RSS Feeds

Email a Friend Printer Friendly

New study shows chiropractic is cost-effective in treating chronic back pain

November 16, 2005

A new study finds that chiropractic and medical care have comparable costs for treating chronic low-back pain, with chiropractic care producing significantly better outcomes. A group of chronic low-back patients who underwent chiropractic treatment showed higher pain relief and satisfaction with the care and lower disability scores than a group that underwent medical care, according to an October 2005 study in the Journal of Manipulative and Physiological Therapeutics (JMPT).

Although several cost-effectiveness studies outside the United States have favorably compared chiropractic to medical care, this new study is one of the first to compare low-back treatment costs and outcomes within the structure of the American health care system. In the United States alone, back pain associated costs are estimated to reach $48 billion this year, and, at any given time, 80 percent of the U.S. population suffers from back pain - statistics that make this study especially pertinent, according to the authors.

Specifics of the study:

The study involved 2780 patients with mechanical low-back pain who referred themselves to 60 doctors of chiropractic and 111 medical doctors in 64 general practice community clinics in Oregon and one in Vancouver, Wa. Chiropractic care included spinal manipulation, physical therapies, an exercise plan, and self-care patient education. Medical care consisted of prescription drugs, an exercise plan, self-care advice, and a referral to a physical therapist (in approximately 25 percent of cases). The costs of treatment and patients' pain, disability, and satisfaction with their health care were assessed at 3 and 12 months after the initial visit to the doctor.

The office costs alone for chiropractic treatment of low-back pain were higher than for medical care. However, when costs of advanced imaging and referral to physical therapists and other providers were added, chiropractic care costs for chronic patients were 16 percent lower than medical care costs. The differences between medical and chiropractic total costs were not statistically significant for acute or chronic patients. The study did not include over-the-counter drug, hospitalization, or surgical costs.

Both acute and chronic patients showed better outcomes in pain and disability reduction and higher satisfaction with their care after undergoing chiropractic treatment. The advantage of chiropractic care was clinically significant in the chronic patient group at 3 months' follow-up, but smaller in the acute group. Improvements in patients' physical and mental health were comparable in both the chiropractic and the medical group, with the exception of physical health scores in the acute patients in the chiropractic group, which showed an advantage over the medical group.

"With their mission to increase value and respond to patient preferences, health care organizations and policy makers need to reevaluate the appropriateness of chiropractic as a treatment option for low-back pain," concluded the study authors.

American Chiropractic Association