Table 1Characteristics of Study Participants According to Whether or Not They Experienced a Reduction in Access to Chiropractic Care After Relocation
Access to Chiropractic Care After Relocation Characteristic Decreased Accessa Did Not Decrease Accessa P Valueb Sample size, no. 16,121 23,157 Mean age in years (SD) 75.1 (6.8) 75.4 (6.8) < 0.001 Sex, no. (%) 0.70 Male 6,367 (39.5) 9,101 (39.3) Female 9,754 (60.5) 14,056 (60.7) Race, no. (%) < 0.001 White 15,589 (96.7) 22,436 (96.9) Black 244 (1.5) 247 (1.1) Other 288 (1.8) 474 (2.1) No. of comorbidities, no. (%) 0.15 0 or 1 11,976 (74.3) 17,103 (73.9) 2 2,595 (16.1) 3,890 (16.8) 3 or more 1,550 (9.6) 2,164 (9.3) Baseline quintile of access to chiropractic care, no. (%) < 0.001 Quintile 1 (excluded) NA NA Quintile 2 622 (3.9) 6,094 (26.3) Quintile 3 2,392 (14.8) 6,910 (29.8) Quintile 4 5,091 (31.6) 6,165 (26.6) Quintile 5 8,016 (49.7) 3,988 (17.2) Baseline healthcare utilization rate, no. per 1,000 beneficiaries Chiropractic care visits 6,176.1 6,252.2 0.34 Primary care visits for spine conditions 535.1 559.7 0.13 Visits to surgeons for spine conditions 252.2 267.4 0.10 Medical specialist visits for spine conditions 240.5 258.1 0.15 Plain film radiographs for spine conditions 296.8 311.0 0.02 Advanced imaging for spine conditions 171.9 175.8 0.35 Spine surgeries 21.4 23.4 0.23 Opioid prescriptions 766.1 744.0 0.39
a Restricted to older fee-for-service beneficiaries who used chiropractic care before relocation.b t test used for comparisons of means and chi-squared test used for comparisons of proportions.