Concept: Spinal adjustment
OBJECTIVE: To assess the significance of adverse events after spinal manipulation therapy (SMT) by replicating and critically reviewing a paper commonly cited when reviewing adverse events of SMT as reported by Ernest (J Roy Soc Med 100:330–338, 2007). METHOD: Replication of a 2007 Ernest paper to compare the details recorded in this paper to the original source material. Specific items that were assessed included the time lapse between treatment and the adverse event, and the recording of other significant risk factors such as diabetes, hyperhomocysteinemia, use of oral contraceptive pill, any history of hypertension, atherosclerosis and migraine. RESULTS: The review of the 32 papers discussed by Ernest found numerous errors or inconsistencies from the original case reports and case series. These errors included alteration of the age or sex of the patient, and omission or misrepresentation of the long term response of the patient to the adverse event. Other errors included incorrectly assigning spinal manipulation therapy (SMT) as chiropractic treatment when it had been reported in the original paper as delivered by a non-chiropractic provider (e.g. Physician).The original case reports often omitted to record the time lapse between treatment and the adverse event, and other significant clinical or risk factors. The country of origin of the original paper was also overlooked, which is significant as chiropractic is not legislated in many countries. In 21 of the cases reported by Ernest to be chiropractic treatment, 11 were from countries where chiropractic is not legislated. CONCLUSION: The number of errors or omissions in the 2007 Ernest paper, reduce the validity of the study and the reported conclusions. The omissions of potential risk factors and the timeline between the adverse event and SMT could be significant confounding factors. Greater care is also needed to distinguish between chiropractors and other health practitioners when reviewing the application of SMT and related adverse effects.
To examine beliefs about cracking sounds heard during high-velocity low-amplitude (HVLA) thrust spinal manipulation in individuals with and without personal experience of this technique.
Chiropractors commonly treat children for a variety of ailments by manipulating the spine to correct a ‘vertebral subluxation’ or a ‘vertebral subluxation complex’ alleged to be a cause of disease. Such treatment might begin soon after a child is born. Both major American chiropractic associations - the International Chiropractic Association and the American Chiropractic Association - support chiropractic care for children, which includes subluxation correction as a treatment or preventive measure. I do not know of any credible evidence to support chiropractic subluxation theory. Any attempt to manipulate the immature, cartilaginous spine of a neonate or a small child to correct a putative chiropractic subluxation should be regarded as dangerous and unnecessary. Referral of a child to a chiropractor for such treatment should not be considered lest a bad outcome harms the child or leads to a charge of negligence or malpractice.
Study Design. Parallel-group randomised controlled trialObjective. Establish the short-term effectiveness of chiropractic therapy for spinal pain compared to a sham intervention and explore the predictors of chiropractic treatment satisfaction.Summary of Background Data. Chiropractic treatment is widely used for spinal pain. However, a lack of sound evidence precludes conclusions about the effectiveness of chiropractic for spinal pain.Methods. Participants were adults experiencing spinal pain, randomized to receive 2 treatments of chiropractic or sham therapy. Participants and outcome assessors were blinded to group allocation. Primary outcomes at 2-weeks were pain intensity (0-10 scale) and function (0-40 Functional Rating Index). Secondary outcomes were global change, minimum acceptable outcome and treatment satisfaction. Treatment effects were estimated with linear mixed models for the primary outcomes. We used logistic regression to identify differences in the secondary outcomes and explore for predictors of treatment satisfaction.Results. 183 participants (chiropractic, n = 92; sham, n = 91) were recruited and included in the analyses. Participants receiving chiropractic therapy reported greater improvements in pain (mean difference[95%CI] = 0.5[0.1,0.9]), physical function (mean difference[95%CI] = 2.1[0.3,4.0]), and were more likely to experience global improvement (48% vs. 24%, p = 0.01) and treatment satisfaction (78% vs. 56%, p<0.01). There was no between-group difference in achieving a minimally acceptable outcome (34% sham vs. 29% chiropractic, p = 0.42). Awareness of treatment assignment and achieving minimally important improvement in pain intensity were associated with chiropractic treatment satisfaction.Conclusions. Short-term chiropractic treatment was superior to sham; however, treatment effects were not clinically important. Awareness of treatment assignment and clinically important reductions in pain were associated with chiropractic treatment satisfaction.
Recent research has shown that chiropractic spinal manipulation can alter central sensorimotor integration and motor cortical drive to human voluntary muscles of the upper and lower limb. The aim of this paper was to explore whether spinal manipulation could also influence maximal bite force. Twenty-eight people were divided into two groups of 14, one that received chiropractic care and one that received sham chiropractic care. All subjects were naive to chiropractic. Maximum bite force was assessed pre- and post-intervention and at 1-week follow up. Bite force in the chiropractic group increased compared to the control group (p = 0.02) post-intervention and this between-group difference was also present at the 1-week follow-up (p < 0.01). Bite force in the chiropractic group increased significantly by 11.0% (±18.6%) post-intervention (p = 0.04) and remained increased by 13.0% (±12.9%, p = 0.04) at the 1 week follow up. Bite force did not change significantly in the control group immediately after the intervention (−2.3 ± 9.0%, p = 0.20), and decreased by 6.3% (±3.4%, p = 0.01) at the 1-week follow-up. These results indicate that chiropractic spinal manipulation can increase maximal bite force.
BACKGROUND: Chiropractors regularly treat pregnant patients for low back pain during their pregnancy. An increasing amount of literature on this topic supports this form of treatment; however the experience of the pregnant patient with low back pain and their chiropractor has not yet been explored. The objective of this study is to explore the experience of chiropractic treatment for pregnant women with low back pain, and their chiropractors. METHODS: This qualitative study employed semi-structured interviews of pregnant patients in their second or third trimester, with low back pain during their pregnancy, and their treating chiropractors in separate interviews. Participants consisted of 11 patients and 12 chiropractors. The interviews consisted of 10 open-ended questions for patients, and eight open-ended questions for chiropractors, asking about their treatment experience or impressions of treating pregnant patients with LBP, respectively. All interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim, and reviewed independently by the investigators to develop codes, super-codes and themes. Thematic saturation was reached after the eleventh chiropractor and ninth patient interviews. All interviews were analyzed using the qualitative analysis software N-Vivo 9. RESULTS: Five themes emerged out of the chiropractor and patient interviews. The themes consisted of Treatment and Effectiveness; Chiropractor-Patient Communication; Pregnant Patient Presentation and the Chiropractic Approach to Pregnancy Care; Safety Considerations; and Self-Care. CONCLUSIONS: Chiropractors approach pregnant patients with low back pain from a patient-centered standpoint, and the pregnant patients interviewed in this study who sought chiropractic care appeared to find this approach helpful for managing their back pain symptoms.
[Purpose] To present a case demonstrating the reduction of progressive thoracolumbar scoliosis by incorporating Chiropractic BioPhysics® (CBP®) technique’s mirror image® exercises, traction and blocking procedures based on the ‘non-commutative properties of finite rotation angles under addition’ engineering law. [Subject and Methods] A 15-year-old female presented with a right thoracolumbar scoliosis having a Cobb angle from T5-L3 of 27° and suffering from headaches and lower back pains. Her curve had progressed over the last two years despite being under traditional chiropractic care. [Results] The patient was treated using CBP structural rehabilitation protocols incorporating mirror image traction, home blocking, corrective exercises and spinal manipulation. The patient was treated 24 times (including 45 home self-treatment blocking sessions) over the course of 15-weeks. Her thoracolumbar curve reduced from 27° to 8° and her headache and low back pain disability improved significantly. [Conclusion] CBP mirror image exercises and traction are consistent with other successful non-surgical approaches and show promise in treating adolescent idiopathic scoliosis.
- Journal of manipulative and physiological therapeutics
- Published almost 2 years ago
A total of 75% of the chiropractic medicine students in the new program at the University of Zürich are women, which is in stark contrast to the traditional ratio of chiropractors in Switzerland, where 75% have been men. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to compare work behaviors between female and male chiropractors relating to workload, patient variety, and chiropractic treatment techniques.
Back pain is one of the most common presentations to the emergency department. Though case reports of patients presenting with increased back pain following chiropractic spinal manipulations are rare, we have identified a case rarely reported in the literature where a potential injury from chiropractic manipulation resulted in a diagnosis of multiple myeloma. We have reported a previously healthy 66-year-old male who presented with persistent lower back pain over 4 weeks. An initial evaluation with thoracolumbar radiographs revealed no significant findings. Following initial presentation to the family physician, the patient underwent three treatments of spinal manipulation from his local chiropractor, which resulted in worsening lower back pain. A re-examination and new radiographs in the hospital revealed multiple compression fractures and an underlying diagnosis of multiple myeloma. We have explored current literature examining the prevalence of lower back pain, as well as the incidence of spinal fracture following chiropractic manipulation, and have highlighted a potential complication from chiropractic manipulation in a patient with an undiagnosed underlying neoplastic disorder.
- Journal of evidence-based complementary & alternative medicine
- Published over 3 years ago
We assessed the attitudes of Canadian obstetricians toward chiropractic with a 38-item cross-sectional survey. Ninety-one obstetricians completed the survey, for a response rate of 14% (91 of 659). Overall, 30% of respondents held positive views toward chiropractic, 37% were neutral, and 33% reported negative views. Most (77%) reported that chiropractic care was effective for some musculoskeletal complaints, but 74% disagreed that chiropractic had a role in treatment of non-musculoskeletal conditions. Forty percent of respondents referred at least some patients for chiropractic care each year, and 56% were interested in learning more about chiropractic care. Written comments from respondents revealed concerns regarding safety of spinal manipulation and variability among chiropractors. Canadian obstetricians' attitudes toward chiropractic are diverse and referrals to chiropractic care for their patients who suffer from pregnancy-related low back pain are limited. Improved interprofessional relations may help optimize care of pregnant patients suffering from low back pain.