Analysis of provider specialties in the treatment of patients with clinically diagnosed back and joint problems

Fernando Wilson, John C. Licciardone, Cathleen M. Kearns, Mathias Akuoko

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

4 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Rationale, aims and objectives Although several studies have compared patient outcomes by provider specialty in the treatment of back and joint pain, little is known about the cost-effectiveness of improving patient outcomes across specialties. This study uses a large-scale, nationally representative database to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of being treated by specific provider specialists for back and joint pain in the United States. Method The 2002-2012 Medical Expenditure Panel Surveys were used to examine patients diagnosed with back and/or joint problems seeking treatment from doctors (internal medicine, family/general, osteopathic medicine, orthopaedics, rheumatology, neurology) or other providers (chiropractor, physical therapist, acupuncturist, massage therapist). A total of 16 546 respondents aged 18 to 85 and clinically diagnosed with back/joint pain were examined. Self-reported measures of physical and mental health and general quality of life (measured by the EuroQol-5D) were compared with average total costs of treatment across medical providers. Results Total annual treatment costs per person ranged from $397 for family/general doctors to $1205 for rheumatologists. Cost-effectiveness analysis suggests that osteopathic, family/general, internal medicine doctors and chiropractors and massage therapists were more cost-effective than other specialties in improving physical function to back pain patients. For mental health measures, family/general and orthopaedic doctors and physical therapists were more cost-effective compared with other specialties. Similar to results on physical function, family/general, osteopathic and internal medicine doctors dominated other specialties. However, only massage therapy was cost-effective among non-doctor providers in improving quality of life measures. Conclusions Patients seeking care for back and joint-related health problems face a wide range of treatments, costs and outcomes depending on which specialist provider they see. This study provides important insight on the relationship between health care costs and patients' perceived physical and mental health status from receiving treatment for diagnosed back/joint problems.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)952-957
Number of pages6
JournalJournal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice
Volume21
Issue number5
DOIs
StatePublished - Oct 1 2015

Fingerprint

Back Pain
Joints
Health Care Costs
Massage
Arthralgia
Internal Medicine
Osteopathic Medicine
Cost-Benefit Analysis
Mental Health
Physical Therapists
Costs and Cost Analysis
Orthopedics
Quality of Life
Therapeutics
Rheumatology
Neurology
Health Expenditures
Health Status
Patient Care
Databases

Keywords

  • cost-effectiveness
  • health care providers
  • low back pain
  • quality of life

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Health Policy
  • Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health

Cite this

Analysis of provider specialties in the treatment of patients with clinically diagnosed back and joint problems. / Wilson, Fernando; Licciardone, John C.; Kearns, Cathleen M.; Akuoko, Mathias.

In: Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice, Vol. 21, No. 5, 01.10.2015, p. 952-957.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{af900485a6c8427ca9ae24005370aabc,
title = "Analysis of provider specialties in the treatment of patients with clinically diagnosed back and joint problems",
abstract = "Rationale, aims and objectives Although several studies have compared patient outcomes by provider specialty in the treatment of back and joint pain, little is known about the cost-effectiveness of improving patient outcomes across specialties. This study uses a large-scale, nationally representative database to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of being treated by specific provider specialists for back and joint pain in the United States. Method The 2002-2012 Medical Expenditure Panel Surveys were used to examine patients diagnosed with back and/or joint problems seeking treatment from doctors (internal medicine, family/general, osteopathic medicine, orthopaedics, rheumatology, neurology) or other providers (chiropractor, physical therapist, acupuncturist, massage therapist). A total of 16 546 respondents aged 18 to 85 and clinically diagnosed with back/joint pain were examined. Self-reported measures of physical and mental health and general quality of life (measured by the EuroQol-5D) were compared with average total costs of treatment across medical providers. Results Total annual treatment costs per person ranged from $397 for family/general doctors to $1205 for rheumatologists. Cost-effectiveness analysis suggests that osteopathic, family/general, internal medicine doctors and chiropractors and massage therapists were more cost-effective than other specialties in improving physical function to back pain patients. For mental health measures, family/general and orthopaedic doctors and physical therapists were more cost-effective compared with other specialties. Similar to results on physical function, family/general, osteopathic and internal medicine doctors dominated other specialties. However, only massage therapy was cost-effective among non-doctor providers in improving quality of life measures. Conclusions Patients seeking care for back and joint-related health problems face a wide range of treatments, costs and outcomes depending on which specialist provider they see. This study provides important insight on the relationship between health care costs and patients' perceived physical and mental health status from receiving treatment for diagnosed back/joint problems.",
keywords = "cost-effectiveness, health care providers, low back pain, quality of life",
author = "Fernando Wilson and Licciardone, {John C.} and Kearns, {Cathleen M.} and Mathias Akuoko",
year = "2015",
month = "10",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1111/jep.12411",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "21",
pages = "952--957",
journal = "Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice",
issn = "1356-1294",
publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",
number = "5",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Analysis of provider specialties in the treatment of patients with clinically diagnosed back and joint problems

AU - Wilson, Fernando

AU - Licciardone, John C.

AU - Kearns, Cathleen M.

AU - Akuoko, Mathias

PY - 2015/10/1

Y1 - 2015/10/1

N2 - Rationale, aims and objectives Although several studies have compared patient outcomes by provider specialty in the treatment of back and joint pain, little is known about the cost-effectiveness of improving patient outcomes across specialties. This study uses a large-scale, nationally representative database to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of being treated by specific provider specialists for back and joint pain in the United States. Method The 2002-2012 Medical Expenditure Panel Surveys were used to examine patients diagnosed with back and/or joint problems seeking treatment from doctors (internal medicine, family/general, osteopathic medicine, orthopaedics, rheumatology, neurology) or other providers (chiropractor, physical therapist, acupuncturist, massage therapist). A total of 16 546 respondents aged 18 to 85 and clinically diagnosed with back/joint pain were examined. Self-reported measures of physical and mental health and general quality of life (measured by the EuroQol-5D) were compared with average total costs of treatment across medical providers. Results Total annual treatment costs per person ranged from $397 for family/general doctors to $1205 for rheumatologists. Cost-effectiveness analysis suggests that osteopathic, family/general, internal medicine doctors and chiropractors and massage therapists were more cost-effective than other specialties in improving physical function to back pain patients. For mental health measures, family/general and orthopaedic doctors and physical therapists were more cost-effective compared with other specialties. Similar to results on physical function, family/general, osteopathic and internal medicine doctors dominated other specialties. However, only massage therapy was cost-effective among non-doctor providers in improving quality of life measures. Conclusions Patients seeking care for back and joint-related health problems face a wide range of treatments, costs and outcomes depending on which specialist provider they see. This study provides important insight on the relationship between health care costs and patients' perceived physical and mental health status from receiving treatment for diagnosed back/joint problems.

AB - Rationale, aims and objectives Although several studies have compared patient outcomes by provider specialty in the treatment of back and joint pain, little is known about the cost-effectiveness of improving patient outcomes across specialties. This study uses a large-scale, nationally representative database to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of being treated by specific provider specialists for back and joint pain in the United States. Method The 2002-2012 Medical Expenditure Panel Surveys were used to examine patients diagnosed with back and/or joint problems seeking treatment from doctors (internal medicine, family/general, osteopathic medicine, orthopaedics, rheumatology, neurology) or other providers (chiropractor, physical therapist, acupuncturist, massage therapist). A total of 16 546 respondents aged 18 to 85 and clinically diagnosed with back/joint pain were examined. Self-reported measures of physical and mental health and general quality of life (measured by the EuroQol-5D) were compared with average total costs of treatment across medical providers. Results Total annual treatment costs per person ranged from $397 for family/general doctors to $1205 for rheumatologists. Cost-effectiveness analysis suggests that osteopathic, family/general, internal medicine doctors and chiropractors and massage therapists were more cost-effective than other specialties in improving physical function to back pain patients. For mental health measures, family/general and orthopaedic doctors and physical therapists were more cost-effective compared with other specialties. Similar to results on physical function, family/general, osteopathic and internal medicine doctors dominated other specialties. However, only massage therapy was cost-effective among non-doctor providers in improving quality of life measures. Conclusions Patients seeking care for back and joint-related health problems face a wide range of treatments, costs and outcomes depending on which specialist provider they see. This study provides important insight on the relationship between health care costs and patients' perceived physical and mental health status from receiving treatment for diagnosed back/joint problems.

KW - cost-effectiveness

KW - health care providers

KW - low back pain

KW - quality of life

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84944146479&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84944146479&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1111/jep.12411

DO - 10.1111/jep.12411

M3 - Article

VL - 21

SP - 952

EP - 957

JO - Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice

JF - Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice

SN - 1356-1294

IS - 5

ER -