ArticleArchives of physical medicine and rehabilitation2025
Comparative Cost Analysis of Neck Pain Treatments for Medicare Beneficiaries.
Article in Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Observational Study of the Safety of Chiropractic vs Medical Care Among Older Adults With Neck Pain.Journal of manipulative and physiological therapeuticsObservational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo evaluate longitudinal cost outcomes of initial treatment strategies for new neck pain (NP) episodes among Medicare beneficiaries.
designRetrospective cohort study using Medicare Part A, B, and D claims data.
settingNot applicable.
participantsMedicare 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.
interventionsThree 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 measuresMedicare allowed costs for total and NP-related claims (Parts A and B), and medication claims (Part D) over 24 months from the index visit.
resultsAmong 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.
conclusionsFor 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.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.