The C.A.M. Report
Complementary and Alternative Medicine: Fair, Balanced, and to the Point
  • About this web log

    This blog is intended as an objective and dispassionate source of information on the latest CAM research. Since my background is in pharmacy and allopathic medicine, I view all CAM as advancing through the development pipeline to eventually become integrated into mainstream medical practice. Some will succeed while others fail. But all are treated fairly here.

  • About the author

    John Russo, Jr., PharmD, is president of The MedCom Resource, Inc. Previously, he was senior vice president of medical communications at www.Vicus.com, a complementary and alternative medicine website.

  • Common sense considerations

    The material on this weblog is for informational purposes. It is not medical advice or counsel. Be smart, consult your health professional before using CAM.

  • Support this site

    If you found the information here helpful, please consider supporting this site.If you found the information here helpful, please consider supporting this site.

  • Recent Posts

  • Recent Comments

    Is physical therapy cost-effective care for sciatica?

    Not when compared to general practitioners’ care alone, according to researchers from Erasmus Medical Center in Rotterdam, the Netherlands.

    First, the details.

    • 135 patients were randomly assigned to physical therapy plus general practitioners’ care or to general practitioners’ care alone.
    • Patients were monitored for a year.
    • The clinical outcomes were global perceived effect and quality of life.
    • The fiscal outcomes were direct and indirect costs measured by means of questionnaires.
    • An incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was used to compare the cost of treatments.
      • ICER is a pharmcoeconomics tool to compare the change in the cost of one treatment vs an alternative (eg, placebo or the best available alternative treatment) to the change in effect of the treatment.

    And, the results at one year.

    • There was a significant difference in perceived recovery in favor of the physical therapy group.
    • Physical therapy beyond that time did not improve quality of life more.
    • The ICER for the total costs (physical therapy plus primary care) was 6224 euros (about US$9000) per improved patient gained. For direct costs of physical therapy only, the ICER was 837 euros (about US$1200).

    The bottom line?
    It’s a bit confusing. But despite the fact that patients favored physical therapy, for the treatment of sciatica (aka acute lumbosacral radicular syndrome), the added cost of physical therapy (in addition to the time lost from work to attend the treatment sessions) isn’t a good use of the money.

    1/23/08 11:13 JR

    Leave a Comment

    XHTML: Line-breaks are automatic. Available tags are <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>