Manipulative therapy in addition to usual medical care accelerates recovery of shoulder complaints at higher costs: economic outcomes of a randomized trial.
BACKGROUND
Shoulder complaints are common in primary care and have unfavourable long term prognosis. Our objective was to evaluate the clinical effectiveness of manipulative therapy of the cervicothoracic spine and the adjacent ribs in addition to usual medical care (UMC) by the general practitioner in the treatment of shoulder complaints.


METHODS
This economic evaluation was conducted alongside a randomized trial in primary care. Included were 150 patients with shoulder complaints and a dysfunction of the cervicothoracic spine and adjacent ribs. Patients were treated with UMC (NSAID's, corticosteroid injection or referral to physical therapy) and were allocated at random (yes/no) to manipulative therapy (manipulation and mobilization). Patient perceived recovery, severity of main complaint, shoulder pain, disability and general health were outcome measures. Data about direct and indirect costs were collected by means of a cost diary.


RESULTS
Manipulative therapy as add-on to UMC accelerated recovery on all outcome measures included. At 26 weeks after randomization, both groups reported similar recovery rates (41% vs. 38%), but the difference between groups in improvement of severity of the main complaint, shoulder pain and disability sustained. Compared to the UMC group the total costs were higher in the manipulative group (€1167 vs. €555). This is explained mainly by the costs of the manipulative therapy itself and the higher costs due sick leave from work. The cost effectiveness ratio showed that additional manipulative treatment is more costly but also more effective than UMC alone. The cost-effectiveness acceptability curve shows that a 50%-probability of recovery with AMT within 6 months after initiation of treatment is achieved at €2876.


CONCLUSIONS
Manipulative therapy in addition to UMC accelerates recovery and is more effective than UMC alone on the long term, but is associated with higher costs. INTERNATIONAL STANDARD RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL NUMBER REGISTER: ISRCTN11216.
Bergman
Gert J D
GJ
Department of General Practice, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Winter
Jan C
JC
van Tulder
Maurits W
MW
Meyboom-de Jong
Betty
B
Postema
Klaas
K
van der Heijden
Geert J M G
GJ
D005260:Female; D017048:Health Care Costs / Q000639:trends*; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D026201:Musculoskeletal Manipulations / Q000191:economics* / Q000379:methods*; D017063:Outcome Assessment, Health Care / Q000379:methods*; D011859:Radiography; D012785:Shoulder Joint / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging / Q000473:pathology / Q000503:physiopathology; D020069:Shoulder Pain / Q000191:economics* / Q000503:physiopathology / Q000628:therapy*; D016037:Single-Blind Method; D016896:Treatment Outcome
BMJ. 2003 Apr 26;326(7395):911
12714472
Stat Med. 1996 Jul 15;15(13):1447-58
8841654
J Clin Epidemiol. 2000 Jul;53(7):688-95
10941945
Stat Methods Med Res. 2002 Dec;11(6):455-68
12516984
Ann Rheum Dis. 1998 Feb;57(2):82-7
9613336
J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 1999 Mar-Apr;22(3):144-8
10220712
Br J Gen Pract. 1996 Sep;46(410):519-23
8917870
Scand J Rehabil Med. 1996 Sep;28(3):163-7
8885039
Rheumatology (Oxford). 1999 Feb;38(2):160-3
10342630
J Clin Epidemiol. 2000 Jan;53(1):29-38
10693901
Health Econ. 1994 Sep-Oct;3(5):309-19
7827647
Med Decis Making. 1990 Jul-Sep;10(3):212-4
2115096
QJM. 1999 Mar;92(3):177-82
10326078
Lancet. 2001 Apr 14;357(9263):1191-4
11323066
Baillieres Best Pract Res Clin Rheumatol. 1999 Jun;13(2):287-309
10952865
Health Econ. 2000 Apr;9(3):227-34
10790701
Pharmacoeconomics. 2002;20(7):443-54
12093300
Scand J Rehabil Med. 1996 Dec;28(4):183-92
9122645
BMJ. 1998 Jul 11;317(7151):111-5
9657785
Scand J Rehabil Med Suppl. 1995;32:107-12
7784832
Scand J Rehabil Med. 1997 Sep;29(3):167-74
9271151
Ann Intern Med. 2004 Sep 21;141(6):432-9
15381516
Med Care. 1997 Nov;35(11):1095-108
9366889
J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 2002 Nov-Dec;25(9):543-9
12466771