terms of their structural and process quality. A first step is the "k edoq" project. It is essential to improve knowledge of the principles of modern pain management. This includes better networking and communication between doctors, physiotherapists and psychologists, and at the grassroots level, providing the public with more detailed and better information.

Health care utilisation and out-of-pocket expenditure associated with back pain: a nationally representative survey of Australian women.

BACKGROUND: Back pain impacts on a significant proportion of the Australian population over the life course and has high prevalence rates among women, particularly in older age. Back pain care is characterised by multiple practitioner and self-prescribed treatment options, and the out-of-pocket costs associated with consultations and self-prescribed treatments have not been examined to date. OBJECTIVE: To analyse the extent of health care practitioner consultations and self-prescribed treatment for back pain care among Australian women, and to assess the self-reported costs associated with such usage. METHODS: Survey of 1,310 women (response rate 80.9%) who reported seeking help for back pain from the '1946-51 cohort' of the Australian Longitudinal Study on Women's Health. Women were asked about their use of health care practitioners and self-prescribed treatments for back pain and the costs associated with such usage. RESULTS: In the past year 76.4% consulted a complementary and alternative practitioner, 56% an allied health practitioner and 59.2% a GP/medical specialist. Overall, women consulted with, on average, 3.0 (SD = 2.0) different health care practitioners, and had, on average, 12.2 (SD = 9.7) discrete health care practitioner consultations for back pain. Average self-reported out-of-pocket expenditure on practitioners and self-prescribed treatments for back pain care per annum was AU$873.10. CONCLUSIONS: Multiple provider usage for various but distinct purposes (i.e. pain/mobility versus anxiety/stress) points to the need for further research into patient motivations and experiences of back pain care in order to improve and enhance access to and continuity of care. Our results suggest that the cost of back pain care represents a significant burden, and may ultimately limit women's access to multiple providers. We extrapolate that for Australian working-age women, total out-of-pocket expenditure on back pain care per annum is in excess of AU$1.4 billion, thus indicating the prominence of back pain as a major economic, social and health burden.

Assessing the effectiveness and cost effectiveness of subcutaneous nerve stimulation in patients with predominant back pain due to failed back surgery syndrome (SubQStim study): study protocol for a multicenter randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Chronic radicular pain can be effectively treated with spinal cord stimulation, but this therapy is not always sufficient for chronic back pain. Subcutaneous nerve stimulation (SQS) refers to the placement of percutaneous leads in the subcutaneous tissue within the area of pain. Case series data show that failed back surgery syndrome (FBSS) patients experience clinically important levels of pain relief following SQS and may also reduce their levels of analgesic therapy and experience functional well-being. However, to date, there is no randomized controlled trial evidence to support the use of SQS in FBSS. METHODS/DESIGN: The SubQStim study is a multicenter randomized controlled trial comparing SQS plus optimized medical management ('SQS arm') versus optimized medical management alone ('OMM arm') in patients with predominant back pain due to FBSS. Up to 400 patients will be recruited from approximately 33 centers in Europe and Australia and will be randomized 1:1 to the SQS or OMM arms. After 9 months, patients who fail to reach the primary outcome will be allowed to switch treatments. Patients will be evaluated at baseline (prior to randomization) and at 1, 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, and 36 months after randomization. The primary outcome is the proportion of patients at 9 months with a ≥50% reduction in back pain intensity compared to baseline. The secondary outcomes are: back and leg pain intensity score, functional disability, health-related quality of life, patient satisfaction, patient global impression of change, healthcare resource utilization/costs, cost-effectiveness analysis and adverse events. Outcomes arms will be compared between SQS and OMM arms at all evaluation points up to and including 9 months. After the 9-month assessment visit, the main analytic focus will be to compare within patient changes in outcomes relative to baseline. DISCUSSION: The SubQStim trial began patient recruitment in November 2012. Recruitment is expected to close in late 2014. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01711619.

Aging baby boomers and the rising cost of chronic back pain: secular trend analysis of longitudinal Medical Expenditures Panel Survey data for years 2000 to 2007.

OBJECTIVES: The purposes of this study were to analyze data from the longitudinal Medical Expenditures Panel Survey (MEPS) to evaluate the impact of an aging population on secular trends in back pain and chronicity and to provide estimates of treatment costs for patients who used only ambulatory services. METHODS: Using the MEPS 2-year longitudinal data for years 2000 to 2007, we analyzed data from all adult respondents. Of the total number of MEPS respondent records analyzed (N = 71,838), we identified 12,104 respondents with back pain and further categorized 3842 as chronic cases and 8262 as nonchronic cases. RESULTS: Secular trends from the MEPS data indicate that the prevalence of back pain has increased by 29%, whereas chronic back pain increased by 64%. The average age among all adults with back pain increased from 45.9 to 48.2 years; the average age among adults with chronic back pain increased from 48.5 to 52.2 years. Inflation-adjusted (to 2010 dollars) biennial expenditures on ambulatory services for chronic back pain increased by 129% over the same period, from $15.6 billion in 2000 to 2001 to $35.7 billion in 2006 to 2007. CONCLUSION: The prevalence of back pain, especially chronic back pain, is increasing. To the extent that the growth in chronic back pain is caused, in part, by an aging population, the growth will likely continue or accelerate. With relatively high cost per adult with chronic back pain, total expenditures associated with back pain will correspondingly accelerate under existing treatment patterns. This carries implications for prioritizing health policy, clinical practice, and research efforts to improve care outcomes, costs, and cost-effectiveness and for health workforce planning.

Value of chiropractic services at an on-site health center.

OBJECTIVE: Chiropractic care offered at an on-site health center could reduce the economic and clinical burden of musculoskeletal conditions. METHODS: A retrospective claims analysis and clinical evaluation were performed to assess the influence of on-site chiropractic services on health care utilization and outcomes. RESULTS: Patients treated off-site were significantly more likely to have physical therapy (P < 0.0001) and outpatient visits (P < 0.0001). In addition, the average total number of health care visits, radiology procedures, and musculoskeletal medication use per patient with each event were significantly higher for the off-site group (all P < 0.0001). Last, headache, neck pain, and low back pain-functional status improved significantly (all P < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that chiropractic services offered at on-site health centers may promote lower utilization of certain health care services, while improving musculoskeletal function.

Disability pension from back pain among social security beneficiaries, Brazil.

OBJECTIVE: To describe disability pension from back pain. METHODS: Descriptive study based on data from the Brazilian Social Security Beneficiary Database and the Social Security Statistics Annual Report in 2007. The incidence rate of disability pension from back pain was estimated according to gender and age by Brazilian states. There were also estimated working days lost due to back pain disability by occupation. RESULTS: Idiopathic back pain was the most common cause of disability among social security pension and accidental retirement. Most pensioners were living in urban areas and were commercial workers. The rate of disability pension from back pain in Brazil was 29.96 per 100,000 beneficiaries. A higher rate was seen among males and older individuals. Rondônia showed the highest rate, four times as high as expected (RR= 4.05) followed by Bahia with a rate about twice as high as expected (RR=2.07). Commercial workers accounted for 96.9% of working days lost due to disability. CONCLUSIONS: Back pain was a major cause of disability in 2007 mostly among commercial workers showing great differences between the Brazilian states.

Cost of care for common back pain conditions initiated with chiropractic doctor vs medical doctor/doctor of osteopathy as first physician: experience of one Tennessee-based general health insurer.

OBJECTIVE: The primary aim of this study was to determine if there are differences in the cost of low back pain care when a patient is able to choose a course of treatment with a medical doctor (MD) versus a doctor of chiropractic (DC), given that his/her insurance provides equal access to both provider types. METHODS: A retrospective claims analysis was performed on Blue Cross Blue Shield of Tennessee's intermediate and large group fully insured population between October 1, 2004 and September 30, 2006. The insured study population had open access to MDs and DCs through self-referral without any limit to the number of visits or differences in co-pays to these 2 provider types. Our analysis was based on episodes of care for low back pain. An episode was defined as all reimbursed care delivered between the first and the last encounter with a health care provider for low back pain. A 60 day window without an encounter was treated as a new episode. We compared paid claims and risk adjusted costs between episodes of care initiated with an MD with those initiated with a DC. RESULTS: Paid costs for episodes of care initiated with a DC were almost 40% less than episodes initiated with an MD. Even after risk adjusting each patient's costs, we found that episodes of care initiated with a DC were 20% less expensive than episodes initiated with an MD. CONCLUSIONS: Beneficiaries in our sampling frame had lower overall episode costs for treatment of low back pain if they initiated care with a DC, when compared to those who initiated care with an MD.

Identifying episodes of back pain using medical expenditures panel survey data: patient experience, use of services, and chronicity.

OBJECTIVE: To explore the correspondence between "Episodes-of-Pain" and "episodes of care" for individuals with back pain. METHODS: This study was a secondary analysis of Medical Expenditures Panel Survey (MEPS) 2-year longitudinal data. Individual use and utilization of back pain services were examined across ambulatory settings and providers, and linked to MEPS medical condition data to identify individuals with back pain who do not use or who delay or discontinue utilization of health services for back pain. "Episodes-of-Care" and Episodes-of-Pain were approximated through round-by-round temporal mapping of MEPS back pain utilization events data and medical conditions data. RESULTS: Of 10,193 individuals with back pain, approximately one fifth did not actively seek care for their back pain. Utilization of services for back pain (Episodes-of-Care) does not always correspond with an individual's full experience of back pain (Episodes-of-Pain). Upwards of 20% of MEPS respondents who use services for some back pain episodes, reported additional episodes for which they do not use services. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that other longitudinal studies based only on data that reflect service use, for example, claims data, may incorrectly infer the nature of back pain and back pain episodes. Many individuals report ongoing back pain that continues beyond their Episodes-of-Care, and many individuals with persistent back pain may use prescription drugs, medical services, and other health services only intermittently.

Comparison of health care expenditures among insured users and nonusers of complementary and alternative medicine in Washington State: a cost minimization analysis.

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this analysis was to compare health care expenditures between insured patients with back pain, fibromyalgia syndrome, or menopause symptoms who used complementary and alternative medical (CAM) providers for some of their care to a matched group of patients who did not use any CAM care. Insurance coverage was equivalent for both conventional and CAM providers. DESIGN: Insurance claims data for 2000-2003 from Washington State, which mandates coverage of CAM providers, were analyzed. CAM-using patients were matched to CAM-nonusing patients based on age group, gender, index medical condition, overall disease burden, and prior-year expenditures. RESULTS: Both unadjusted tests and linear regression models indicated that CAM users had lower average expenditures than nonusers. (Unadjusted: $3,797 versus $4,153, p = 0.0001; beta from linear regression -$367 for CAM users.) CAM users had higher outpatient expenditures that which were offset by lower inpatient and imaging expenditures. The largest difference was seen in the patients with the heaviest disease burdens among whom CAM users averaged $1,420 less than nonusers, p < 0.0001, which more than offset slightly higher average expenditures of $158 among CAM users with lower disease burdens. CONCLUSIONS: This analysis indicates that among insured patients with back pain, fibromyalgia, and menopause symptoms, after minimizing selection bias by matching patients who use CAM providers to those who do not, those who use CAM will have lower insurance expenditures than those who do not use CAM.

[Comparison of treatment expenses of naturopathic and orthopedic in-patient treatment]. / Kostenvergleichsuntersuchung zur naturheilkundlichen und konventionellen orthopädischen stationären Behandlung.

BACKGROUND: In health services research comparative studies between orthopaedics and naturopathy are necessary. They allow evidence based decisions between individual therapeutical alternatives as well as decisions on health politics, e.g. concerning allocation of resources. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A controlled prospective cohort study is presented. Conservatively treated patients were recruited for the study, if they needed in-patient treatment because of chronic back pain. The conservative orthopaedic treatment including Minimal invasive Therapy (MIT) was compared to in-patient naturopathic "complex"-treatment. The real costs to the public health insurance system are unknown--relating to both the individual patient and the physician. Hence an approximation was attempted on the basis of the billing of the concerned hospitals, the analysis of extensive patient interviews, randomly selected evaluation of in- and out-patient records, validated by an expert panel. RESULTS: Costs for medication decreased in the post stationary phase after orthopedic and naturopathic treatment. Rehabilitation measures and treatments at a health resort increased after orthopedic treatment, whereas the frequency of specialist consultation decreased in both cohorts indicating the efficacy of the in-patient treatment. Incidence of psychotherapy was highest in the naturopathic group before admission to hospital and decreased afterwards. The gathered data point to a reduction of the total outpatient treatment costs in both cohorts. There were treatment-specific differences when regarding single components. CONCLUSION: Naturopathic complex in-patient treatment is a cost-efficient complement of the conventional orthopedic treatment options.