老年颈部疼痛患者捏脊与医疗护理安全性的观察性研究。

IF 1.4 4区 医学 Q4 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
James M Whedon, Brian Anderson, Todd A Mackenzie, Leah Grout, Steffany Moonaz, Jon D Lurie, Scott Haldeman
{"title":"老年颈部疼痛患者捏脊与医疗护理安全性的观察性研究。","authors":"James M Whedon, Brian Anderson, Todd A Mackenzie, Leah Grout, Steffany Moonaz, Jon D Lurie, Scott Haldeman","doi":"10.1016/j.jmpt.2025.07.002","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>The purpose of this study was to evaluate the risk of selected adverse outcomes for older adults with a new episode of neck pain (NP) receiving chiropractic care compared to those receiving primary medical care with Prescription Drug Therapy (PDT) or primary care without medication.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Through analysis of Medicare claims data, we designed a retrospective cohort study including 291 604 patients with a new office visit for NP in 2019. We developed 3 mutually exclusive exposure groups: the Chiropractic Manipulative Therapy (CMT) group received spinal manipulative therapy from a chiropractor with no primary care visits; the PDT group visited primary care and filled an analgesic prescription within 7 days without chiropractic care, and the Primary Care Only (PCO) group visited primary care without chiropractic care or analgesic prescriptions. We analyzed possible complications, including adverse drug events, vertebrobasilar insufficiency, and other selected adverse outcomes, calculating incidence rate ratios over 24 months using Poisson regression with robust standard errors and inverse propensity weighing to balance the exposure groups regarding patient characteristics.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among 291 604 patients, 182 596 (63%) received chiropractic care. For CMT vs PDT, the rate for any measured adverse outcome was 20% lower; for CMT vs PCO, the rate was 14% lower, and for PDT vs PCO, the rate was 6% higher. PDT had the highest risk of any measured adverse outcome.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>For Medicare Part B beneficiaries with new onset NP, management with chiropractic care was associated with lower rates of adverse events than primary medical care. The PDT group had the highest risk of any measured adverse outcome.</p>","PeriodicalId":16132,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Manipulative and Physiological Therapeutics","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12422707/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Observational Study of the Safety of Chiropractic vs Medical Care Among Older Adults With Neck Pain.\",\"authors\":\"James M Whedon, Brian Anderson, Todd A Mackenzie, Leah Grout, Steffany Moonaz, Jon D Lurie, Scott Haldeman\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jmpt.2025.07.002\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>The purpose of this study was to evaluate the risk of selected adverse outcomes for older adults with a new episode of neck pain (NP) receiving chiropractic care compared to those receiving primary medical care with Prescription Drug Therapy (PDT) or primary care without medication.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Through analysis of Medicare claims data, we designed a retrospective cohort study including 291 604 patients with a new office visit for NP in 2019. We developed 3 mutually exclusive exposure groups: the Chiropractic Manipulative Therapy (CMT) group received spinal manipulative therapy from a chiropractor with no primary care visits; the PDT group visited primary care and filled an analgesic prescription within 7 days without chiropractic care, and the Primary Care Only (PCO) group visited primary care without chiropractic care or analgesic prescriptions. We analyzed possible complications, including adverse drug events, vertebrobasilar insufficiency, and other selected adverse outcomes, calculating incidence rate ratios over 24 months using Poisson regression with robust standard errors and inverse propensity weighing to balance the exposure groups regarding patient characteristics.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among 291 604 patients, 182 596 (63%) received chiropractic care. For CMT vs PDT, the rate for any measured adverse outcome was 20% lower; for CMT vs PCO, the rate was 14% lower, and for PDT vs PCO, the rate was 6% higher. PDT had the highest risk of any measured adverse outcome.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>For Medicare Part B beneficiaries with new onset NP, management with chiropractic care was associated with lower rates of adverse events than primary medical care. The PDT group had the highest risk of any measured adverse outcome.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":16132,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Manipulative and Physiological Therapeutics\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-09\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12422707/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Manipulative and Physiological Therapeutics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmpt.2025.07.002\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Manipulative and Physiological Therapeutics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmpt.2025.07.002","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:本研究的目的是评估接受捏脊治疗的老年人新发颈部疼痛(NP)的不良结局风险,与接受处方药治疗(PDT)或不接受药物治疗的老年人进行比较。方法:通过分析医疗保险索赔数据,设计了一项回顾性队列研究,纳入了2019年新就诊的NP患者291604例。我们开发了3个相互排斥的暴露组:脊医推拿疗法(CMT)组在没有初级保健访问的情况下接受脊医的脊椎推拿治疗;PDT组在没有捏脊治疗的情况下,在7天内就诊并开具镇痛处方;PCO组在没有捏脊治疗或镇痛处方的情况下就诊。我们分析了可能的并发症,包括药物不良事件、椎基底动脉功能不全和其他选定的不良结局,使用具有稳健标准误差的泊松回归和逆倾向加权来计算24个月内的发病率比,以平衡暴露组的患者特征。结果:291 604例患者中,182 596例(63%)接受捏脊治疗。对于CMT和PDT,任何测量到的不良结果的发生率低20%;CMT与PCO相比,发病率低14%,PDT与PCO相比,发病率高6%。PDT有最高的不良后果风险。结论:对于新发NP的医疗保险B部分受益人,与初级医疗护理相比,脊椎指压治疗的不良事件发生率较低。PDT组出现任何不良结果的风险最高。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Observational Study of the Safety of Chiropractic vs Medical Care Among Older Adults With Neck Pain.

Objective: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the risk of selected adverse outcomes for older adults with a new episode of neck pain (NP) receiving chiropractic care compared to those receiving primary medical care with Prescription Drug Therapy (PDT) or primary care without medication.

Methods: Through analysis of Medicare claims data, we designed a retrospective cohort study including 291 604 patients with a new office visit for NP in 2019. We developed 3 mutually exclusive exposure groups: the Chiropractic Manipulative Therapy (CMT) group received spinal manipulative therapy from a chiropractor with no primary care visits; the PDT group visited primary care and filled an analgesic prescription within 7 days without chiropractic care, and the Primary Care Only (PCO) group visited primary care without chiropractic care or analgesic prescriptions. We analyzed possible complications, including adverse drug events, vertebrobasilar insufficiency, and other selected adverse outcomes, calculating incidence rate ratios over 24 months using Poisson regression with robust standard errors and inverse propensity weighing to balance the exposure groups regarding patient characteristics.

Results: Among 291 604 patients, 182 596 (63%) received chiropractic care. For CMT vs PDT, the rate for any measured adverse outcome was 20% lower; for CMT vs PCO, the rate was 14% lower, and for PDT vs PCO, the rate was 6% higher. PDT had the highest risk of any measured adverse outcome.

Conclusion: For Medicare Part B beneficiaries with new onset NP, management with chiropractic care was associated with lower rates of adverse events than primary medical care. The PDT group had the highest risk of any measured adverse outcome.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.00
自引率
7.70%
发文量
63
审稿时长
29 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Manipulative and Physiological Therapeutics (JMPT) is an international and interdisciplinary journal dedicated to the advancement of conservative health care principles and practices. The JMPT is the premier biomedical publication in the chiropractic profession and publishes peer reviewed, research articles and the Journal''s editorial board includes leading researchers from around the world. The Journal publishes original primary research and review articles of the highest quality in relevant topic areas. The JMPT addresses practitioners and researchers needs by adding to their clinical and basic science knowledge and by informing them about relevant issues that influence health care practices.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信