September 2017
M T W T F S S
« Aug    
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
252627282930  

Archives

Please support our Sponsors

Founder’s Day:   Chiropractic Turns 122 Today

Founder’s Day:   Chiropractic Turns 122 Today

The Chiro.Org Blog


     
Harvey Lillard (L)               D.D. Palmer (R)

The Story of Chiropractic

The year was 1895, the same year that x-rays were discovered. At that time, Health Care was provided by a diverse group of unregulated and unlicensed professions, including osteopaths, magnetic healers, and “medical” doctors.   In those days, most medical education consisted of working as an “apprentice” for a medical doctor, and learning the craft by observation.

D.D. Palmer, the Father of Chiropractic, was a magnetic healer,
with a huge practice in Davenport, Iowa.   He had doubts about the
“germ theory” as the complete explanation for the cause of all disease.

After all, if germs kill… shouldn’t we all be dead?   He asked himself:

how it was that 2 brothers could work in the same shop, eat the same food, sleep in the same bed, and that one would succumb to a disease while the other one would not”?

His theory evolved that it was not just the “seed” (or germ) which was the cause of dis-ease.   He felt that the “soil”, or the recuperative power of the body (which he later referred to as “innate intelligence”, and we now call homeostasis) was the missing component of the equation, which defines the continuum between health and “dis-ease”.

One day D.D. was talking with Harvey Lillard, the man who owned the janitor service in his building.   Harvey was deaf.   He mentioned to D.D. that years before, while lifting a heavy weight, he felt something “snap” at the base of his neck.   Shortly thereafter his hearing started to fade.

D.D. was intrigued, and asked Harvey if he could have permission examine his back.   What D.D. “felt” (we refer to this art as “palpation) was that one of the upper thoracic bones was sticking out much more than the one above or below it.   He explained to Harvey that he felt that this “bone out of place
could be causing pressure on his spinal cord, and that this could be the
reason that Harvey was now deaf.

Continue reading Founder’s Day:   Chiropractic Turns 122 Today

A Structured Protocol of Evidence-based Conservative Care Compared with Usual Care for Acute Nonspecific Low Back Pain

A Structured Protocol of Evidence-based Conservative Care Compared with Usual Care for Acute Nonspecific Low Back Pain: A Randomized Clinical Trial

The Chiro.Org Blog


SOURCE:   Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2012 (Jan); 93 (1): 11–20

Gregory F. Parkin-Smith, MTech(Chiro), MSc, DrHC,
Ian J. Norman, BSc, MSc, PhD,
Emma Briggs, BSc, PhD, RN,
Elizabeth Angier, BSc, MSc(Chiro),
Timothy G. Wood, BSc, MTech(Chiro),
James W. Brantingham, DC, PhD

School of Chiropractic & Sports Science,
Murdoch University,
Perth, Australia.


OBJECTIVE:   To compare a protocol of evidence-based conservative care with usual care for acute nonspecific low back pain (LBP) of less than 6 weeks’ duration.

DESIGN:   Parallel-group randomized trial.

SETTING:   Three practices in the United Kingdom.

PARTICIPANTS:   Convenience sample of 149 eligible patients were invited to participate in the study, with 118 volunteers being consented and randomly allocated to a treatment group.

INTERVENTIONS:   The experimental group received evidence-based treatments for acute nonspecific LBP as prescribed in a structured protocol of care developed for this study. The control group received usual conservative care. Participants in both groups could receive up to 7 treatments over a 4-week period.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES:   Oswestry Low Back Disability Index (ODI), visual analog scale (VAS), and Patient Satisfaction Questionnaire, alongside estimation of clinically meaningful outcomes.

RESULTS:   Total dropout rate was 14% (n=16), with 13% of data missing. Missing data were replaced using a multiple imputation method. Participants in both groups received an average of 6 treatments. There was no statistically significant difference in disability (ODI) scores at the end of week 4 (P=.33), but there was for pain (VAS) scores (P< .001). Interestingly, there were statistically significant differences between the 2 groups for both disability and pain measures at the midpoint of the treatment period (P<.001). Patient satisfaction with care was equally high (85%) in both groups. Minimally clinically important differences in scores and number needed to treat scores (NNT<6) indicated that the experimental treatment (protocol of care) offered a clinically meaningful benefit over the control treatment (usual care), particularly at the midpoint of the treatment period.

There are more articles like this @ our:

Low Back Pain and Chiropractic Page

Continue reading A Structured Protocol of Evidence-based Conservative Care Compared with Usual Care for Acute Nonspecific Low Back Pain

Recommendations to the Musculoskeletal Health Network

Recommendations to the Musculoskeletal Health Network, Health Department of Western Australia related to the Spinal Pain Model of Care made on behalf of the Chiropractors Association of Australia (Western Australian Branch)

The Chiro.Org Blog


SOURCE:   Topics in Integrative Health Care 2014 (Jun 30); 5 (2)

Lyndon G. Amorin-Woods, BAppSci(Chiropractic),
Gregory F. Parkin-Smith, MTech(Chiro), MBBS, MSc, DrHC,
Vern Saboe, DC, DACAN, FACO,
Anthony L. Rosner, Ph.D., LL.D.[Hon.], LLC


The 2009 Spinal Model of Care published by the Western Australian Health Department via the Musculoskeletal Health Network would benefit from an update. Best-evidence synthesis and cost-risks-benefits estimations suggest that such guidelines should provide:

(1)   the early assessment of patients with non-malignant spinal pain (particularly low back) by a musculoskeletal clinician, be it a chiropractor, musculoskeletal physician, osteopath or musculoskeletal physiotherapist with referral within the early stages of the disorder; and

(2)   the provision of manipulative therapy, where indicated, as a first-line treatment while also providing rehabilitation, health promotion, and contemporary wellness/wellbeing management with the intention of avoiding chronicity.

Emerging workforce capacity suggests that early assessment and evidence-based management of non-malignant spinal pain is feasible, leading to better patient outcomes. The authors and the association are hopeful that providing this submission in open access may prove useful for advocates of the chiropractic profession in other jurisdictions.


From the FULL TEXT Article:

Background

The importance of addressing spinal pain in the Australian community in a cost effective and clinically appropriate manner is illustrated in a series of studies emerging from the Global Burden of Disease 2010 Project. [1] It is well-known that musculoskeletal conditions, such as low back pain, neck pain and arthritis, affect more than 1.7 billion people worldwide and are set to become more prevalent with a growing, ageing, developed world population. [2] Australian chiropractors may occupy a pivotal role in the cost effective management of these clinical presentations.

There are more articles like this @ our:

Low Back Pain and Chiropractic Page and the:

Chiropractic and Spinal Pain Management

Continue reading Recommendations to the Musculoskeletal Health Network

Looking Ahead: Chronic Spinal Pain Management

Looking Ahead: Chronic Spinal Pain Management

The Chiro.Org Blog


SOURCE:   Journal of Pain Research 2017 (Aug 30); 10: 2089–2095

Gregory F Parkin-Smith, Stephanie J Davies,
Lyndon G Amorin-Woods

School of Health Professions,
Murdoch University,
Perth, WA, Australia


The other day, we oversaw a seminar on pain management for a local consumer pain group, where all consumers (patients) in attendance were experiencing chronic, persistent spinal pain. Each person had a unique story, and their experience and perceived cause of their pain differed. The quality of life in all these consumers was markedly reduced, which was the only clear similarity, confirming that there may be some similarities in the pain experience, but the pain experience was more often unique and individual. These consumers’ criticisms of care services were consistent, however, with dissatisfaction with their access to care and overall management of their pain. They described variable and often difficult access, limited continuity of care, they were often not taken seriously by health care providers, they received scant information about chronic pain and its prognosis and there were often noteworthy variations in the treatment they received. We agree that these criticisms are commonplace and a frequent gripe directed at health care practitioners about the “system.” [1] Moreover, the problems associated with care delivery are confounded by a number of patient/consumer factors, such as lifestyle habits, nutrition, body weight, depression, health literacy, geographical isolation and poor socioeconomic conditions, making the management of persistent pain even more complicated. [2] There is no doubt that, in the future, matching the care service and treatment with the individual patient will become an essential component of care services, as has been implied in published research. [3-6]

Health care practitioners involved in the triage and management of patients with persistent spinal pain will need to become more vigilant about individualizing and coordinating care for each patient, to achieve the best possible outcomes. For example, Cecchi et al concluded that patients with chronic (persistent) lower baseline pain (LBP)-related disability predicted “nonresponse” to standard physiotherapy, but not to spinal manipulation (an intervention commonly employed by chiropractors [7-9]), implying that spinal manipulation should be considered as a first-line conservative treatment. [9] We note that spinal manipulation is now suggested as the first-line intervention by Deyo, [10] since not a single study examined in a recent systematic review found that spinal manipulation was less effective than conventional care. [11]

Garcia et al, [12] conversely, showed that high pain intensity may be an important treatment effect modifier for patients with chronic low back pain receiving Mckenzie therapy (a treatment frequently used by physiotherapists). These examples demonstrate the importance of matching treatments with the characteristics of the patient.

There are more articles like this @ our:

Low Back Pain and Chiropractic Page and the:

Chiropractic and Spinal Pain Management

Continue reading Looking Ahead: Chronic Spinal Pain Management

Chronic Neck Pain Patients With Traumatic or Non-traumatic Onset: Differences in Characteristics

Chronic Neck Pain Patients With Traumatic or Non-traumatic Onset: Differences in Characteristics.
A Cross-sectional Study

The Chiro.Org Blog


SOURCE:   Scand J Pain. 2017 (Jan); 14: 1-8

Inge Ris, Birgit Juul-Kristensen, Eleanor Boyle,
Alice Kongsted, Claus Manniche, Karen Søgaard

Research Unit for Musculoskeletal Function and Physiotherapy,
Department of Sports Science and Clinical Biomechanics,
University of Southern Denmark,
Campusvej 55, 5230 Odense M, Denmark;


BACKGROUND AND AIMS:   Patients with chronic neck pain can present with disability, low quality of life, psychological factors and clinical symptoms. It is unclear whether patients with a traumatic onset differ from those with a non-traumatic onset, by having more complex and severe symptoms. The purpose of this study was to investigate the clinical presentation of chronic neck pain patients with and without traumatic onset by examining cervical mobility, sensorimotor function, cervical muscle performance and pressure pain threshold in addition to the following self-reported characteristics: quality of life, neck pain and function, kinesiophobia, depression, and pain bothersomeness.

METHODS:   This cross-sectional study included 200 participants with chronic neck pain: 120 with traumatic onset and 80 with non-traumatic onset. Participants were recruited from physiotherapy clinics in primary and secondary health care. For participants to be included, they were required to be at least 18 years of age, have had neck pain for at least 6 months, and experienced neck-related activity limitation as determined by a score of at least 10 on the Neck Disability Index. We conducted the following clinical tests of cervical range of motion, gaze stability, eye movement, cranio-cervical flexion, cervical extensors, and pressure pain threshold. The participants completed the following questionnaires: physical and mental component summary of the Short Form Health Survey, EuroQol-5D, Neck Disability Index, Patient-Specific Functional Scale, Pain Bothersomeness, Beck Depression Inventory-II, and TAMPA scale of kinesiophobia. The level of significance for all analyses was defined as p<0.01. Differences between groups for the continuous data were determined using either a Student’s t-test or Mann Whitney U test.

RESULTS:   In both groups, the majority of the participants were female (approximately 75%). Age, educational level, working situation and sleeping patterns were similar in both groups. The traumatic group had symptoms for a shorter duration (88 vs. 138 months p=0.001). Participants in the traumatic group showed worse results on all measures compared with those in the non-traumatic group, significantly on neck muscle function (cervical extension mobility p=0.005, cranio-cervical flexion test p=0.007, cervical extensor test p=0.006) and cervical pressure pain threshold bilateral (p=0.002/0.004), as well on self-reported function (Neck Disability Index p=0.001 and Patient-Specific Functional Scale p=0.007), mental quality of life (mental component summary of the Short Form Health Survey p=0.004 and EuroQol-5D p=0.001) and depression (Beck Depression Inventory-II p=0.001).

There are more articles like this @ our:

Chronic Neck Pain and Chiropractic Page

Continue reading Chronic Neck Pain Patients With Traumatic or Non-traumatic Onset: Differences in Characteristics

An Observational Study on Recurrences of Low Back Pain During the First 12 Months After Chiropractic Treatment

An Observational Study on Recurrences of Low Back Pain During the First 12 Months After Chiropractic Treatment

The Chiro.Org Blog


SOURCE:   J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 2017 (Jul); 40 (6): 427–433

Christina Knecht, BMed,
Barry Kim Humphreys, DC, PhD,
Brigitte Wirth, PT, MSc, PhD

Chiropractic Medicine Department,
Faculty of Medicine,
University of Zürich and University Hospital Balgrist,
Zürich, Switzerland.


OBJECTIVES:   The purpose of this study was to investigate recurrence rate and prognostic factors in a large population of patients with low back pain (LBP) up to 1 year after chiropractic care using standardized definitions.

METHODS:   In Switzerland, 722 patients with LBP (375 male; mean age = 44.5 ± 13.8 years) completed the Numeric Rating Scale for pain (NRS) and the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) before treatment and 1, 3, 6, and 12 months later (ODI up to 3 months). Based on NRS values, patients were categorized as “fast recovery,” “slow recovery,” “recurrent,” “chronic,” and “others.” In multivariable logistic regression models, age, sex, work status, duration of complaint (subacute: ≥14 days to <3 months; chronic: ≥3 months), previous episodes, baseline NRS, and baseline ODI were investigated as predictors.

RESULTS:   Based on NRS values, 13.4% of the patients were categorized as recurrent. The recurrent pattern significantly differed from fast recovery in duration of complaint (subacute: odds ratio [OR] = 3.3; chronic: OR = 10.1). The recurrent and chronic pattern significantly differed in duration of complaint (chronic: OR = 0.14) and baseline NRS (OR = 0.75).

There are more articles like this @ our:

Low Back Pain and Chiropractic Page

Continue reading An Observational Study on Recurrences of Low Back Pain During the First 12 Months After Chiropractic Treatment

Can Neurotransmitter Status Affect the Results of Exercise-Based Scoliosis Treatment?

Can Neurotransmitter Status Affect the Results of Exercise-Based Scoliosis Treatment? Results of a Controlled Comparative Chart Review

The Chiro.Org Blog


SOURCE:   Alternative & Integrative Medicine 2014 (Nov 20); 3: 177

Mark W Morningstar, Aatif Siddiqui,
Brian Dovorany and Clayton J Stitzel

Natural Wellness & Pain Relief Center
8293 Office Park Dr.,
Grand Blanc, MI 48439, USA


Idiopathic scoliosis has long been held as a purely orthopedic spinal deformity without a known origin. Hence all treatment of scoliosis has involved physical methods exclusively to treat the condition, whether by bracing, surgery, or exercise-based methods. Over the last several years many authors have introduced etiological concepts of scoliosis involving multiple biochemical central nervous system pathways, such as neurotransmitter imbalances. The purpose of this study is to evaluate how these neurotransmitter imbalances affect patients’ ability to participate in a scoliosis therapy program and the ability of the resultant radiographic changes to be maintained. Two groups of patients performed baseline neurotransmitter testing, and completed a short-term chiropractic rehabilitation program for scoliosis. One group additionally participated in a nutrient program designed to rebalance their neurotransmitter levels, while the second group declined. Both groups were evaluated 6 months after the completion of their rehabilitation program to evaluate Cobb angle changes

Keywords   Chiropractic; Nutrition; Scoliosis; Spine; Rehabilitation


From the Full-Text Article:

Introduction:

Scoliosis is historically thought of as a purely biomechanical or orthopedic disorder of the spine wherein the spine curves greater than 10 degrees on radiographic assessment. [1] Conventional treatments of scoliosis have been entirely based upon this model of scoliosis, whether it be bracing or surgery. Both of these treatments entirely focus upon the spine curvature, and attempt to straighten or stabilize the spine throughout the human growing years.

There are more articles like this @ our:

Scoliosis and Chiropractic Page

Continue reading Can Neurotransmitter Status Affect the Results of Exercise-Based Scoliosis Treatment?

Chiropractic Treatments for Idiopathic Scoliosis: A Narrative Review Based on SOSORT Outcome Criteria

Chiropractic Treatments for Idiopathic Scoliosis: A Narrative Review Based on SOSORT Outcome Criteria

The Chiro.Org Blog


SOURCE:   J Chiropractic Medicine 2017 (Mar); 16 (1): 64–71

Mark W. Morningstar, DC, PhD, Clayton J. Stitzel, DC,
Aatif Siddiqui, DC, Brian Dovorany, DC

Natural Wellness & Pain Relief Center,
Grand Blanc, MI.


OBJECTIVE:   The purpose of this review was to evaluate the current body of literature on chiropractic treatment of idiopathic scoliosis against the 2014 consensus paper of the Society on Scoliosis Orthopedic and Rehabilitation Treatment (SOSORT) and the Scoliosis Research Society (SRS) Non-Operative Management Committee for outcome reporting in nonoperative treatments.

METHODS:   A search of the PubMed and Index to Chiropractic Literature databases for studies published from January 2000 through February 2016 detailing specific treatments and outcomes for idiopathic scoliosis was conducted.

RESULTS:   A total of 27 studies that discussed chiropractic scoliosis treatments were identified. Of these, there were 15 case reports, 10 case series, 1 prospective cohort, and 1 randomized clinical trial. Of the 27 studies, only 2 described their outcomes as recommended in the 2014 SOSORT and SRS Non-Operative Management Committee consensus paper.

There are more articles like this @ our:

Scoliosis and Chiropractic Page

Continue reading Chiropractic Treatments for Idiopathic Scoliosis: A Narrative Review Based on SOSORT Outcome Criteria

Short Term Treatment Versus Long Term Management of Neck and Back Disability in Older Adults Utilizing Spinal Manipulative Therapy and Supervised Exercise

Short Term Treatment Versus Long Term Management of Neck and Back Disability in Older Adults Utilizing Spinal Manipulative Therapy and Supervised Exercise: A Parallel-group Randomized Clinical Trial Evaluating Relative Effectiveness and Harms

The Chiro.Org Blog


SOURCE:   Chiropractic & Manual Therapies 2014 (Jul 23); 22: 26

Corrie Vihstadt, Michele Maiers,
Kristine Westrom, Gert Bronfort,
Roni Evans, Jan Hartvigsen and
Craig Schulz

Northwestern Health Sciencs University,
Wolfe-Harris Center for Clinical Studies,
2501 W 84th Street,
Bloomington 55431, MN, USA.


BACKGROUND:   Back and neck disability are frequent in older adults resulting in loss of function and independence. Exercise therapy and manual therapy, like spinal manipulative therapy (SMT), have evidence of short and intermediate term effectiveness for spinal disability in the general population and growing evidence in older adults. For older populations experiencing chronic spinal conditions, long term management may be more appropriate to maintain improvement and minimize the impact of future exacerbations. Research is limited comparing short courses of treatment to long term management of spinal disability. The primary aim is to compare the relative effectiveness of 12 weeks versus 36 weeks of SMT and supervised rehabilitative exercise (SRE) in older adults with back and neck disability.

METHODS/DESIGN:   Randomized, mixed-methods, comparative effectiveness trial conducted at a university-affiliated research clinic in the Minneapolis/St. Paul, Minnesota metropolitan area.

PARTICIPANTS:   Independently ambulatory community dwelling adults ≥ 65 years of age with back and neck disability of minimum 12 weeks duration (n = 200).

INTERVENTIONS:   12 weeks SMT + SRE or 36 weeks SMT + SRE.

RANDOMIZATION:   Blocked 1:1 allocation; computer generated scheme, concealed in sequentially numbered, opaque, sealed envelopes.

BLINDING:   Functional outcome examiners are blinded to treatment allocation; physical nature of the treatments prevents blinding of participants and providers to treatment assignment.

PRIMARY ENDPOINT:   36 weeks post-randomization.

DATA COLLECTION:   Self-report questionnaires administered at 2 baseline visits and 4, 12, 24, 36, 52, and 78 weeks post-randomization. Primary outcomes include back and neck disability, measured by the Oswestry Disability Index and Neck Disability Index. Secondary outcomes include pain, general health status, improvement, self-efficacy, kinesiophobia, satisfaction, and medication use. Functional outcome assessment occurs at baseline and week 37 for hand grip strength, short physical performance battery, and accelerometry. Individual qualitative interviews are conducted when treatment ends. Data on expectations, falls, side effects, and adverse events are systematically collected.

PRIMARY ANALYSIS:   Linear mixed-model method for repeated measures to test for between-group differences with baseline values as covariates.

There are more articles like this @ our:

Low Back Pain and Chiropractic Page and the:

Exercise and Chiropractic Care Page and the:

Chronic Neck Pain and Chiropractic Page

Continue reading Short Term Treatment Versus Long Term Management of Neck and Back Disability in Older Adults Utilizing Spinal Manipulative Therapy and Supervised Exercise

Spinal Manipulation and Home Exercise With Advice for Subacute and Chronic Back-related Leg Pain

Spinal Manipulation and Home Exercise With Advice for Subacute and Chronic Back-related Leg Pain: A Trial With Adaptive Allocation

The Chiro.Org Blog


SOURCE:   Ann Intern Med. 2014 (Sep 16); 161 (6): 381—391

Gert Bronfort, DC, PhD; Maria A. Hondras, DC, MPH;
Craig A. Schulz, DC, MS; Roni L. Evans, DC, PhD;
Cynthia R. Long, PhD; and Richard Grimm, MD, PhD

University of Minnesota,
Northwestern Health Sciences University, and
Berman Center for Outcomes and Clinical Research at
the Minneapolis Medical Research Foundation,
Minneapolis, Minnesota, and
Palmer Center for Chiropractic Research,
Davenport, Iowa.


BACKGROUND:   Back-related leg pain (BRLP) is often disabling and costly, and there is a paucity of research to guide its management.

OBJECTIVE:   To determine whether spinal manipulative therapy (SMT) plus home exercise and advice (HEA) compared with HEA alone reduces leg pain in the short and long term in adults with BRLP.

DESIGN:   Controlled pragmatic trial with allocation by minimization conducted from 2007 to 2011.
(ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT00494065).

SETTING:   2 research centers (Minnesota and Iowa).

PATIENTS:   Persons aged 21 years or older with BRLP for least 4 weeks.

INTERVENTION:   12 weeks of SMT plus HEA or HEA alone.

MEASUREMENTS:   The primary outcome was patient-rated BRLP at 12 and 52 weeks. Secondary outcomes were self-reported low back pain, disability, global improvement, satisfaction, medication use, and general health status at 12 and 52 weeks. Blinded objective tests were done at 12 weeks.

RESULTS:   Of the 192 enrolled patients, 191 (99%) provided follow-up data at 12 weeks and 179 (93%) at 52 weeks. For leg pain, SMT plus HEA had a clinically important advantage over home exercise and advice (HEA) (difference, 10 percentage points [95% CI, 2 to 19]; P=0.008) at 12 weeks but not at 52 weeks (difference, 7 percentage points [CI, -2 to 15]; P=0.146). Nearly all secondary outcomes improved more with SMT plus HEA at 12 weeks, but only global improvement, satisfaction, and medication use had sustained improvements at 52 weeks. No serious treatment-related adverse events or deaths occurred.

There are more articles like this @ our NEW:

Exercise and Chiropractic Care Page

Continue reading Spinal Manipulation and Home Exercise With Advice for Subacute and Chronic Back-related Leg Pain

Exploring the Definition of «Acute» Neck Pain

Exploring the Definition of «Acute» Neck Pain:
A Prospective Cohort Observational Study Comparing the Outcomes of Chiropractic Patients with 0-2 Weeks, 2-4 Weeks and 4-12 Weeks of Symptoms

The Chiro.Org Blog


SOURCE:   Chiropractic & Manual Therapies 2017 (Aug 16); 25: 24

Luana Nyiro, Cynthia K. Peterson and
B. Kim Humphreys

Department of Chiropractic Medicine,
Orthopaedic University Hospital Balgrist,
Forchstrasse 340, 8008
Zürich, Switzerland


BACKGROUND:   Neck pain is a common complaint in chiropractic patients. Amongst other baseline variables, numerous studies identify duration of symptoms as a strong predictor of outcome in neck pain patients. The usual time frame used for ‘acute’ onset of pain is between 0 and 4 weeks. However, the appropriateness of this time frame has been challenged for chiropractic low back pain patients. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to compare outcomes in neck pain patients with 0–2 vs 2–4 and 4–12 weeks of symptoms undergoing chiropractic treatment.

METHODS:   This is a prospective cohort observational study with 1 year follow-up including 495 patients whose data was collected between October 2009 and March 2015. Patients were divided into high-acute (0–2 weeks), mid-acute (2–4 weeks) and subacute (4–12 weeks) corresponding to duration of their symptoms at initial treatment. Patients completed the numerical pain rating scale (NRS) and Bournemouth questionnaire for neck pain (BQN) at baseline. At follow-up time points of 1 week, 1 month, 3 months, 6 months and 1 year the NRS and BQN were completed along with the Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC) scale. The PGIC responses were dichotomized into ‘improved’ and ‘not improved’ patients and compared between the 3 subgroups. The Chi-square test was used to compare improved patients between the 3 subgroups and the unpaired Student’s t-test was used for the NRS and BQN change scores.

RESULTS:   The proportion of patients ‘improved’ was only significantly higher for patients with symptoms of 0–2 weeks compared to 2–4 weeks at the 1 week outcome time point (p = 0.015). The NRS changes scores were significantly greater for patients with 2–4 weeks of symptoms compared to 4–12 weeks of symptoms only at 1 week (p = 0.035).

There are more articles like this @ our:

Chronic Neck Pain and Chiropractic Page

Continue reading Exploring the Definition of «Acute» Neck Pain

Health Maintenance Care in Work-Related Low Back Pain and Its Association With Disability Recurrence

Health Maintenance Care in Work-Related Low Back Pain and Its Association With Disability Recurrence

The Chiro.Org Blog


SOURCE:   J Occupat Enviro Med 2011 (Apr); 53 (4): 396–404

Manuel Cifuentes, MD, PhD,
Joanna Willetts, MS, and
Radoslaw Wasiak, PhD, MA, MSc

Center for Disability Research
Liberty Mutual Research Institute for Safety
University of Massachusetts Lowell
Hopkinton, Mass


This study is unique in that it was conducted by the Center for Disability Research at the Liberty Mutual Research Institute for Safety AND the University of Massachusetts Lowell, Hopkinton, Mass

Their objective was to compare the occurrences of repeated disability episodes between types of health care providers, who treat claimants with new episodes of work-related low back pain (LBP).   They followed 894 patients over 1-year, using workers’ compensation claims data.

By controlling for demographics and severity, they determined the hazard ratio (HR) for disability recurrence between 3 types of providers:

Physical Therapists (PT),

Physicians (MD), or

Chiropractors (DC).

The results are quite interesting:

  • For PTs: HR = 2.0
  • For MDs: HR = 1.6
  • For DCs: HR = 1.0

Statistically, this means you are twice as likely to end up disabled if you got your care from a Physical Therapists (PT), rather than from a chiropractor.

You’re also 60% more likely to be disabled if you choose a Physicians (MD) to manage your care, rather than a chiropractor.

The authors concluded:

In work-related nonspecific LBP, the use of health maintenance care provided by physical therapist or physician services was associated with a higher disability recurrence than with chiropractic services.”

OBJECTIVES:   To compare occurrence of repeated disability episodes across types of health care providers who treat claimants with new episodes of work-related low back pain (LBP).

METHOD:   A total of 894 cases followed 1 year using workers’ compensation claims data. Provider types were defined for the initial episode of disability and subsequent episode of health maintenance care.

RESULTS:   Controlling for demographics and severity, the hazard ratio [HR] of disability recurrence for patients of physical therapists (HR = 2.0; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.0 to 3.9) or physicians (HR = 1.6; 95% CI = 0.9 to 6.2) was higher than that of chiropractor (referent, HR = 1.0), which was similar to that of the patients non-treated after return to work (HR = 1.2; 95% CI = 0.4 to 3.8).

There are more articles like this @ our:

Low Back Pain and Chiropractic Page
and the:

Cost-Effectiveness of Chiropractic Page

Continue reading Health Maintenance Care in Work-Related Low Back Pain and Its Association With Disability Recurrence

Prevention and Health Promotion by Chiropractors

Prevention and Health Promotion by Chiropractors

The Chiro.Org Blog


SOURCE:   American J Lifestyle Medicine 2008;   2 (6):   537–545

Daniel Redwood, DC, and Gary Globe, MBA, DC, PhD

Cleveland Chiropractic College–Kansas City,
10850 Lowell Avenue,
Overland Park, KS 66210


Chiropractic care includes a variety of minimally invasive approaches, with both treatment and prevention as essential elements of clinical practice. Although chiropractic adjustment (manipulation) is the signature therapy and best-known identifier of the profession, the practice of chiropractic involves more than manual therapeutics. In general, chiropractors seek to bring a holistic worldview to the doctor–patient encounter, seeking not only to relieve pain and restore neuromusculoskeletal function but also to support the inherent self-healing and self-regulating powers of the body.

Aside from applying their diagnostic training to the evaluation of a variety of physical disorders and delivering manual adjustments and related therapeutic interventions, many chiropractors encourage patients to take an active role in restoring and maintaining health, with particular emphasis on doctor-guided self-care through exercise and nutrition. In this review, the authors summarize the peer-reviewed literature on chiropractic and prevention, describe health promotion and wellness approaches currently taught at chiropractic colleges and used in chiropractic clinical settings, discuss duration of care, emphasize the importance of interprofessional cooperation and collaboration, and address the hypothesis that chiropractic adjustments yield preventive effects.

There are more articles like this @ our:

Health Promotion, Wellness and Chiropractic Page

Continue reading Prevention and Health Promotion by Chiropractors

Do Participants with Low Back Pain who Respond to Spinal Manipulative Therapy Differ Biomechanically From Nonresponders, Untreated Controls or Asymptomatic Controls?

Do Participants with Low Back Pain who Respond to Spinal Manipulative Therapy Differ Biomechanically From Nonresponders, Untreated Controls or Asymptomatic Controls?

The Chiro.Org Blog


SOURCE:   Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2015 (Sep 1); 40 (17): 1329–1337

Arnold Y. L. Wong, PT, MPhil, PhD,
Eric C. Parent, PT, PhD,
Sukhvinder S. Dhillon, MB, ChB, CCST,
Narasimha Prasad, PhD,
and Gregory N. Kawchuk, DC, PhD

Department of Physical Therapy,
University of Alberta,
Alberta, Canada


STUDY DESIGN:   Nonrandomized controlled study.

OBJECTIVE:   To determine whether patients with low back pain (LBP) who respond to spinal manipulative therapy (SMT) differ biomechanically from nonresponders, untreated controls or asymptomatic controls.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA:   Some but not all patients with LBP report improvement in function after SMT. When compared with nonresponders, studies suggest that SMT responders demonstrate significant changes in spinal stiffness, muscle contraction, and disc diffusion. Unfortunately, the significance of these observations remains uncertain given methodological differences between studies including a lack of controls.

METHODS:   Participants with LBP and asymptomatic controls attended 3 sessions for 7 days. On sessions 1 and 2, participants with LBP received SMT (+LBP/+SMT, n = 32) whereas asymptomatic controls did not (-LBP/-SMT, n = 57). In these sessions, spinal stiffness and multifidus thickness ratios were obtained before and after SMT and on day 7. Apparent diffusion coefficients from lumbar discs were obtained from +LBP/+SMT participants before and after SMT on session 1 and from an LBP control group that did not receive SMT (+LBP/-SMT, n = 16). +LBP/+SMT participants were dichotomized as responders/nonresponders on the basis of self-reported disability on day 7. A repeated measures analysis of covariance was used to compare apparent diffusion coefficients among responders, nonresponders, and +LBP/-SMT subjects, as well as spinal stiffness or multifidus thickness ratio among responders, nonresponders, and -LBP/-SMT subjects.

RESULTS:   After the first SMT, SMT responders displayed statistically significant decreases in spinal stiffness and increases in multifidus thickness ratio sustained for more than 7 days; these findings were not observed in other groups. Similarly, only SMT responders displayed significant post-SMT improvement in apparent diffusion coefficients.

There are more articles like this @ our:

Clinical Prediction Rule and the:

Low Back Pain and Chiropractic Page

Continue reading Do Participants with Low Back Pain who Respond to Spinal Manipulative Therapy Differ Biomechanically From Nonresponders, Untreated Controls or Asymptomatic Controls?

Effectiveness of Manual Therapy for Chronic Tension-type Headache

Effectiveness of Manual Therapy for Chronic Tension-type Headache: A Pragmatic, Randomised, Clinical Trial

The Chiro.Org Blog


SOURCE:   Cephalalgia. 2011 (Jan); 31 (2): 133–143

Rene F Castien, Danielle AWM van der Windt,
Anneke Grooten and Joost Dekker

Healthcare Centre Haarlemmermeer,
The Netherlands.


OBJECTIVE:   To evaluate the effectiveness of manual therapy (MT) in participants with chronic tension-type headache (CTTH).

SUBJECTS AND METHODS:   We conducted a multicentre, pragmatic, randomised, clinical trial with partly blinded outcome assessment. Eighty-two participants with CTTH were randomly assigned to MT or to usual care by the general practitioner (GP). Primary outcome measures were frequency of headache and use of medication. Secondary outcome measures were severity of headache, disability and cervical function.

RESULTS:   After 8 weeks (n = 80) and 26 weeks (n = 75), a significantly larger reduction of headache frequency was found for the MT group (mean difference at 8 weeks, -6.4 days; 95% CI -8.3 to -4.5; effect size, 1.6). Disability and cervical function showed significant differences in favour of the MT group at 8 weeks but were not significantly different at 26 weeks.

There are more articles like this @ our:

Headache and Chiropractic Page

Continue reading Effectiveness of Manual Therapy for Chronic Tension-type Headache