Chiropractic Users Research Articles

National Trends in the Utilization and Expenditure of Chiropractic Care in U.S. Adults: Analysis of the 2007-2016 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey

ObjectiveThis study aimed to examine the trends in the utilization and expenditure of chiropractic care in a representative sample of US adults, aged ≥18 years. MethodsSerial cross-sectional data (2007-2016) from the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey (MEPS) were examined. Weighted descriptive statistics were analyzed to obtain national estimates of chiropractic utilization and expenditure, and time-series linear regression was used to assess trends over time. Socio-demographic characteristics and musculoskeletal diagnoses associated with chiropractic use were also reported. ResultsA statistically significantly increasing trend was observed for the number of adults receiving chiropractic care (p < .05), number of visits (p < .05) and utilization rate (P < .05) from 2007 to 2016. A similar trend was not found for chiropractic expenditure during this period (P > .05). The mean number of visits was 8.3 visits per year, with a mean expenditure of $86.94 USD per visit and $721.43 USD per person per year. Mean age of adult chiropractic users each year ranged between 48.6 and 51.2 years old, and users were primarily female (56.3%-60.4%), White persons (90.1%-93.5%), and privately insured (77.3%-82.8%). The most prevalent musculoskeletal diagnoses associated with chiropractic use were low back conditions (45.4%-58.1%), inflammatory/degenerative disc or joint conditions (21.2%-26.8%) and head and neck complaints (9.8%-13.7%). ConclusionThe findings showed statistically significant increasing trends for the number of adult chiropractic users, the number of visits, and percent utilization of chiropractic care from 2007 to 2016. Conversely, we found a statistically null trend for the total annual expenditure on chiropractic care during the same time period. Findings from this analysis imply that, while chiropractic care appears to be growing, it may still be under-utilized, and more efforts should be devoted to ensuring sustained growth and a larger role in the management of musculoskeletal health.

Association Between Chiropractic Utilization and Opioid Prescriptions Among People With Back or Neck Pain: Evaluation of the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey

ObjectiveThe purpose of this study was to assess the association between patients in the United States seeing a chiropractor and receiving an opioid prescription for back or neck pain. MethodsMedical Expenditure Panel Survey (Years 2012 to 2015) respondents for longitudinal panels 17 to 19 who participated in all 5 rounds were at least 18 years of age, did not have cancer, and reported back or neck pain. We defined chiropractic users as participants reporting at least 1 chiropractic visit for back or neck pain and opioid users as participants reporting purchase or receipt of a prescription classified as Multum Lexicon “60” and “191” for back or neck pain. We adjusted for socioeconomic and clinical variables using multiple logistic regression. ResultsThe sample contained 4686 people, 21% of whom reported an opioid prescription for back or neck pain. Among opioid users, 14% reported a chiropractic visit for back or neck pain compared to 31% of nonopioid users. The adjusted odds ratio for chiropractic use among opioid users compared to nonopioid users was 0.46 (95% confidence interval, 0.36-0.57). ConclusionPatients with back or neck pain who saw a chiropractor had approximately half the odds of reporting an opioid prescription compared to those who did not see a chiropractor.

National Trends in the Expenditure and Utilization of Chiropractic Care in U.S. Children and Adolescents From the 2007-2016 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey: A Cross Sectional Study

ObjectivesThe purpose of this study was to examine the trends in the expenditure and utilization of chiropractic care in a representative sample of children and adolescents in the United States (US) aged <18 years. MethodsWe evaluated serial cross-sectional data (2007-2016) from the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey. Weighted descriptive statistics were conducted to derive national estimates of expenditure and utilization, and linear regression was used to determine trends over time. Sociodemographic and clinical characteristics of chiropractic users were also reported. ResultsA statistically significant increasing trend was observed for the number of children receiving chiropractic care (P <.05) and chiropractic utilization rate (P < .05). Increases in chiropractic expenditure and the number of chiropractic visits were also observed over time but were not statistically significant (P > .05). The mean annual number of visits was 6.4 visits, with a mean expenditure of $71.49 US dollars (USD) per visit and $454.08 USD per child. Children and adolescent chiropractic users in the United States were primarily 14 to 17 years old (39.6%-61.6%), White (71.5%-76.9%), male (50.6%-51.3%), and privately insured (56.7%-60.8%). Chiropractic visits in this population primarily involved low back conditions (52.4%), spinal curvature (14.0%), and head and neck complaints (12.8%). ConclusionThe number of children visiting a chiropractor and percent utilization showed a statistically significant, increasing trend from 2007 to 2016; however, total expenditure and the number of chiropractic visits did not significantly differ during this period. These findings provide novel insight into the patterns of chiropractic utilization in this understudied age group.

Association Between Chiropractic Use and Opioid Receipt Among Patients with Spinal Pain: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

To investigate the current evidence to determine if there is an association between chiropractic use and opioid receipt. Systematic review and meta-analysis. The protocol for this review was registered on PROSPERO (CRD42018095128). The MEDLINE, PubMed, EMBASE, AMED, CINAHL, and Web of Science databases were searched for relevant articles from database inception through April 18, 2018. Controlled studies, cohort studies, and case-control studies including adults with noncancer pain were eligible for inclusion. Studies reporting opioid receipt for both subjects who used chiropractic care and nonusers were included. Data extraction and risk of bias assessment were completed independently by pairs of reviewers. Meta-analysis was performed and presented as an odds ratio with 95% confidence interval. In all, 874 articles were identified. After detailed selection, 26 articles were reviewed in full, and six met the inclusion criteria. Five studies focused on back pain and one on neck pain. The prevalence of chiropractic care among patients with spinal pain varied between 11.3% and 51.3%. The proportion of patients receiving an opioid prescription was lower for chiropractic users (range = 12.3-57.6%) than nonusers (range = 31.2-65.9%). In a random-effects analysis, chiropractic users had a 64% lower odds of receiving an opioid prescription than nonusers (odds ratio = 0.36, 95% confidence interval = 0.30-0.43, P < 0.001, I2 = 92.8%). This review demonstrated an inverse association between chiropractic use and opioid receipt among patients with spinal pain. Further research is warranted to assess this association and the implications it may have for case management strategies to decrease opioid use.

PAM9 COMPARING EXPENDITURE AND ABSENTEEISM FOR EXTENSIVE USERS OF CHIROPRACTIC SERVICES VERSUS NON-USERS: A PROPENSITY SCORE-MATCHED ANALYSIS

This study compared the economic outcomes and absenteeism of chiropractic users to non-users. This study used a retrospective matched case-control design, utilizing year 2015 nationally representative Medical Expenditure Panel Survey (MEPS) database. Chiropractic utilization was defined as six or greater visits to a chiropractor in the first half of the year, among adults age 18 and older. Visitors to a chiropractor, not meeting the visit criteria were excluded. A propensity score (PS) model was developed, using backwards stepwise logistic regression, predicting chiropractic utilization. The scores were applied using a greedy one-treated to two-control matching technique, caliper set at 0.5. Outcomes considered include days missed from work/school, mean out-of-pocket medical expenses, and mean total medical expenses. Data analyses were completed using SAS version 9.4, significance set at 0.05. There were 229,905,173 (94.02%) adults classified as non-chiropractic users, 3,255,865 (1.33%) chiropractic users that met inclusion criteria, and 11,354,126 (4.64%) visitors to a chiropractor that did not meet the visit inclusion criteria. Before PS matching, the treatment and control groups differed significantly (p-value <0.05) on: age, presence of neck/back pain or injury, BMI, region of residence, insurance coverage, education, and comorbidities. There were 261 treated observations matched with 521 controls (weighted frequencies of 3,255,865 and 5,717,947, respectively). After matching, groups differed significantly only on BMI (28.03 treated versus 27.40 control) and age (52.48 treated versus 52.97 control). The treated group had significantly fewer days of missed work/school (8.51 versus 10.01). The treated group had significantly higher mean out-of-pocket medical expenses ($2,270 versus $973) and mean total medical expense ($11,857 versus $9,623). Those treated by a chiropractor had significantly higher out of pocket and total medical expenses, a result that differs from prior published literature. However, those treated missed less work/school. The cost-effectiveness of chiropractic services for this sub-population should be examined more closely.

Complementary and Alternative Medicine in an Integrated Health Care Delivery System: Users of Chiropractic, Acupuncture, and Massage Services.

Complementary and alternative medicine research has relied primarily on survey data from community populations rather than from patient populations receiving these services in integrated health care delivery systems (IHDS). To describe patients seeking chiropractic, acupuncture, or massage therapy in a dedicated Center for Complementary Medicine (CCM) within an IHDS. Patient surveys at the initial CCM visit included chief complaint, prior treatments, and relief with treatment (0% to 100% relief). A modified Brief Pain Inventory assessed average and current pain (0 = no pain; 10 = unbearable pain) and interference with life domains (1 = does not interfere; 10 = completely interferes). Demographics and CCM provider type were obtained from medical records. Analysis included patients who completed the survey. Between 2007 and 2014, a total of 27,225 patients sought CCM services (median age = 50 years). Most (62%) were female, and 73% were white. Modalities included chiropractic (66.9%), acupuncture (18.1%), and massage (15.0%). Spine/truncal pain was most commonly reported (70.5%). A majority of patients (59%) saw their physician for their condition, 59% had not used CCM services previously, and 60% received medications for their condition. Mean ratings included pain relief with prior treatment (30.07%, standard deviation [SD] = 27.01%), current pain (4.33, SD = 2.4), and functional impairment ranging from 3.03 (SD = 3.09) for relationships to 5.42 (SD = 3.22) for enjoyment of life. Spine/truncal pain was the most common complaint and chiropractic the most common modality among patients receiving CCM services in an IHDS. More than one-third of patients self-referred to the CCM.

Comparing Propensity Score Methods for Creating Comparable Cohorts of Chiropractic Users and Nonusers in Older, Multiply Comorbid Medicare Patients With Chronic Low Back Pain

ObjectivePatients who use complementary and integrative health services like chiropractic manipulative treatment (CMT) often have different characteristics than do patients who do not, and these differences can confound attempts to compare outcomes across treatment groups, particularly in observational studies when selection bias may occur. The purposes of this study were to provide an overview on how propensity scoring methods can be used to address selection bias by balancing treatment groups on key variables and to use Medicare data to compare different methods for doing so. MethodsWe described 2 propensity score methods (matching and weighting). Then we used Medicare data from 2006 to 2012 on older, multiply comorbid patients who had a chronic low back pain episode to demonstrate the impact of applying methods on the balance of demographics of patients between 2 treatment groups (those who received only CMT and those who received no CMT during their episodes). ResultsBefore application of propensity score methods, patients who used only CMT had different characteristics from those who did not. Propensity score matching diminished observed differences across the treatment groups at the expense of reduced sample size. However, propensity score weighting achieved balance in patient characteristics between the groups and allowed us to keep the entire sample. ConclusionsAlthough propensity score matching and weighting have similar effects in terms of balancing covariates, weighting has the advantage of maintaining sample size, preserving external validity, and generalizing more naturally to comparisons of 3 or more treatment groups. Researchers should carefully consider which propensity score method to use, as using different methods can generate different results.

Who uses Australian chiropractic services?

BackgroundThe use of chiropractic services is widespread, however, little is known about the characteristics of people who seek chiropractic care in Australia. This study compared the characteristics of users and non-users of chiropractic services from a cohort of patients sourced from general medical practice in Victoria, Australia.MethodsThis is a secondary analysis of baseline screening data from a prospective adult cohort study beginning in 2005. Thirty randomly selected Australian general medical practices mailed out surveys to 17,780 of their patients. Differences were examined between chiropractic users and others, and between chiropractic users who reported a back problem to those who did not.ResultsOf 7,519 respondents, 15% indicated they had visited a chiropractor in the last 12 months. Chiropractic users were more likely to have their GP located in a rural location and to be born in Australia; they were less likely to be in the older age group (55–76), to be unemployed or to have a pension/benefit as their main source of income. Chiropractic users were more likely to: have a back problem; use complementary or alternative medication; visit another type of complementary health practitioner or a physiotherapist. They were less likely to take medication for certain health problems (e.g. for high blood pressure, high cholesterol or asthma). No important differences were seen between chiropractic users and non-users for other health problems. People who visited a chiropractor and reported a back problem were more likely to: be a current smoker; have a number of other chronic conditions, including arthritis, hypertension, chronic sinusitis, asthma, dermatitis, depression and anxiety; report taking medications, including antidepressants, analgesics (painkillers and arthritis medication) and complementary or alternative medications.ConclusionsThis large cross-sectional study of general medical practice attendees suggests that chiropractors are the most commonly consulted complementary health profession. Chiropractors should ensure they are aware of their patients’ health conditions other than musculoskeletal problems and should ensure they are appropriately managed.

Chiropractic Use, Health Care Expenditures, and Health Outcomes for Rural and Nonrural Individuals With Arthritis

ObjectiveArthritis is considered the leading cause of disability among adults in the United States today and contributes substantially to the rising cost of health care. Residents of rural areas are especially affected. The purposes of this article are to describe chiropractic use by rural and nonrural individuals with arthritis and to identify differences in other health care use and health status by those using chiropractic care plus conventional care or conventional care alone. MethodsA longitudinal cohort from panel 12 (N = 12440) of the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey spanning 2007 to 2008 was selected for this study to represent changes in health care expenditures and use and outcomes throughout this period. The population was stratified by self-reported physician-diagnosed arthritis and rural status and compared across demographics, health status, and health care use and expenditures, including use of chiropractic services plus conventional care or conventional care alone. ResultsTwice as many rural people with arthritis had 1 or more visits with a doctor of chiropractic compared with nonrural persons with arthritis. More rural chiropractic users with arthritis reported their perceived health status as excellent, very good, or good compared with nonrural chiropractic users with arthritis and to rural people with arthritis who reported no chiropractic visits. Health care expenditures for other physician services were higher among rural chiropractic users with arthritis than nonrural users with arthritis. ConclusionsDifferences in chiropractic use were observed between rural and nonrural individuals with arthritis. More studies are needed to investigate these differences and the impact on health care use and expenditures and outcomes of individuals with arthritis.

Geographic Variations in Availability and Use of Chiropractic Under Medicare

ObjectiveThe purpose of this study was to measure geographic variations in the availability and use of chiropractic under Medicare. MethodsA cross-sectional design was used to analyze a large nationally representative sample of Medicare data. Data from a 20% representative sample of all paid Medicare Part B fee-for-service claims for 2007 were merged with files containing beneficiary and provider data. The sample was restricted to adults aged 65 to 99 years. Measures of chiropractic availability and use were described and selectively mapped by state. Geographic variations were quantified. Spearman test was used to evaluate for correlation between chiropractic availability and use. ResultsThe average number of doctors of chiropractic (DC) by state was 1135; average DC per 1000 beneficiaries was 2.5 (SD, 1.1). The average number of chiropractic users by state was 34 502 (SD, 30 844); average chiropractic users per 1000 beneficiaries was 76 (SD, 41). Chiropractic availability by state varied 6-fold, and chiropractic use varied nearly 30-fold. Availability was strongly correlated with use (Spearman ρ, 0.86; P < .001). Expenditures per DC were highest in the upper Midwest and lowest in the far West; expenditures per user were highest in New England and New York, and lowest in the West. ConclusionChiropractic availability and use by older adults under Medicare predominated in rural states in the North Central United States. Expenditures were higher in the East and Midwest and lower in the far West. Chiropractic availability and use by state were highly correlated. Future analyses should use small-area analysis and statistical modeling to identify factors predictive of chiropractic use.

Immunization Status of Adult Chiropractic Patients in Analyses of National Health Interview Survey

Objective Two recent studies that examined National Health Interview Survey data reported divergent findings regarding the propensity of adult chiropractic users to receive seasonal influenza immunization. Although one study found a statistically significant negative association between chiropractic use and influenza vaccination, another found that chiropractic users were significantly more likely to be vaccinated. The purpose of this study is to extend previous works by delving more deeply into recent data to identify adult chiropractic users at high risk and high priority for vaccination against influenza and pneumococcal disease. Methods We used data from the 2007 National Health Interview Survey in an attempt to replicate previous methodologies and further examine vaccination among adult chiropractic users (age ≥18 years) who, according to the Center for Disease Control and Prevention guidelines, should receive influenza and/or pneumococcal vaccination. We used complex survey design methods to make national estimates and used logistic regression to determine if having used chiropractic care predicted vaccination. Results We found major methodological differences between the prior studies. In our analyses, we found that chiropractic users were significantly less likely than nonusers to have received the pneumococcal vaccine, and we found no significant difference between chiropractic users and nonusers relative to having received the seasonal flu vaccine. Conclusions Methodological differences in previous studies that investigated the association between chiropractic care and adult vaccination likely explain divergent findings reported in the literature. Future studies should consider these differences.

Influenza vaccination among chiropractic patients and other users of complementary and alternative medicine: Are chiropractic patients really different?

ObjectivePrevious studies suggest a possible association between using chiropractic care and lower influenza vaccination rates. We examined adult influenza vaccination rates for chiropractic patients to determine if they are different than those for users of other complementary and alternative medicine (CAM). MethodWe used the 2007 National Health Interview Survey to examine influenza vaccination rates among adult respondents who were considered high priority for the influenza vaccine (n=12,164). We separated respondents into clinically meaningful categories according to age and whether or not they had recently used chiropractic care, some other type of CAM, or neither. We used adjusted logistic regression to determine whether user status predicted influenza vaccination. ResultsOnly 33% of younger and 64% of older high priority Chiropractic Users were vaccinated in 2007; these rates approximated those of Non-CAM Users. However, younger Non-Chiropractic CAM Users were more likely than Non-CAM Users to have been vaccinated (p-value=0.05). In adjusted logistic regressions, we found statistically insignificant differences when comparing Chiropractic Users to Non-CAM Users for younger adults (OR=0.93(95% CI:0.76–1.13), or for older adults OR=0.90 (95% CI:0.64–1.20). ConclusionChiropractic Users appear no less likely to be vaccinated for influenza; whereas, younger Non-chiropractic CAM Users are more likely than Non-CAM Users to be vaccinated.

A longitudinal study of chiropractic use among older adults in the United States

BackgroundLongitudinal patterns of chiropractic use in the United States, particularly among Medicare beneficiaries, are not well documented. Using a nationally representative sample of older Medicare beneficiaries we describe the use of chiropractic over fifteen years, and classify chiropractic users by annual visit volume. We assess the characteristics that are associated with chiropractic use versus nonuse, as well as between different levels of use.MethodsWe analyzed data from two linked sources: the baseline (1993-1994) interview responses of 5,510 self-respondents in the Survey on Assets and Health Dynamics Among the Oldest Old (AHEAD), and their Medicare claims from 1993 to 2007. Binomial logistic regression was used to identify factors associated with chiropractic use versus nonuse, and conditional upon use, to identify factors associated with high volume relative to lower volume use.ResultsThere were 806 users of chiropractic in the AHEAD sample yielding a full period prevalence for 1993-2007 of 14.6%. Average annual prevalence between 1993 and 2007 was 4.8% with a range from 4.1% to 5.4%. Approximately 42% of the users consumed chiropractic services only in a single calendar year while 38% used chiropractic in three or more calendar years. Chiropractic users were more likely to be women, white, overweight, have pain, have multiple comorbid conditions, better self-rated health, access to transportation, higher physician utilization levels, live in the Midwest, and live in an area with fewer physicians per capita. Among chiropractic users, 16% had at least one year in which they exceeded Medicare's "soft cap" of 12 visits per calendar year. These over-the-cap users were more likely to have arthritis and mobility limitations, but were less likely to have a high school education. Additionally, these over-the-cap individuals accounted for 58% of total chiropractic claim volume. High volume users saw chiropractors the most among all types of providers, even more than family practice and internal medicine combined.ConclusionThere is substantial heterogeneity in the patterns of use of chiropractic services among older adults. In spite of the variability of use patterns, however, there are not many characteristics that distinguish high volume users from lower volume users. While high volume users accounted for a significant portion of claims, the enforcement of a hard cap on annual visits by Medicare would not significantly decrease overall claim volume. Further research to understand the factors causing high volume chiropractic utilization among older Americans is warranted to discern between patterns of "need" and patterns of "health maintenance".

Trends and Predictors of Publicly Subsidized Chiropractic Service Use Among Adults Age 50+

This article examines trends in and predictors of publicly subsidized chiropractic use from 1991 to 2000, a decade characterized by health care system reforms throughout North America. The sample included adults age 50+ who visited a publicly subsidized chiropractor in the Canadian province of British Columbia during the study period. Administrative claims data for chiropractic service use were drawn from the Medical Services Plan (MSP) Master file in the British Columbia Linked Health Data resource. The MSP Master file contains claims reported for every provincially insured medical service and supplementary health benefit including chiropractic visits. Joinpoint regression analyses demonstrate that while annual rates of chiropractic users did not change over the decade, visit rates decreased during this period. Predictors of a greater number of chiropractic visits include increasing age, female gender, urban residence, low to moderate income, and use of chiropractic services earlier in the decade. The trend toward decreasing visit rates over the 1990s both conflicts with and is consistent with findings from other North American chiropractic studies using similar time periods. Results indicating that low and moderate income and advancing age predict more frequent chiropractic service are novel. However, given that lower income and older individuals were exempted from chiropractic service limits during this period, these results suggest support for the responsive nature of chiropractic use to financial barriers.

Are those who use specific complementary and alternative medicine therapies less likely to be immunized?

Objective Some authorities are concerned that the use of complementary and alternative medications (CAM) may replace recommended preventive health practices. This study was done to determine if users of individual types of CAM were less likely to receive recommended immunizations. Methods We used data from the 2007 National Health Interview Survey of over 23,000 adult, non-institutionalized U.S. citizens using bivariate and multivariate analysis to determine if users of individual types of CAM were less likely to receive influenza and/or pneumococcal vaccinations. Results Using a weighted logistic regression analysis, we found that respondents who used chiropractic care were less likely to receive flu shots (OR = 0.68, CI = 0.55,0.83, p < 0.001). There was a mildly positive trend toward receiving the pneumococcal vaccine in users of deep breathing exercises and toward not receiving both in followers of qi gong. Prayer use was prevalent and had a positive impact on receiving immunizations, especially in Blacks and those in poor health. Regular exercise, having a primary care provider and more frequent office visits were also positively associated with receiving immunizations. Conclusion Chiropractic users are less likely to get flu shots, perhaps reflecting their national body's attitude, which could affect morbidity and mortality. Providers should be aware of their patients' CAM use and encourage accepted primary care practices.

Chiropractic Users and Nonusers: Differences in Use, Attitudes, and Willingness to Use Nonmedical Doctors for Primary Care

Objective To determine the differences in attitudes and other determinants of care-seeking behavior between persons who have used chiropractic services and persons who have not. A second objective is to determine the interest in members of these 2 groups in choosing nonmedical doctors for providing routine services. Methods In 1998, a nationwide telephone survey of randomly selected households in the United States was done, including 400 adults who have used chiropractic services and 400 adults who have not. Survey participants were asked about their use, knowledge, and attitudes about chiropractic care, attitudes about personal role in health care, current source of obtaining usual and routine care, and willingness to consider use of nonmedical doctors as the usual source of such care. The analysis compares persons who have used with those who have not used chiropractic services by using a χ 2 test to determine significance of differences between the responses of the 2 groups. A multivariate analysis is done of willingness to use alternative providers for routine care. Results Persons who have seen a doctor of chiropractic before have different attitudes and preferences about health and health care than others who have never seen a doctor of chiropractic. Almost all of persons in both groups have medical doctors that they use for routine care, and a sizeable portion of both groups would be willing to consider using a nonmedical doctor for this role. Although willingness to use a chiropractor in this role is much higher among persons who have used a chiropractor before, both groups would prefer physician assistants and nurse practitioners to chiropractors in this role. Conclusion For persons participating in this survey, unwillingness to accept the idea of a chiropractor in a primary care role may be largely due to poor knowledge about chiropractic care.

Factors Associated With Patient Satisfaction With Chiropractic Care: Survey and Review of the Literature

Objective The purpose of this study is to review the recent literature on satisfaction with chiropractic care and offer a multivariate analysis of a national household survey data to understand which aspects of care and behavior contribute most to patient satisfaction with chiropractors. Methods A national phone survey of households was done to measure attitudes, utilization, and health practices of chiropractic users and nonusers. A 73% response rate was achieved. Satisfaction with chiropractic services is analyzed using both descriptive and multivariate methods. Results Satisfaction levels with chiropractic care are quite high (83% of persons are satisfied or very satisfied). High satisfaction is related to several factors, including whether the chiropractor orders and interprets laboratory tests, whether the chiropractor displays concern about patient's overall health, and the extent to which the chiropractor explains the condition and the treatment. Conclusions The evidence about the factors that underlie high levels of chiropractic satisfaction is not consistent. Communication quality seems to be a consistent predictor of patient satisfaction with chiropractors. More research is needed to understand the role of perceived effectiveness of treatment, intensity of use, accessibility, and financing issues in determining patient satisfaction levels.

The Public's Image of Chiropractic Services

This study is exploratory in nature, and addresses several aspects of chiropractic service including attitude toward chiropractors as members of the medical profession, a profile of chiropractic users, sources for information involved in the search for a specific chiropractor, and customer satisfaction with specific elements of a chiropractic service. The sample of 120 respondents overwhelmingly agreed that chiropractors were members of the medical profession. Overall, the profile of a chiropractic user tended to be female, aged 45 to 64, high school or college-educated, married with children, and had an annual household income of $30,000 to $50,000. Significant differences were found between users and non-users of chiropractic services in terms of their age, family status, education, and household income. The predominant sources used in the search for a chiropractor were reference groups, including referrals from friends and general word-of-mouth information. The customer satisfaction levels tended to be positive, with the highest satisfaction reported to be with the cleanliness of the office and the friendliness of the staff. These results are beneficial to both academicians in terms of understanding how this service may differ from others, as well as practitioners in terms of where and how they might direct future marketing efforts in recruiting and retaining chiropractic customers.

Factors affecting use of chiropractic services in seven midwestern states of the United State.

Although chiropractic is used by approximately 10 percent of the U.S. population, predictors of its use have not been definitively described. Previous studies have suggested that chiropractic users differ from nonusers in a number of sociodemographic characteristics, but their findings are inconsistent, perhaps because of differences in populations sampled and dates of data collection, most of which are prior to 1990. Regional studies have been conducted in rural areas based on the premise that rural residents are more likely than non-rural residents to use chiropractice; however, this premise has not been definitively documented. The purpose of this study was to provide clarification of these sociodemographic predictors of chiropractic use in Illinois, Iowa, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, South Dakota and Wisconsin by characterizing chiropractic users and nonusers in terms of sociodemographics, including rural or non-rural residence, and presence of low back pain. Data from 1,511 respondents to a 1994 population-based survey, conducted by the University of Iowa Social Science Institute, were analyzed. Unconditional logistic regression was used to derive odds ratios and 95 percent confidence intervals for univariate and multiple regression models. Overall, 15.1 percent of respondents had used chiropractic within the last year, most often for low back pain (57 percent). Chiropractic use was less likely in African Americans, Hispanics and Asians than whites, less likely by non-rural than rural residents, and less likely in Catholics than Protestants in states other than Iowa and South Dakota. Overall, 42.7 percent of workers with low back pain reported using chiropractic, and use increased with age but remained significantly related to race, rural or non-rural residence, state of residence and religious preference. Race, rural or non-rural residence, state of residence and religious preference, independently of low back pain, affect use of chiropractice in seven Midwestern states.