|
| ||
![]() |
||
|
|
|
Chiropractic More Cost-Effective Than Medicine Under Managed CareBy Editorial Staff A study of chiropractic utilization in managed health plans was among several groundbreaking papers presented at the Research Agenda Conference (RAC) in March 2003.1,2 The study, conducted by researchers from American Specialty Health and Health Benchmarks, Inc., was headed by Doug Metz, DC, chief health services officer, and Craig Nelson, DC, MS, senior health services research scientist.The four-year study compared the experiences of 1.7 million patients in a California managed-care plan: 1 million members without chiropractic coverage and 700,000 with chiropractic coverage. Patients were divided into six groups, based on whether they enjoyed chiropractic coverage and whether they received chiropractic or medical care for their neuromusculoskeletal (NMS) conditions. The researchers discovered that chiropractic care in the managed-care setting was more cost-effective on a number of levels:
According to Dr. Nelson, these findings could translate into a $47.5 million savings over four years for the 1.7 million-member managed-care plan, if all 1.7 million members were provided with chiropractic coverage. While the paper has not yet been published, the results were also presented at the World Federation of Chiropractic 7th Biennial Congress in Orlando at the beginning of May. Although chiropractors tend to be critical of managed-health care, this study provides us with the best rationale yet for the inclusion of a chiropractic benefit in a health plan. The study reached these conclusions:
It is particularly important to note the substitution effect: Particularly in the current uncertain economic climate, it is extremely unlikely employers or health plans are eager to add benefits that will increase costs. This study shows that adding a chiropractic benefit does not add to the total amount of care (and therefore costs), but provides a lower cost alternative for patients. Therefore, the overall effect of the chiropractic benefit was a favorable selection effect; according to the study, if chiropractic care is substituted for medical care, that care will be less costly and less invasive for back pain, and fewer invasive and expensive procedures will need to be performed. The net effect of these factors is a significant reduction in overall health-care costs. Conversely, it is entirely legitimate to conclude from this study that not having a chiropractic benefit will add to total health-care costs. Initially, this study will likely effect the decisions of health-care plans that have yet to offer chiropractic benefits to their patients. However, the study should also assist the chiropractic profession in a number of other ways, particularly in discussions with the U.S. Congressional Budget Office, which historically has refused to consider the cost-savings benefits that can be gained by including chiropractic. References
|
|