Comparative Cost Analysis of Neck Pain Treatments for Medicare Beneficiaries.

IF 3.6 2区 医学 Q1 REHABILITATION
Brian R Anderson, Todd A MacKenzie, Leah M Grout, James M Whedon
{"title":"Comparative Cost Analysis of Neck Pain Treatments for Medicare Beneficiaries.","authors":"Brian R Anderson, Todd A MacKenzie, Leah M Grout, James M Whedon","doi":"10.1016/j.apmr.2025.01.467","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To evaluate longitudinal cost outcomes of initial treatment strategies for new neck pain (NP) episodes among Medicare beneficiaries.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Retrospective cohort study using Medicare Part A, B, and D claims data.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>Not applicable.</p><p><strong>Participants: </strong>Medicare beneficiaries aged 65-99 years, continuously enrolled in Parts A, B, and D from 2018 to 2021, who experienced a new NP episode in 2019.</p><p><strong>Interventions: </strong>Three cohorts were developed based on the index visit provider: chiropractic (spinal manipulative therapy [SMT]), primary care with prescription analgesics (PCP [+A]), and primary care without analgesics (PCP [-A], reference group).</p><p><strong>Main outcome measures: </strong>Medicare allowed costs for total and NP-related claims (Parts A and B), and medication claims (Part D) over 24 months from the index visit.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among 291,604 older adults with NP, most were White women with few comorbidities. Compared to PCP (-A), the SMT cohort had 6% (cost ratio, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.93-0.95) lower total Medicare Part A costs, whereas the PCP (+A) cohort showed no difference. For NP-related Part A claims, PCP (+A) had 7% (0.93; 95% CI, 0.88-0.98) lower costs, whereas SMT showed no difference. The SMT cohort had 6% (0.94; 95% CI, 0.94-0.95) lower total Medicare Part B costs and 36% (0.64; 95% CI, 0.64-0.65) lower NP-related costs, whereas PCP (+A) had 2% (1.02; 95% CI, 1.01-1.02) higher total costs. The SMT had 2% (0.98; 95% CI, 0.98-0.99) lower nonanalgesic and 13% (0.87; 95% CI, 0.87-0.88) lower analgesic Part D costs; the PCP (+A) had 13% (1.13; 95% CI, 1.12-1.14) higher nonanalgesic but 14% (0.86; 95% CI, 0.86-0.87) lower analgesic costs. Propensity weighting balanced covariates among cohorts.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>For older adults with new NP episodes, initial SMT was associated with lower health care costs, particularly for Part A total and NP-related claims, with a less pronounced effect on Part B and D claims than PCP-related strategies. These findings suggest potential for health care savings based on the initial treatment choice.</p>","PeriodicalId":8313,"journal":{"name":"Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apmr.2025.01.467","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"REHABILITATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: To evaluate longitudinal cost outcomes of initial treatment strategies for new neck pain (NP) episodes among Medicare beneficiaries.

Design: Retrospective cohort study using Medicare Part A, B, and D claims data.

Setting: Not applicable.

Participants: Medicare beneficiaries aged 65-99 years, continuously enrolled in Parts A, B, and D from 2018 to 2021, who experienced a new NP episode in 2019.

Interventions: Three cohorts were developed based on the index visit provider: chiropractic (spinal manipulative therapy [SMT]), primary care with prescription analgesics (PCP [+A]), and primary care without analgesics (PCP [-A], reference group).

Main outcome measures: Medicare allowed costs for total and NP-related claims (Parts A and B), and medication claims (Part D) over 24 months from the index visit.

Results: Among 291,604 older adults with NP, most were White women with few comorbidities. Compared to PCP (-A), the SMT cohort had 6% (cost ratio, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.93-0.95) lower total Medicare Part A costs, whereas the PCP (+A) cohort showed no difference. For NP-related Part A claims, PCP (+A) had 7% (0.93; 95% CI, 0.88-0.98) lower costs, whereas SMT showed no difference. The SMT cohort had 6% (0.94; 95% CI, 0.94-0.95) lower total Medicare Part B costs and 36% (0.64; 95% CI, 0.64-0.65) lower NP-related costs, whereas PCP (+A) had 2% (1.02; 95% CI, 1.01-1.02) higher total costs. The SMT had 2% (0.98; 95% CI, 0.98-0.99) lower nonanalgesic and 13% (0.87; 95% CI, 0.87-0.88) lower analgesic Part D costs; the PCP (+A) had 13% (1.13; 95% CI, 1.12-1.14) higher nonanalgesic but 14% (0.86; 95% CI, 0.86-0.87) lower analgesic costs. Propensity weighting balanced covariates among cohorts.

Conclusions: For older adults with new NP episodes, initial SMT was associated with lower health care costs, particularly for Part A total and NP-related claims, with a less pronounced effect on Part B and D claims than PCP-related strategies. These findings suggest potential for health care savings based on the initial treatment choice.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.20
自引率
4.70%
发文量
495
审稿时长
38 days
期刊介绍: The Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation publishes original, peer-reviewed research and clinical reports on important trends and developments in physical medicine and rehabilitation and related fields. This international journal brings researchers and clinicians authoritative information on the therapeutic utilization of physical, behavioral and pharmaceutical agents in providing comprehensive care for individuals with chronic illness and disabilities. Archives began publication in 1920, publishes monthly, and is the official journal of the American Congress of Rehabilitation Medicine. Its papers are cited more often than any other rehabilitation journal.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信