| 
      List All News Items
 
  
 
 Sign
      up for FCER's The Week in Chiropractic--Now FREE
 
 |  |  | FCER
      Research Release
 
 VAD
      Following Cervical Manipulation: D.C. vs M.D. Experiences Affect Perception of Risk
 
 January
      13, 2003
  Contact:
      Robin R. Merrifield
 1304
      Perry Ave., Bremerton WA 98310
 Phone:
      800-343-0549 or 360-478-2716
 Fax:
      360-478-0834 E-Mail: FCERedit@aol.com
       
      
Des Moines, Iowa — Ask a Doctor of Chiropractic and a
      neurologist what a patient’s risk of stroke following cervical
      manipulation is and the answers given will likely differ greatly.
      Chiropractic estimates are at approximately 0.2 per million adjustments,
      whereas medical literature has the risk at about 1 per 500,000
      adjustments.
 In an effort to examine the role of bias in these
      estimations, Scott Haldeman, D.C., M.D., Ph.D., and Paul Carey, D.C.,
      Murray Townsend, D.C, and Costa Papadopoulos, MHA, CHE, studied the
      perceived incidence of vertebral artery dissection (VAD) from both the
      chiropractic and neurologist points of view.
 
 Examination of the database of the Canadian Chiropractic
      Protective Association (CCPA, which provides malpractice insurance for 85%
      of chiropractors in Canada) for the period 1988 to 1997 found 23 cases of
      VAD. Retrospective review of these cases and a survey of chiropractors
      suggests an estimated 134,466,765 cervical manipulations were performed
      during the 10-year period. Records from these reported VAD cases indicates
      that in a 30 year practice, only one in 48 chiropractors would be aware of
      a vascular incident following cervical manipulation. In contrast,
      examination of the records show that these 23 VAD patients saw a total of
      216 physicians, including 69 neurologists.
 
 The researchers concluded that "the difference in the
      number of chiropractors . . . and neurologists . . . in active practice
      and the fact that each patient who has a stroke following manipulation
      will likely be seen by only one chiropractor but by 3 or more neurologists
      partly explains the difference in experience and the perception of risk of
      these two professions. This selection or referral bias is important in
      shaping the clinical opinions of the various disciplines and distorts
      discussion on the true incidence of these complications of cervical
      manipulation."
 
 It is important to note that this study was not an attempt
      to define the risk of stroke following manipulation. Rather it is an
      examination of the differences in perception.
 
 The study was published in The Spine Journal,
      September 2002. Reprints of the full article may be requested from Paul
      Carey, D.C., at pfcarey@golden.net
      or fax a request to (519) 273-4161.
   
 Return to STROKE 
     |