Chiro.org - Chiropractic Resource Organization.     Support Chiropractic Research!

Guidelines

Home/Guidelines

Spinal Manipulative Therapy and Other Conservative Treatments for Low Back Pain

By |April 12, 2018|Guidelines, Low Back Pain|

Spinal Manipulative Therapy and Other Conservative Treatments for Low Back Pain:

A Guideline From the Canadian Chiropractic Guideline Initiative

The Chiro.Org Blog


SOURCE:   J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 2018 (Mar 29) [Epub]

André E. Bussières, DC, FCCS(C), PhD, Gregory Stewart, DC, Fadi Al-Zoubi, PT, MSc, Philip Decina, DC, Martin Descarreaux, DC, PhD, Danielle Haskett, BSc, Cesar Hincapié, DC, PhD, Isabelle Pagé, DC, MSc, Steven Passmore, DC, PhD, John Srbely, DC, PhD, Maja Stupar, DC, PhD, Joel Weisberg, DC, Joseph Ornelas, DC, PhD

School of Physical and Occupational Therapy,
Faculty of Medicine, McGill University,
Montreal, Québec, Canada


OBJECTIVE: &nbsp The objective of this study was to develop a clinical practice guideline on the management of acute and chronic low back pain (LBP) in adults. The aim was to develop a guideline to provide best practice recommendations on the initial assessment and monitoring of people with low back pain and address the use of spinal manipulation therapy (SMT) compared with other commonly used conservative treatments.

METHODS: &nbsp The topic areas were chosen based on an Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality comparative effectiveness review, specific to spinal manipulation as a nonpharmacological intervention. The panel updated the search strategies in Medline. We assessed admissible systematic reviews and randomized controlled trials for each question using A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews and Cochrane Back Review Group criteria. Evidence profiles were used to summarize judgments of the evidence quality and link recommendations to the supporting evidence. Using the Evidence to Decision Framework, the guideline panel determined the certainty of evidence and strength of the recommendations. Consensus was achieved using a modified Delphi technique. The guideline was peer reviewed by an 8-member multidisciplinary external committee.

RESULTS: &nbsp For patients with acute (0-3 months) back pain, we suggest offering advice (posture, staying active), reassurance, education and self-management strategies in addition to SMT, usual medical care when deemed beneficial, or a combination of SMT and usual medical care to improve pain and disability. For patients with chronic (>3 months) back pain, we suggest offering advice and education, SMT or SMT as part of a multimodal therapy (exercise, myofascial therapy or usual medical care when deemed beneficial). For patients with chronic back-related leg pain, we suggest offering advice and education along with SMT and home exercise (positioning and stabilization exercises).

There are more articles like this @ our:

Low Back Pain Guidelines Page

(more…)

National Clinical Guidelines for Non-surgical Treatment of Patients with Recent Onset Low Back Pain or Lumbar Radiculopathy

By |July 27, 2017|Guidelines, Low Back Pain|

National Clinical Guidelines for Non-surgical Treatment of Patients with Recent Onset Low Back Pain or Lumbar Radiculopathy

The Chiro.Org Blog


SOURCE:   Eur Spine J. 2017 (Apr 20) [Epub] 1451–1460

Mette Jensen Stochkendahl, Per Kjaer,
Jan Hartvigsen, Alice Kongsted1,
Jens Aaboe, Margrethe Andersen, et al.

Department of Sports Science and Clinical Biomechanics,
University of Southern Denmark,
Campusvej 55, 5230, Odense M, Denmark.


PURPOSE:   To summarise recommendations about 20 non-surgical interventions for recent onset (<12 weeks) non-specific low back pain (LBP) and lumbar radiculopathy (LR) based on two guidelines from the Danish Health Authority.

METHODS:   Two multidisciplinary working groups formulated recommendations based on the GRADE approach.

RESULTS:   Sixteen recommendations were based on evidence, and four on consensus. Management of LBP and LR should include information about prognosis, warning signs, and advise to remain active. If treatment is needed, the guidelines suggest using patient education, different types of supervised exercise, and manual therapy. The guidelines recommend against acupuncture, routine use of imaging, targeted treatment, extraforaminal glucocorticoid injection, paracetamol, NSAIDs, and opioids.

There are more articles like this @ our:

Low Back Pain and Chiropractic Page and the:

Low Back Pain Guidelines Page

(more…)

Knowledge Transfer within the Canadian Chiropractic Community. Part 2: Narrowing the Evidence-Practice Gap

By |April 10, 2017|Chiropractic Care, Evidence-based Practice, Guidelines|

Knowledge Transfer within the Canadian Chiropractic Community. Part 2: Narrowing the Evidence-Practice Gap

The Chiro.Org Blog


SOURCE:   J Can Chiropr Assoc. 2014 (Sep); 58 (3): 206–214

Greg Kawchuk, DC, MSc, PhD, Genevieve Newton, DC, PhD,
John Srbely, DC, PhD, Steven Passmore, Hons BKin, DC, PhD,
André Bussières, DC, FCCS (C), Jason W. Busse, DC, PhD,
and Paul Bruno, BHK, DC, PhD

Associate Professor and Canada Research Chair
in Spinal Function,
Faculty of Rehabilitation Medicine,
University of Alberta


Introduction

This two-part commentary aims to provide clinicians with a basic understanding of knowledge translation (KT), a term that is often used interchangeably with phrases such as knowledge transfer, translational research, knowledge mobilization, and knowledge exchange. [1] Knowledge translation, also known as the science of implementation, is increasingly recognized as a critical element in improving healthcare delivery and aligning the use of research knowledge with clinical practice. [2] The focus of our commentary relates to how these KT processes link with evidence-based chiropractic care.

There are more articles like this @ our:

The Guidelines Section and the:

The Evidence-based Practice Page

(more…)

Knowledge Transfer within the Canadian Chiropractic Community. Part 1: Understanding Evidence-Practice Gaps

By |April 9, 2017|Guidelines, Knowledge Transfer|

Knowledge Transfer within the Canadian Chiropractic Community. Part 1: Understanding Evidence-Practice Gaps

The Chiro.Org Blog


SOURCE:   J Can Chiropr Assoc. 2013 (Jun); 57 (2): 111–115

Greg Kawchuk, DC, PhD, Paul Bruno, BHK, DC, PhD,
Jason W. Busse, DC, PhD, André Bussières, DC, FCCS(C), PhD,
Mark Erwin, DC, PhD, Steven Passmore, Hons BKin, DC, PhD,
and John Srbely, DC, PhD

Associate Professor and Canada Research Chair
in Spinal Function,
Faculty of Rehabilitation Medicine,
University of Alberta


Overview

This two-part commentary aims to provide a basic understanding of knowledge translation (KT), how KT is currently integrated in the chiropractic community and our view of how to improve KT in our profession. Part 1 presents an overview of KT and discusses some of the common barriers to successful KT within the chiropractic profession. Part 2 will suggest strategies to mitigate these barriers and reduce the evidence-practice gap for both the profession at large and for practicing clinicians.


Introduction

New knowledge is created at such a rapid pace that health care professionals find it difficult, if not impossible, to keep up to date. In a single day alone, 75 clinical trials and 11 systematic reviews are published. [1] As a result, it is incredibly difficult to keep up to date with the literature in order to implement new knowledge that may optimize patient care, increase benefits, or reduce harm. In an effort to promote evidence-based practice, many researchers and funding agencies are now focusing on processes to deliver emerging evidence successfully to clinicians and other stakeholders; this process has been termed KT.

      What is KT?

There are more articles like this @ our:

The Guidelines Section and the:

The Evidence-based Practice Page

(more…)

Noninvasive Treatments for Acute, Subacute, and Chronic Low Back Pain

By |February 15, 2017|Guidelines, Low Back Pain|

Noninvasive Treatments for Acute, Subacute, and Chronic Low Back Pain: A Clinical Practice Guideline From the American College of Physicians

The Chiro.Org Blog


SOURCE:   Ann Intern Med. 2017 (Feb 14) [Epub] ~ FULL TEXT

Amir Qaseem, MD, PhD, MHA; Timothy J. Wilt, MD, MPH;
Robert M. McLean, MD; Mary Ann Forciea, MD;
for the Clinical Guidelines Committee of the American College of Physicians (*)

From the American College of Physicians
and Penn Health System,
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania;
Minneapolis Veterans Affairs Medical Center,
Minneapolis, Minnesota; and
Yale School of Medicine,
New Haven, Connecticut.


The American College of Physicians (ACP) released updated guidelines this week that recommend the use of noninvasive, non-drug treatments for low back pain before resorting to drug therapies, which were found to have limited benefits. One of the non-drug options cited by ACP is spinal manipulation.

Chiropractors, who diagnose and treat musculoskeletal disorders, are experts in spinal manipulation.

On May 1, 2017, the New York Times published an editorial by Aaron E. Carroll, M.D., that mentions the new guideline in a generally positive light. The article appeared in a major, mainstream publication read by millions of people. “Spinal manipulation — along with other less traditional therapies like heat, meditation and acupuncture — seems to be as effective as many other more medical therapies we prescribe, and as safe, if not safer,” he wrote.

Talking points on new ACP guideline:

  • The chiropractic profession has advocated for decades that conservative care choices such as chiropractic be the first line of treatment for low-back pain. Now, with this new guideline, the medical profession is recognizing the benefits of conservative care for this common problem.
  • Thanks to this guideline, it’s possible more medical doctors will choose to refer their patients with low-back pain to chiropractors.
  • The ACP guideline was adopted by the American Chiropractic Association, which also adopted the Clinical Compass guidelines on chiropractic for LBP at its HOD meeting in March.

DESCRIPTION: &nbsp The American College of Physicians (ACP) developed this guideline to present the evidence and provide clinical recommendations on noninvasive treatment of low back pain.

METHODS: &nbsp Using the ACP grading system, the committee based these recommendations on a systematic review of randomized, controlled trials and systematic reviews published through April 2015 on noninvasive pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic treatments for low back pain. Updated searches were performed through November 2016. Clinical outcomes evaluated included reduction or elimination of low back pain, improvement in back-specific and overall function, improvement in health-related quality of life, reduction in work disability and return to work, global improvement, number of back pain episodes or time between episodes, patient satisfaction, and adverse effects.

TARGET AUDIENCE AND PATIENT POPULATION: &nbsp The target audience for this guideline includes all clinicians, and the target patient population includes adults with acute, subacute, or chronic low back pain.

RECOMMENDATION 1:   Given that most patients with acute or subacute low back pain improve over time regardless of treatment, clinicians and patients should select nonpharmacologic treatment with superficial heat (moderate-quality evidence), massage, acupuncture, or spinal manipulation (low-quality evidence). If pharmacologic treatment is desired, clinicians and patients should select nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs or skeletal muscle relaxants (moderate-quality evidence). (Grade: strong recommendation).

WARNING:   Before following Recommendation #1,
please review the

Contra-indications to NSAIDS use

.

There are more articles like this @ our:

Guidelines Section

(more…)

GRADE: An Emerging Consensus on Rating Quality of Evidence and Strength of Recommendations

By |January 23, 2017|Guidelines|

GRADE: An Emerging Consensus on Rating Quality of Evidence and Strength of Recommendations

The Chiro.Org Blog


Brit Med J 2008 (Apr 26); 336 (7650): 924–926 ~ FULL TEXT

Gordon H Guyatt, Andrew D Oxman, Gunn E Vist,
Regina Kunz, Yngve Falck-Ytter

G H Guyatt
CLARITY Research Group,
Department of Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics,
Room 2C12, 1200 Main Street,
West Hamilton, ON, Canada L8N 3Z5


Guidelines are inconsistent in how they rate the quality of evidence and the strength of recommendations. This article explores the advantages of the GRADE system, which is increasingly being adopted by organisations worldwide.


From the FULL TEXT Article

Summary points

  • Failure to consider the quality of evidence can lead to misguided recommendations; hormone replacement therapy for post-menopausal women provides an instructive example
  • High quality evidence that an intervention’s desirable effects are clearly greater than its undesirable effects, or are clearly not, warrants a strong recommendation
  • Uncertainty about the trade-offs (because of low quality evidence or because the desirable and undesirable effects are closely balanced) warrants a weak recommendation
  • Guidelines should inform clinicians what the quality of the underlying evidence is and whether recommendations are strong or weak
  • The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE ) approach provides a system for rating quality of evidence and strength of recommendations that is explicit, comprehensive, transparent, and pragmatic and is increasingly being adopted by organisations worldwide

Introduction:

Guideline developers around the world are inconsistent in how they rate quality of evidence and grade strength of recommendations. As a result, guideline users face challenges in understanding the messages that grading systems try to communicate. Since 2006 the BMJ has requested in its “Instructions to Authors” on bmj.com that authors should preferably use the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system for grading evidence when submitting a clinical guidelines article. What was behind this decision?

There are more articles like this @ our:

Practice Guidelines Page

(more…)