Robbins Heather, Gatchel Robert J, Noe Carl, Gajraj Noor, Polatin Peter, Deschner Martin, Vakharia Akshay, Adams Laura
The Eugene McDermott Center for Pain Management, The University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center at Dallas, 75390, USA.
Anesth Analg. 2003 Jul;97(1):156-62, table of contents. doi: 10.1213/01.ane.0000058886.87431.32.
Although interdisciplinary pain management programs are both therapeutically effective as well as cost-effective, they are currently being underutilized because of managed care policies. We used this prospective comparison trial, with 1-yr follow-up of chronic pain patients, to demonstrate the short- and long-term efficacy of an interdisciplinary pain management program, and evaluate the impact of managed care's physical therapy "carve out" practices on these treatment outcomes. Consecutive chronic pain patients (n = 201) were evaluated, some of whom had their physical therapy "carved out" from this integrated program. Results revealed that successful completion of interdisciplinary pain management was therapeutically effective. Most importantly, physical therapy "carved out" practices had a negative impact on both the short-term and 1-yr follow-up outcome measures. Thus, interdisciplinary pain management is effective in treating the major health problem of chronic pain. However, insurance carrier policies of contracting treatment "carve outs" significantly compromise the efficacy of this evidence-based, best standard of medical care treatment. This raises important medico-legal and ethical issues.
Interdisciplinary pain management is effective and cost-effective in treating the major health problem of chronic pain. The present study demonstrated its efficacy using a prospective, 1-yr posttreatment evaluation methodology. Moreover, physical therapy "carve out" practices by insurance carriers had a negative impact on the outcomes, raising important medico-legal and ethical issues.
尽管跨学科疼痛管理项目在治疗上既有效又具成本效益,但由于管理式医疗政策,它们目前未得到充分利用。我们进行了这项前瞻性比较试验,对慢性疼痛患者进行了1年随访,以证明跨学科疼痛管理项目的短期和长期疗效,并评估管理式医疗的物理治疗“分离”做法对这些治疗结果的影响。对连续的慢性疼痛患者(n = 201)进行了评估,其中一些患者的物理治疗从这个综合项目中“分离”出来。结果显示,成功完成跨学科疼痛管理在治疗上是有效的。最重要的是,物理治疗“分离”做法对短期和1年随访结果指标都有负面影响。因此,跨学科疼痛管理在治疗慢性疼痛这一主要健康问题上是有效的。然而,承保治疗“分离”的保险公司政策严重损害了这种基于证据的最佳医疗护理标准治疗的疗效。这引发了重要的医学法律和伦理问题。
跨学科疼痛管理在治疗慢性疼痛这一主要健康问题上既有效又具成本效益。本研究使用前瞻性的1年治疗后评估方法证明了其疗效。此外,保险公司的物理治疗“分离”做法对结果有负面影响,引发了重要的医学法律和伦理问题。