Incorporating Acupuncture Into American Healthcare: Initiating a Discussion on Implementation Science, the Status of the Field, and Stakeholder Considerations

Introduction: The field of implementation science is the study of methods that promote the uptake of evidence-based interventions into healthcare policy and practice. While acupuncture has gained significant traction in the American healthcare landscape, its journey has been somewhat haphazard and non-linear. Methods: In June 2019, a group of thirty diverse stakeholders was convened by the Society for Acupuncture Research with the support of a Patient Centered Outcomes Research Institute, Eugene Washington Engagement Award. This group of stakeholders represented a diverse mix of patients, providers, academicians, researchers, funders, allied health professionals, insurers, association leaders, certification experts, and military program developers. The collective engaged in discussion that explored acupuncture\u27s status in healthcare, including reflections on its safety, effectiveness, best practices, and the actual implementation of acupuncture as seen from diverse stakeholder viewpoints. Objectives: A primary goal was to consider how to utilize knowledge from the field of implementation science more systematically and intentionally to disseminate information about acupuncture and its research base, through application of methods known to implementation science. The group also considered novel challenges that acupuncture may present to known implementation processes. Findings: This article summarizes the initial findings of this in-person meeting of stakeholders and the ongoing discussion among the subject matter experts who authored this report. The goal of this report is to catalyze greater conversation about how the field of implementation science might intersect with practice, access, research, and policymaking pertaining to acupuncture. Core concepts of implementation science and its relationship to acupuncture are introduced, and the case for acupuncture as an Evidence Based Practice (EBP) is established. The status of the field and current environment of acupuncture is examined, and the perspectives of four stakeholder groups--patients, two types of professional practitioners, and researchers--are explored in more detail

Incorporating Acupuncture Into American Healthcare: Initiating a Discussion on Implementation Science, the Status of the Field, and Stakeholder Considerations

Introduction: The field of implementation science is the study of methods that promote the uptake of evidence-based interventions into healthcare policy and practice. While acupuncture has gained significant traction in the American healthcare landscape, its journey has been somewhat haphazard and non-linear. Methods: In June 2019, a group of thirty diverse stakeholders was convened by the Society for Acupuncture Research with the support of a Patient Centered Outcomes Research Institute, Eugene Washington Engagement Award. This group of stakeholders represented a diverse mix of patients, providers, academicians, researchers, funders, allied health professionals, insurers, association leaders, certification experts, and military program developers. The collective engaged in discussion that explored acupuncture's status in healthcare, including reflections on its safety, effectiveness, best practices, and the actual implementation of acupuncture as seen from diverse stakeholder viewpoints. Objectives: A primary goal was to consider how to utilize knowledge from the field of implementation science more systematically and intentionally to disseminate information about acupuncture and its research base, through application of methods known to implementation science. The group also considered novel challenges that acupuncture may present to known implementation processes. Findings: This article summarizes the initial findings of this in-person meeting of stakeholders and the ongoing discussion among the subject matter experts who authored this report. The goal of this report is to catalyze greater conversation about how the field of implementation science might intersect with practice, access, research, and policymaking pertaining to acupuncture. Core concepts of implementation science and its relationship to acupuncture are introduced, and the case for acupuncture as an Evidence Based Practice (EBP) is established. The status of the field and current environment of acupuncture is examined, and the perspectives of four stakeholder groups--patients, two types of professional practitioners, and researchers--are explored in more detail

A definition of flare in low back pain (LBP): A multiphase process involving perspectives of individuals with LBP and expert consensus

Low back pain (LBP) varies over time. Consumers, clinicians and researchers use various terms to describe fluctuations of LBP symptoms. Although "flare" is commonly used to describe symptom fluctuation, there is no consensus on how it is defined. This study aimed to obtain consensus for a LBP flare definition using a mixed-method approach. Step 1 involved derivation of a preliminary candidate flare definition based on thematic analysis of consumers' views in consultation with an expert consumer writer. In Step 2, a workshop was conducted to incorporate perspectives of LBP experts into the preliminary flare definition, which resulted in two alternative LBP flare definitions. Step 3 refined the definition using a two-round Delphi consensus process with experts in musculoskeletal conditions. The definition favoured by experts was further tested with individuals with LBP in Step 4, using the definition in three scenarios. This multiphase study produced a LBP flare definition that distinguishes it from other LBP fluctuations, represents views of consumers, involves expert consensus, and is understandable by consumers in clinical and research contexts: "A flare-up is a worsening of your condition that lasts from hours to weeks that is difficult to tolerate and generally impacts your usual activities and/or emotions". Perspective: A multiphase processes produced a low back pain (LBP) flare definition that distinguishes it from other LBP fluctuations, involves expert consensus and represents consumers' views

A united statement of the global chiropractic research community against the pseudoscientific claim that chiropractic care boosts immunity.

BACKGROUND: In the midst of the coronavirus pandemic, the International Chiropractors Association (ICA) posted reports claiming that chiropractic care can impact the immune system. These claims clash with recommendations from the World Health Organization and World Federation of Chiropractic. We discuss the scientific validity of the claims made in these ICA reports. MAIN BODY: We reviewed the two reports posted by the ICA on their website on March 20 and March 28, 2020. We explored the method used to develop the claim that chiropractic adjustments impact the immune system and discuss the scientific merit of that claim. We provide a response to the ICA reports and explain why this claim lacks scientific credibility and is dangerous to the public. More than 150 researchers from 11 countries reviewed and endorsed our response. CONCLUSION: In their reports, the ICA provided no valid clinical scientific evidence that chiropractic care can impact the immune system. We call on regulatory authorities and professional leaders to take robust political and regulatory action against those claiming that chiropractic adjustments have a clinical impact on the immune system

The Intersection of Dissemination Research and Acupuncture: Applications for Chronic Low Back Pain.

Dissemination research is the study of distributing information and intervention materials to a specific clinical practice or public health audience. Acupuncture, a healthcare practice involving the stimulation of certain body points, often with thin needles, is considered an evidence-based treatment for low back pain (LBP), but is underutilized in the United States. Body: We will use the example of acupuncture for LBP to identify opportunities to leverage dissemination research to increase utilization of acupuncture. Deficits in the awareness or knowledge of acupuncture may limit its adoption by patients and other stakeholders. Thus, we summarize methods to gather data on stakeholder awareness and knowledge of acupuncture for LBP, i.e., audience research. Engaging multiple stakeholder audiences (e.g., health system leaders, primary care providers, patients), is needed to generate knowledge on promising dissemination strategies for each audience. Audience segmentation is important for identifying population subgroups for whom adoption of acupuncture may require a more intensive or tailored dissemination strategy. To illustrate potential audience 'segments', our research discussion focused on developing dissemination strategies by age (i.e., older adults - those age 65 years or older, and younger adults - those under age 65 ). This decision was prompted by Medicare's recent policy covering acupuncture for chronic LBP. We leverage current knowledge of barriers and facilitators of acupuncture use to discuss how further tailoring of dissemination strategies might optimize adoption of acupuncture in both groups of adults. Experimental study designs could then be used to compare the effectiveness of such strategies to increase awareness, knowledge, or adoption of acupuncture. Conclusions: Conducting dissemination research may improve awareness and knowledge of acupuncture, and ultimately the adoption of acupuncture in biomedical settings. We anticipate that the concepts highlighted in this manuscript will also be helpful for those disseminating information about other complementary and integrative health approaches

Patient and provider characteristics associated with therapeutic intervention selection in a chiropractic clinical encounter: a cross-sectional analysis of the COAST and O-COAST study data

Abstract Background Chiropractors use a variety of therapeutic interventions in clinical practice. How the selection of interventions differs across musculoskeletal regions or with different patient and provider characteristics is currently unclear. This study aimed to describe how frequently different interventions are used for patients presenting for chiropractic care, and patient and provider characteristics associated with intervention selection. Methods Data were obtained from the Chiropractic Observation and Analysis STudy (COAST) and Ontario (O-COAST) studies: practice-based, cross-sectional studies in Victoria, Australia (2010–2012) and Ontario, Canada (2014–2015). Chiropractors recorded data on patient diagnosis and intervention selection from up to 100 consecutive patient visits. The frequency of interventions selected overall and for each diagnostic category (e.g., different musculoskeletal regions) were descriptively analysed. Univariable multi-level logistic regression (provider and patient as grouping factors), stratified by diagnostic category, was used to assess the association between patient/provider variables and intervention selection. Results Ninety-four chiropractors, representative of chiropractors in Victoria and Ontario for age, sex, and years in practice, participated. Data were collected on 7,966 patient visits (6419 unique patients), including 10,731 individual diagnoses (mean age: 43.7 (SD: 20.7), 57.8% female). Differences in patient characteristics and intervention selection were observed between chiropractors practicing in Australia and Canada. Overall, manipulation was the most common intervention, selected in 63% (95%CI:62–63) of encounters. However, for musculoskeletal conditions presenting in the extremities only, soft tissue therapies were more commonly used (65%, 95%CI:62–68). Manipulation was less likely to be performed if the patient was female (OR:0.74, 95%CI:0.65–0.84), older (OR:0.79, 95%CI:0.77–0.82), presenting for an initial visit (OR:0.73, 95%CI:0.56–0.95) or new complaint (OR:0.82, 95%CI:0.71–0.95), had one or more comorbidities (OR:0.63, 95%CI:0.54–0.72), or was underweight (OR:0.47, 95%CI:0.35–0.63), or obese (OR:0.69, 95%CI:0.58–0.81). Chiropractors with more than five years clinical experience were less likely to provide advice/education (OR:0.37, 95%CI:0.16–0.87) and exercises (OR:0.17, 95%CI:0.06–0.44). Conclusion In more than 10,000 diagnostic encounters, manipulation was the most common therapeutic intervention for spine-related problems, whereas soft tissue therapies were more common for extremity problems. Different patient and provider characteristics were associated with intervention selection. These data may be used to support further research on appropriate selection of interventions for common musculoskeletal complaints

Doctors of chiropractic working with or within integrated healthcare delivery systems: a scoping review protocol.

IntroductionBack and neck pain are the leading causes of disability worldwide. Doctors of chiropractic (DCs) are trained to manage these common conditions and can provide non-pharmacological treatment aligned with international clinical practice guidelines. Although DCs practice in over 90 countries, chiropractic care is rarely available within integrated healthcare delivery systems. A lack of DCs in private practice, particularly in low-income communities, may also limit access to chiropractic care. Improving collaboration between medical providers and community-based DCs, or embedding DCs in medical settings such as hospitals or community health centres, will improve access to evidence-based care for musculoskeletal conditions.Methods and analysesThis scoping review will map studies of DCs working with or within integrated healthcare delivery systems. We will use the recommended six-step approach for scoping reviews. We will search three electronic data bases including Medline, Embase and Web of Science. Two investigators will independently review all titles and abstracts to identify relevant records, screen the full-text articles of potentially admissible records, and systematically extract data from selected articles. We will include studies published in English from 1998 to 2020 describing medical settings that have established formal relationships with community-based DCs (eg, shared medical record) or where DCs practice in medical settings. Data extraction and reporting will be guided by the Proctor Conceptual Model for Implementation Research, which has three domains: clinical intervention, implementation strategies and outcome measurement. Stakeholders from diverse clinical fields will offer feedback on the implications of our findings via a web-based survey.Ethics and disseminationEthics approval will not be obtained for this review of published and publicly accessible data, but will be obtained for the web-based survey. Our results will be disseminated through conference presentations and a peer-reviewed publication. Our findings will inform implementation strategies that support the adoption of chiropractic care within integrated healthcare delivery systems

Yoga, Physical Therapy, or Education for Chronic Low Back Pain: A Randomized Noninferiority Trial

Background: Yoga is effective for mild to moderate chronic low back pain (cLBP), but its comparative effectiveness with physical therapy (PT) is unknown. Moreover, little is known about yoga\u27s effectiveness in underserved patients with more severe functional disability and pain. Objective: To determine whether yoga is noninferior to PT for cLBP. Design: 12-week, single-blind, 3-group randomized noninferiority trial and subsequent 40-week maintenance phase. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01343927). Setting: Academic safety-net hospital and 7 affiliated community health centers. Participants: 320 predominantly low-income, racially diverse adults with nonspecific cLBP. Intervention: Participants received 12 weekly yoga classes, 15 PT visits, or an educational book and newsletters. The maintenance phase compared yoga drop-in classes versus home practice and PT booster sessions versus home practice. Measurements: Primary outcomes were back-related function, measured by the Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ), and pain, measured by an 11-point scale, at 12 weeks. Prespecified noninferiority margins were 1.5 (RMDQ) and 1.0 (pain). Secondary outcomes included pain medication use, global improvement, satisfaction with intervention, and health-related quality of life. Results: One-sided 95% lower confidence limits were 0.83 (RMDQ) and 0.97 (pain), demonstrating noninferiority of yoga to PT. However, yoga was not superior to education for either outcome. Yoga and PT were similar for most secondary outcomes. Yoga and PT participants were 21 and 22 percentage points less likely, respectively, than education participants to use pain medication at 12 weeks. Improvements in yoga and PT groups were maintained at 1 year with no differences between maintenance strategies. Frequency of adverse events, mostly mild self-limited joint and back pain, did not differ between the yoga and PT groups. Limitations: Participants were not blinded to treatment assignment. The PT group had disproportionate loss to follow-up. Conclusion: A manualized yoga program for nonspecific cLBP was noninferior to PT for function and pain. Primary Funding Source: National Center for Complementary and Integrative Health of the National Institutes of Health

Additional file 2 of Patient and provider characteristics associated with therapeutic intervention selection in a chiropractic clinical encounter: a cross-sectional analysis of the COAST and O-COAST study data

Supplementary Material