ACR Meeting Abstracts

ACR Meeting Abstracts

  • Meetings
    • ACR Convergence 2024
    • ACR Convergence 2023
    • 2023 ACR/ARP PRSYM
    • ACR Convergence 2022
    • ACR Convergence 2021
    • ACR Convergence 2020
    • 2020 ACR/ARP PRSYM
    • 2019 ACR/ARP Annual Meeting
    • 2018-2009 Meetings
    • Download Abstracts
  • Keyword Index
  • Advanced Search
  • Your Favorites
    • Favorites
    • Login
    • View and print all favorites
    • Clear all your favorites
  • ACR Meetings

Abstract Number: 1938

A Description Of Therapies Used For Low Back Pain

Elizabeth G. Salt1, Yevgeniya Gokun2 and Jeffery Talbert3, 1College of Nursing, Division of Rheumatology, University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY, 2College of Nursing, University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY, 3University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY

Meeting: 2013 ACR/ARHP Annual Meeting

Keywords: Low back pain

  • Tweet
  • Email
  • Print
Session Information

Title: ARHP Health Services Research

Session Type: Abstract Submissions (ARHP)

Background/Purpose:

An estimated 67% to 84% of persons residing in industrialized countries suffer from low back pain (LBP), and 2% of all workers are compensated for work days lost to back injuries.1-3 Of the 29,886 occupational injuries reported in Kentucky in 2010-2011, 28% were low back injuries.4 The combined direct and indirect costs of LBP have been estimated to be 90 billion U.S. dollars annually.3 An estimated 13% of direct costs are spent on primary care and pharmacy services.1 Many pharmaceuticals such as opioids have only “fair” evidence to support their use. Yet the number of opioid analgesic prescriptions for LBP have increased dramatically – In 1998, 16% of all opioid prescriptions were written for LBP, while 40% of opioid prescriptions were written for LBP in 2004.2,3 In the Clinical Guidelines for the Diagnosis and Treatment of LBP, Chou and colleagues2 recommend treating patients who fail self-care with proven non-pharmacologic therapies (ex. cognitive behavioral therapy) stating the level of evidence to support this therapy as “good.”2 We will report the treatments provided to patients with the diagnosis of LBP using a private insurance dataset which represents a sample of 15 million patients annually across the US.

Methods:

We extracted de-identified patient health claims data from persons residing in Kentucky with the diagnosis of LBP or related terms using ICD-9 codes (ex. 724.2 (lumbago)) along with treatments received using CPT codes (ex. 97001 (physical therapy evaluation)) and medication records from January 1, 2007 to December 31, 2009. Descriptive statistics were used to report the percentage of patients receiving the various treatments for LBP.

Results:

Approximately 25% of patients with LBP received a service administered by a physical therapist (ex. evaluation, iontophoresis). Approximately 16% received exercise therapy and only 6% received psychological services. Similarly, despite the frequency in which occupation affects LBP, less than 1% of patients received occupational therapy (Table 1).2 Yet, approximately 55% of patients filled a prescription for an opioid analgesic (Table 2).

Conclusion:

The various treatment options that are available for LBP are not received by patients in Kentucky, a predominantly rural, medically underserved state.5

Table 1.  Therapies among patients with the diagnosis of LBP in Kentucky (N=15,335).

Therapy

n (unweighted %)

Surgical Procedure

   Yes

   No

25 (0.2%)

15,310 (99.8%)

Physical Therapy Evaluation

   Yes

   No

1,347 (8.8%)

13,988 (91.2%)

Physical Therapy Re-Evaluation

   Yes

   No

113 (0.7%)

15,222 (99.3%)

Manual Therapy

   Yes

   No

1,777 (11.6%)

13,558 (88.4%)

Therapeutic Activities

   Yes

   No

748 (4.9%)

14,587 (95.1%)

Neuromuscular Re-Education

   Yes

   No

626 (4.1%)

14,709 (95.9%)

Aquatic Therapy

   Yes

   No

19 (0.1%)

15,316 (99.9%)

Gait Training

   Yes

   No

50 (0.3%)

15,285 (99.7%)

Electrical Stimulation

   Yes

   No

316 (2.1%)

15,019 (97.9%)

Hot/Cold Packs

   Yes

   No

222 (1.5%)

15,113 (98.5%)

Iontophoresis

   Yes

   No

938 (6.1%)

14,397 (93.9%)

Occupational Therapy Evaluation

   Yes

   No

50 (0.3%)

15,285 (99.7%)

Occupational Therapy Re-Evaluation

   Yes

   No

6 (0.04%)

15,329 (99.96%)

Massage

   Yes

   No

15 (0.1%)

15,320 (99.9%)

Self-Care Training

   Yes

   No

370 (2.4%)

14,965 (97.6%)

Exercise Therapy

   Yes

   No

2,441 (15.9%)

12,894 (84.1%)

Traction

   Yes

   No

1,681 (11.0%)

13,654 (89.0%)

Biofeedback

   Yes

   No

2 (0.01%)

15,333 (99.99%)

Psychological Therapy

   Yes

   No

942 (6.1%)

14,393 (93.9%)

Table 2.  Medication usage among patients with the diagnosis of LBP in Kentucky (N=15,335).

Medication

n (unweighted %)

Opiate-analgesic (ex. hydrocodone, oxycodone, codeine)

   Yes

   No

8,508 (55.5%)

7,268 (47.4%)

Steroid

   Yes

   No

4,959 (32.3%)

10,376 (67.7%)

Benzodiazepine

   Yes

   No

2,065 (13.5%)

13,270 (86.5%)

Hypnotic

   Yes

   No

869 (5.7%)

14,466 (94.3%)

Muscle Relaxer

   Yes

   No

3,897 (25.4%)

11,438 (74.6%)

Non-Steroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drug (NSAID)

   Yes

   No

6,220 (40.6%)

9,115 (59.4%)

Analgesic (ex. tramadol, lidocaine patches)

   Yes

   No

2,113 (13.8%)

13,222 (86.2%)

Sedative

   Yes

   No

387 (2.5%)

14,948 (97.5%)

Anticonvulsant

   Yes

   No

525 (3.4%)

14,810 (96.6%)


Disclosure:

E. G. Salt,
None;

Y. Gokun,
None;

J. Talbert,
None.

  • Tweet
  • Email
  • Print

« Back to 2013 ACR/ARHP Annual Meeting

ACR Meeting Abstracts - https://acrabstracts.org/abstract/a-description-of-therapies-used-for-low-back-pain/

Advanced Search

Your Favorites

You can save and print a list of your favorite abstracts during your browser session by clicking the “Favorite” button at the bottom of any abstract. View your favorites »

All abstracts accepted to ACR Convergence are under media embargo once the ACR has notified presenters of their abstract’s acceptance. They may be presented at other meetings or published as manuscripts after this time but should not be discussed in non-scholarly venues or outlets. The following embargo policies are strictly enforced by the ACR.

Accepted abstracts are made available to the public online in advance of the meeting and are published in a special online supplement of our scientific journal, Arthritis & Rheumatology. Information contained in those abstracts may not be released until the abstracts appear online. In an exception to the media embargo, academic institutions, private organizations, and companies with products whose value may be influenced by information contained in an abstract may issue a press release to coincide with the availability of an ACR abstract on the ACR website. However, the ACR continues to require that information that goes beyond that contained in the abstract (e.g., discussion of the abstract done as part of editorial news coverage) is under media embargo until 10:00 AM ET on November 14, 2024. Journalists with access to embargoed information cannot release articles or editorial news coverage before this time. Editorial news coverage is considered original articles/videos developed by employed journalists to report facts, commentary, and subject matter expert quotes in a narrative form using a variety of sources (e.g., research, announcements, press releases, events, etc.).

Violation of this policy may result in the abstract being withdrawn from the meeting and other measures deemed appropriate. Authors are responsible for notifying colleagues, institutions, communications firms, and all other stakeholders related to the development or promotion of the abstract about this policy. If you have questions about the ACR abstract embargo policy, please contact ACR abstracts staff at [email protected].

Wiley

  • Online Journal
  • Privacy Policy
  • Permissions Policies
  • Cookie Preferences

© Copyright 2025 American College of Rheumatology