MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3030742556 · doi:10.1093/ptj/pzaa100

Time Between an Emergency Department Visit and Initiation of Physical Therapist Intervention: Health Care Utilization and Costs

2020· article· en· W3030742556 on OpenAlexaff
John Magel, Jaewhan Kim, Julie M. Fritz, Janet K. Freburger

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical Therapy · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMusculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation
Canadian institutionsAthletic Edge Sports Medicine
FundersNational Institutes of HealthNational Center for Advancing Translational SciencesFoundation for Physical Therapy
KeywordsMedicineEmergency departmentPhysical therapyRetrospective cohort studyHealth careCohortRelative riskIntervention (counseling)Emergency medicineLow back painConfidence intervalInternal medicineAlternative medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to examine the association between the length of time between an emergency department (ED) visit and the subsequent initiation of physical therapist intervention for low back pain (LBP) on 1-year LBP-related health care utilization (ie, surgery, advanced imaging, injections, long-term opioid use, ED visits) and costs. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study focused on individuals who consulted the ED for an initial visit for LBP. Claims from a single statewide, all-payers database were used. LBP-related health care use and costs for the 12 months after the ED visit were extracted. Poisson and general linear models weighted with inverse probability treatment weights were used to compare the outcomes of patients who attended physical therapy early or delayed after the ED visit. RESULTS: Compared with the delayed physical therapy group (n = 94), the early physical therapy group (n = 171) had a lower risk of receiving lumbar surgery (relative risk [RR] = 0.47, 95% CI = 0.26-0.86) and advanced imaging (RR = 0.72, 95% CI = 0.55-0.95), and they were less likely to have long-term opioid use (RR = 0.45, 95% CI = 0.28-0.76). The early physical therapy group incurred lower costs (mean = $3,806, 95% CI = $1,998-$4,184) than those in the delayed physical therapy group (mean = $8,689, 95% CI = $4,653-$12,727). CONCLUSION: Early physical therapy following an ED visit was associated with a reduced risk of using some types of health care and reduced health care costs in the 12 months following the ED visit. IMPACT STATEMENT: The ED is an entry point into the health care system for patients with LBP. Until now, the impact of the length of time between an ED visit and physical therapy for LBP has not been well understood. This study shows that swift initiation of physical therapy following an ED visit for LBP is associated with lower LBP-related health utilization for some important outcomes and lower LBP-related health care costs.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.947
Threshold uncertainty score0.323

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.039
GPT teacher head0.371
Teacher spread0.332 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations26
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical TherapySame topicMusculoskeletal pain and rehabilitationFrench-language works237,207