Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24928639›Full record

Trial reportJournal of manipulative and physiological therapeutics2014

Cost analysis related to dose-response of spinal manipulative therapy for chronic low back pain: outcomes from a randomized controlled trial.

Darcy A Vavrek, Rajiv Sharma, Mitchell Haas

Registry-linked trialOpen access · bronzeAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Journal of manipulative and physiological therapeutics, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT00376350 (Dose-Response/Efficacy of Manipulation for Chronic LBP), which is not on this map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.6field-weighted citation impact, top 12% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT00376350 phase2 / phase3completednot on this map

Dose-Response/Efficacy of Manipulation for Chronic LBP

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity of Western StatesRan2007 to 2011Enrolled400ConditionsLow Back PainArmsSpinal Manipulation, Light Massage, Pulsed Ultrasound
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 15 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Massage for low-back pain.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2015
    Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Darcy A VavrekAssistant Professor, University of Western States, Portland, OR. Electronic address: dvavrek@uws.edu.
Rajiv SharmaPortland State University, Portland, OR.
Mitchell HaasAssociate Vice President of Research, University of Western States, Portland, OR.
University of Western States · USPortland State University · US

Funding

Dose-Response/Efficacy of Manipulation for Chronic LBPU01AT001908 · NCCIH · UNIVERSITY OF WESTERN STATES · PI HAAS, MITCHELL · 2006 to 2010
$2.8M
NCCIH NIH HHS U01 AT001908
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThe purpose of this analysis is to report the incremental costs and benefits of different doses of spinal manipulative therapy (SMT) in patients with chronic low back pain (LBP).

methodsWe randomized 400 patients with chronic LBP to receive a dose of 0, 6, 12, or 18 sessions of SMT. Participants were scheduled for 18 visits for 6 weeks and received SMT or light massage control from a doctor of chiropractic. Societal costs in the year after study enrollment were estimated using patient reports of health care use and lost productivity. The main health outcomes were the number of pain-free days and disability-free days. Multiple regression was performed on outcomes and log-transformed cost data.

resultsLost productivity accounts for most societal costs of chronic LBP. Cost of treatment and lost productivity ranged from $3398 for 12 SMT sessions to $3815 for 0 SMT sessions with no statistically significant differences between groups. Baseline patient characteristics related to increase in costs were greater age (P = .03), greater disability (P = .01), lower quality-adjusted life year scores (P = .01), and higher costs in the period preceding enrollment (P < .01). Pain-free and disability-free days were greater for all SMT doses compared with control, but only SMT 12 yielded a statistically significant benefit of 22.9 pain-free days (P = .03) and 19.8 disability-free days (P = .04). No statistically significant group differences in quality-adjusted life years were noted.

conclusionsA dose of 12 SMT sessions yielded a modest benefit in pain-free and disability-free days. Care of chronic LBP with SMT did not increase the costs of treatment plus lost productivity.

Indexed as

AdultAge FactorsCost of IllnessDisability EvaluationEfficiency, OrganizationalFemaleHumansLow Back PainMaleManipulation, SpinalOregonProspective StudiesQuality-Adjusted Life YearsChiropracticCosts and Cost AnalysisHealth Care CostsLow Back PainManipulationSpinal

Identifiers

PMID24928639
PMCPMC4095804
OpenAlexW2008502302

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.