HealthCore, Inc., Wilmington, Delaware.
Office of Medical Policy and Technology Assessment, Anthem Inc., Latham, New York, USA.
Pain Med. 2021 Nov 26;22(11):2754-2762. doi: 10.1093/pm/pnab187.
To compare prescribed opioid use and invasive surgical interventions between patients using acupuncture and those using non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs)/physical therapy (PT).
Retrospective observational study of administrative claims.
Large commercial insurance plan.
52 346 each treated with either acupuncture or NSAIDs/PT.
Users of acupuncture and NSAIDs/PT were identified from January 1, 2014, to December 31, 2017. The first date of each service was defined as the index date. Acupuncture patients were 1:1 propensity score matched to the NSAIDs/PT group on baseline characteristics. Outcomes included opioid use, subsequent invasive surgical procedures, healthcare utilization such as hospitalizations or emergency department (ED) visits, and costs. These were assessed in the 12-month period before index date (baseline) and 12-month period following index date (follow-up) using difference-in-difference (DID) analysis. Results for opioid use were stratified by those with and without baseline opioid use.
The acupuncture group had fewer patients initiating opioids post-index both among those with (49.2% vs 56.5%, P < .001) and without (15.9% vs 22.6%, P < .001) baseline opioid use. There was a small increase in invasive surgical procedures with acupuncture (3.1% vs 2.8%, P = .006). A reduction in ED visits was observed with acupuncture (DID -4.6% for all-cause; -3.3% for pain-related, all P < .001). Acupuncture was associated with higher total medical and pharmacy costs (DID +$1331 per patient, P = .006).
Acupuncture showed a modest effect in reducing opioid use and ED visits. More research on acupuncture's place in emergency care, pain relief, and comparison to other types of non-opioid treatment is needed.
比较使用针灸和非甾体抗炎药/物理疗法(PT)的患者之间的规定阿片类药物使用情况和侵入性手术干预。
行政索赔的回顾性观察研究。
大型商业保险计划。
2014 年 1 月 1 日至 2017 年 12 月 31 日,每位患者分别接受针灸或 NSAIDs/PT 治疗。每项服务的第一天定义为索引日期。在基线特征上,对针灸患者进行 1:1 倾向评分匹配以匹配 NSAIDs/PT 组。结果包括阿片类药物的使用、随后的侵入性手术程序、医疗保健利用(如住院或急诊就诊)和成本。在索引日期前 12 个月(基线)和索引日期后 12 个月(随访)期间,使用差异(DID)分析评估这些结果。阿片类药物使用结果按基线阿片类药物使用情况进行分层。
在索引后,针灸组中开始使用阿片类药物的患者比例较低,无论是否存在基线阿片类药物使用情况(分别为 49.2% vs 56.5%,P < 0.001)。针灸组的侵入性手术略有增加(3.1% vs 2.8%,P = 0.006)。针灸治疗后急诊就诊次数减少(所有原因的 DID-4.6%;与疼痛相关的 DID-3.3%,均 P < 0.001)。针灸与更高的总医疗和药房费用相关(每个患者 DID +$1331,P = 0.006)。
针灸在减少阿片类药物使用和急诊就诊方面显示出适度的效果。需要更多关于针灸在急诊护理、疼痛缓解方面的作用以及与其他类型非阿片类治疗方法的比较的研究。