toggle visibility Search & Display Options

Select All    Deselect All
 |   | 

Deprecated: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is deprecated, use preg_replace_callback instead in /home/acutrialsocom/public_html/refbase-ocom/includes/ on line 5275
  Record Links
Author (up) Eisenberg, D. M.; Post, D. E.; Davis, R. B.; Connelly, M. T.; Legedza, A. T.; Hrbek, A. L.; Prosser, L. A.; Buring, J. E.; Inui, T. S.; Cherkin, D. C. url  openurl
  Title Addition of choice of complementary therapies to usual care for acute low back pain: a randomized controlled trial Type of Study RCT
  Year 2007 Publication Spine Abbreviated Journal Spine  
  Volume 32 Issue 2 Pages 151-158  
  Keywords CAM Control; Acu Versus > 1 Control; Acupuncture; Low Back Pain, Acute; AcuTrials; Chiropractic; Cost Effectiveness; Low Back Pain; Massage; Pain; RCT; Usual Care Control, Unspecified  
  Abstract STUDY DESIGN: A randomized controlled trial. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the effectiveness and cost of usual care plus patient choice of acupuncture, chiropractic, or massage therapy (choice) compared with usual care alone in patients with acute low back pain (LBP). SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Few studies have evaluated care models with facilitated access to and financial coverage for adjunctive complementary and alternative medicine therapies. METHODS: A total of 444 patients with acute LBP (<21 days) were recruited from 4 clinical sites and randomized into 2 groups: usual care or choice. Outcomes included symptoms (bothersomeness), functional status (Roland), and satisfaction between baseline and 5 weeks, and cost of medical care in the 12 weeks after randomization. RESULTS: After 5 weeks, providing patients with a choice did not yield clinically important reductions in symptoms (median -4, [interquartile range -7, -2] for usual care, and -5 [-7, -3] for choice; P = 0.002) or improvements in functional status (-8 [-13, -2] for usual care, and -9 [-15, -4] for choice; P = 0.15). Although there was a significantly greater satisfaction with care in the choice group, this came at a net increase in costs of 244 dollars per patient. This consisted of a 99 dollars reduction in the average cost to the insurer for medical care but an additional cost of 343 dollars, for an average of 6.0 complementary and alternative medicine treatments per patient. CONCLUSIONS: A model of care that offered access to a choice of complementary and alternative medicine therapies for acute LBP did not result in clinically significant improvements in symptom relief or functional restoration. This model was associated with greater patient satisfaction but increased total costs. Future evaluations of this choice model should focus on patients with chronic conditions (including chronic back pain) for which conventional medical care is often costly and of limited benefit  
  Address Division for Research and Education in Complementary and Integrative Medical Therapies, Osher Institute, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA 02215, USA.  
  Language Number of Treatments  
  Treatment Follow-up 5 Weeks Frequency N/A Number of Participants 444  
  Time in Treatment 5 Weeks Condition Low Back Pain, Acute
  Disease Category Back Pain OCSI Score  
  Notes Approved no  
  Call Number Serial 280  
Permanent link to this record
Select All    Deselect All
 |   | 

Save Citations:
Export Records: