Assessing practice pattern differences in the treatment of acute low back pain in the United States Military Health System

Erich J Dietrich, Todd Leroux, Carla F Santiago, Melvin D Helgeson, Patrick Richard, Tracey P Koehlmoos, Erich J Dietrich, Todd Leroux, Carla F Santiago, Melvin D Helgeson, Patrick Richard, Tracey P Koehlmoos

Abstract

Background: Acute low back pain is one of the most common reasons for individuals to seek medical care in the United States. The US Military Health System provides medical care to approximately 9.4 million beneficiaries annually. These patients also routinely suffer from acute low back pain. Within this health system, patients can receive care and treatment from physicians, or physician extenders including physician assistants and nurse practitioners. Given the diversity of provider types and their respective training programs, it would be informative to evaluate variation in care delivery, adherence to clinical guidelines, and differences within the MHS among a complex mix of provider types.

Methods: This study was a retrospective, cross-sectional quantitative analysis that examined variations in treatment between provider types within the Military Health System in 2015 for treatment of acute low back pain using administrative data. In addition to descriptive and summary statistics, binomial logistic regression models were used to assess variation in practice patterns among physicians and mid-level practitioners for prescribing of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory, opioids, plain radiography, computed tomography, and magnetic resonance imaging.

Results: With regard to prescribing practices, results indicated that the odds of receiving non-steroidal anti-inflammatory prescriptions increased significantly for both physician assistants and nurse practitioners when compared to physicians. For basic radiological referrals, odds increased significantly for ordering plain radiography for physician assistants and nurse practitioners when compared to physicians. For more advanced imaging, odds significantly decreased for ordering computed tomography (CT) and slightly decreased for magnetic resonance for physician assistants, nurse practitioners and physician residents compared to the physician group. Additionally this study discovered differences in the prescribing patterns between provider categories. Both contractors and civilians had higher odds of prescribing opioids compared to active duty providers.

Conclusions: As physician assistants and nurse practitioners continue to gain popularity as physician extenders in the US and in addressing provider shortages for the Military Health System, further research should be conducted to determine what impact, if any, the differences found in this study have on patient outcomes. In addition, provider type warrants further investigation to determine if labor mix and outsourcing decisions within a single payer system impacts health delivery and value based care.

Keywords: Health services; Low back pain; Military medicine; Nurse practitioner; Physician assistant; Physician extenders; Practice guideline.

Conflict of interest statement

Ethics approval and consent to participate

This study received Institutional Review Board (IRB) approval through the Uniformed Services University in Bethesda, Maryland.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

References

    1. Rubin DI. Epidemiology and risk factors for spine pain. Neurol Clin. 2007;25(2):353–371. doi: 10.1016/j.ncl.2007.01.004.
    1. Katz JN. Lumbar disc disorders and low back pain: socioeconomic factors and consequences. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2006;88(Suppl 2):21–24.
    1. Chou R, Qaseem A, Owens DK, Shekelle P. Diagnostic imaging for low back pain: advice for high-value healthcare from the American College of Physicians. Ann Intern Med. 2011;154:181–189. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-154-3-201102010-00008.
    1. Chou R, Qaseem A, Snow V, Casey D, Cross JT, Jr, Shekelle P, et al. Diagnosis and treatment of low back pain: a joint clinical practice guideline from the American College of Physicians and the American pain society. Ann Intern Med. 2007;147(7):478–491. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-147-7-200710020-00006.
    1. United States Department of Veterans Affairs. VA/DoD clinical practice guidelines: Diagnosis and treatment of low back pain. 2007. Available from:
    1. Mundell BF, Friedberg MW, Eibner C, Mundell WC. US military primary care: problems, solutions, and implications for civilian medicine. Health Aff. 2013;32:1949–1955. doi: 10.1377/hlthaff.2013.0586.
    1. Carlson SW, Carlson WO. NP vs. PA: what is the difference? S D Med. 2014;67:61–63.
    1. Strange K. How does provider supply and regulation influence health care markets? Evidence from nurse practitioners and physician assistants. J Health Econ. 2013;33:1–27. doi: 10.1016/j.jhealeco.2013.10.009.
    1. Lassi ZS, Cometto G, Huicho L, Bhutta ZA. Quality of care provided by mid-level health workers: systematic review and meta-analysis. Bull World Health Organ. 2013;91(11):824–833. doi: 10.2471/BLT.13.118786.
    1. Scheffler RM, Waltzman NJ, Hillman JM. The productivity of physician assistants and nurse practitioners and health work force policy in the era of managed health care. J Allied Health. 1996;25(3):207–217.
    1. United States Department of Defense. Department of Defense INSTRUCTION Number 1100.22; December 2017. Available from:
    1. United States Defense Health Agency. TRICARE Facts and Figures. 2016. Available from: .
    1. Becker GS. Human capital: a theoretical and empirical analysis with special reference to education. 3. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press; 1994. Human capital revisited; pp. 15–38.
    1. Schoenfeld AJ, Jiang W, Chaudhary MA, Scully RE, Koehlmoos T, Haider AH. Sustained prescription opioid use among previously opioid-naive patients insured through TRICARE (2006-2014) JAMA Surg. 2017;152(12):1175–1176. doi: 10.1001/jamasurg.2017.2628.
    1. MHS Review Group. 2014. Military health system review. Available from:
    1. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. AHRQuality Indicators. No date. Available from:

Source: PubMed

Sponsorzy i współpracownicy

Warunki medyczne

Interwencje lekowe

3
Subskrybuj