Support Chiropractic Research!

Frank M. Painter

About Frank M. Painter

I was introduced to Chiro.Org in early 1996, where my friend Joe Garolis helped me learn HTML, the "mark-up language" for websites. We have been fortunate that journals like JMPT have given us permission to reproduce some early important articles in Full-Text format. Maintaining the Org website has been, and remains, my favorite hobby.

Report of the NIH Task Force on Research Standards for Chronic Low Back Pain

By |September 27, 2015|Chiropractic Research, Low Back Pain|

Report of the NIH Task Force on Research Standards for Chronic Low Back Pain

The Chiro.Org Blog


SOURCE:   Int J Ther Massage Bodywork. 2015 (Sep 1); 8 (3): 16–33 ~ FULL TEXT


Richard A. Deyo, MD, MPH, Samuel F. Dworkin, DDS, PhD,
Dagmar Amtmann, PhD, Gunnar Andersson, MD, PhD,
David Borenstein, MD, Eugene Carragee, MD,
John Carrino, MD, MPH, Roger Chou, MD, Karon Cook, PhD,
Anthony DeLitto, PT, PhD, Christine Goertz, DC, PhD,
Partap Khalsa, DC, PhD, John Loeser, MD, Sean Mackey, MD, PhD,
James Panagis, MD, James Rainville, MD, Tor Tosteson, ScD,
Dennis Turk, PhD, Michael Von Korff, ScD, and Debra K. Weiner, MD

Oregon Health and Sciences University,
Portland, OR.


Despite rapidly increasing intervention, functional disability due to chronic low back pain (cLBP) has increased in recent decades. We often cannot identify mechanisms to explain the major negative impact cLBP has on patients’ lives. Such cLBP is often termed non-specific, and may be due to multiple biologic and behavioral etiologies. Researchers use varied inclusion criteria, definitions, baseline assessments, and outcome measures, which impede comparisons and consensus. The NIH Pain Consortium therefore charged a Research Task Force (RTF) to draft standards for research on cLBP. The resulting multidisciplinary panel recommended using 2 questions to define cLBP; classifying cLBP by its impact (defined by pain intensity, pain interference, and physical function); use of a minimal data set to describe research participants (drawing heavily on the PROMIS methodology); reporting “responder analyses” in addition to mean outcome scores; and suggestions for future research and dissemination. The Pain Consortium has approved the recommendations, which investigators should incorporate into NIH grant proposals. The RTF believes these recommendations will advance the field, help to resolve controversies, and facilitate future research addressing the genomic, neurologic, and other mechanistic substrates of chronic low back pain. We expect the RTF recommendations will become a dynamic document, and undergo continual improvement.

KEYWORDS: &nbsp NIH Task Force; chronic low back pain; low back pain; minimum dataset; research standards


 

From the FULL TEXT Article:

Introduction

The Institute of Medicine recently estimated that chronic pain affects about 100 million adults in the United States, with an estimated annual cost of $635 billion, including direct medical expenditures and loss of work productivity. [3] Activity-limiting low back pain (LBP), in particular, has a world-wide lifetime prevalence of about 39% and a similar annual prevalence of 38%. [61] The majority of people having LBP experience recurrent episodes. [62] The use of all interventions for treating chronic LBP (cLBP) increased from 1995–2010, including surgery, pharmacological, and non-pharmacological approaches. Despite increased utilization, however, the prevalence of symptoms and expenditures has increased. [37, 70, 91]

There are more articles like this @ our:

Low Back Pain and Chiropractic Page

(more…)

The 120th Anniversary of Chiropractic

By |September 18, 2015|Announcement|

The 120th Anniversary of Chiropractic

The Chiro.Org Blog


SOURCE:   Palmer College of Chiropractic


Happy Founder’s Day!

Most likely, this is the very first graduating class of Chiropractors in Davenport, Iowa.

Click on the graphic to see a larger version.


 

This year marks 120 years since chiropractic was founded.

Traditionally, Founder’s Day is celebrated on Sept. 18, the date which is on or near the anniversary of the first chiropractic adjustment by D.D. Palmer in Davenport, Iowa, in 1895.

Founder’s Day is the perfect opportunity to share chiropractic with the world!

Post information about it on your website, Facebook page and profile, Twitter, Instagram and anywhere else.

Need some content? Check out the results of the:

Gallup-Palmer report.

Thanks to Palmer College for access to this material!

How to Proceed When Evidence-based Practice Is Required But Very Little Evidence Available?

By |September 3, 2015|Evidence-based Practice|

How to Proceed When Evidence-based Practice Is Required But Very Little Evidence Available?

The Chiro.Org Blog


SOURCE:   Chiropractic & Manual Therapies 2013 (Jul 10); 21 (1): 24 ~ FULL TEXT


Charlotte Leboeuf-Yde, Olivier Lanlo and Bruce F Walker

The Spine Research Centre,
Hospital Lillebaelt, and Institute for Regional Health Research,
University of Southern Denmark,
Middelfart, Denmark.
clyde@health.sdu.dk


BACKGROUND:   All clinicians of today know that scientific evidence is the base on which clinical practice should rest. However, this is not always easy, in particular in those disciplines, where the evidence is scarce. Although the last decades have brought an impressive production of research that is of interest to chiropractors, there are still many areas such as diagnosis, prognosis, choice of treatment, and management that have not been subjected to extensive scrutiny.

DISCUSSION:   In this paper we argue that a simple system consisting of three questions will help clinicians deal with some of the complexities of clinical practice, in particular what to do when clear clinical evidence is lacking. Question 1 asks: are there objectively tested facts to support the concept? Question 2: are the concepts that form the basis for this clinical act or decision based on scientifically acceptable concepts? And question three; is the concept based on long-term and widely accepted experience? This method that we call the “Traffic Light System” can be applied to most clinical processes.

There are more articles like this @ our:

The Evidence-based Practice Page

(more…)

Do Participants With Low Back Pain Who Respond to Spinal Manipulative Therapy Differ Biomechanically?

By |September 1, 2015|Chiropractic Care, Low Back Pain, Spinal Manipulation|

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 2015 (Sep 1);   40 (17):   1329–1337 ~ FULL TEXT


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

Department of Rehabilitation Sciences,
The Hong Kong Polytechnic University,
Kowloon, Hong Kong

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


FROM:  University of Alberta ~ 8-31-2015

Researchers at the University of Alberta have found that spinal manipulation—applying force to move joints to treat pain, a technique most often used by chiropractors and physical therapists — does indeed have immediate benefits for some patients with low-back pain but does not work for others with low-back pain. And though on the surface this latest conflict might appear to muddy the waters further, the results point to the complexity of low-back pain and the need to treat patients differently, says lead author Greg Kawchuk.“This study shows that, just like some people respond differently to a specific medication, there are different groups of people who respond differently to spinal manipulation.”

In a non-randomized control study, individuals with low-back pain received spinal manipulation during two treatment sessions that spanned a week. Participants reported their pain levels and disability levels after spinal manipulation, and researchers used ultrasound, MRI and other diagnostics to measure changes in each participant’s back, including muscle activity, properties within the intervertebral discs, and spinal stiffness.

A control group of participants with low-back pain underwent similar clinical examinations but did not receive spinal manipulation. A third group — those who did not have low-back pain symptoms — were also evaluated.

The people who responded to spinal manipulation reported less pain right away and showed improvement in back muscle thickness, disc diffusion and spinal stiffness. Those changes were great enough to exceed or equal the measures in the control groups and stayed that way for the week of treatment, the research team found.
A patient receives spinal manipulation treatment.

Kawchuk, who practised as a chiropractor before going on to obtain his PhD in biomechanics and bioengineering, said the results do not advocate one way or another for spinal manipulation but help explain why there has been so much conflicting data about its merits.

“Clearly there are some people with a specific type of back pain who are responding to this treatment and there are some people with another type of back pain who do not. But if you don’t know that and you mix those two groups together, you get an artificial average that doesn’t mean anything,” Kawchuk explained.

The research team is still fine-tuning how to distinguish who is a responder or non-responder before spinal manipulation is given; however, this study shows it can be used to identify an effective treatment course.

“Spinal manipulation acts so rapidly in responders that it could be used as a screening tool to help get the right treatment to the right patient at the right time.”

The study did not investigate the long-term effects of spinal manipulation, but this is next on the list for the researchers.

 

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.

There are more articles like this @ our:

Low Back Pain and Chiropractic Page

(more…)

First-Contact Care With a Medical vs Chiropractic Provider

By |August 23, 2015|Musculoskeletal Complaints, Patient Satisfaction|

First-Contact Care With a Medical vs Chiropractic Provider After Consultation With a Swiss Telemedicine Provider: Comparison of Outcomes, Patient Satisfaction, and Health Care Costs in Spinal, Hip, and Shoulder Pain Patients

The Chiro.Org Blog


SOURCE:   J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 2015 (Aug 15)]


Taco A.W. Houweling, DC, MRes, PhD,
Andrea V. Braga, MD, MBA,
Thomas Hausheer, DC, arco Vogelsang, DC,
Cynthia Peterson, RN, DC, MMedEd,
B. Kim Humphreys, DC, PhD

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


OBJECTIVE:   The purpose of this study was to identify differences in outcomes, patient satisfaction, and related health care costs in spinal, hip, and shoulder pain patients who initiated care with medical doctors (MDs) vs those who initiated care with doctors of chiropractic (DCs) in Switzerland.

METHODS:   A retrospective double cohort design was used. A self-administered questionnaire was completed by first-contact care spinal, hip, and shoulder pain patients who, 4 months previously, contacted a Swiss telemedicine provider regarding advice about their complaint. Related health care costs were determined in a subsample of patients by reviewing the claims database of a Swiss insurance provider.

RESULTS:   The study sample included 403 patients who had seen MDs and 316 patients who had seen DCs as initial health care providers for their complaint. Differences in patient sociodemographic characteristics were found in terms of age, pain location, and mode of onset. Patients initially consulting MDs had significantly less reduction in their numerical pain rating score (difference of 0.32) and were significantly less likely to be satisfied with the care received (odds ratio = 1.79) and the outcome of care (odds ratio = 1.52). No significant differences were found for Patient’s Global Impression of Change ratings. Mean costs per patient over 4 months were significantly lower in patients initially consulting DCs (difference of CHF 368; US $368).

There are more articles like this @ our:

Low Back Pain and Chiropractic Page

and our:

The Shoulder Girdle & Chiropractic Page

(more…)

Craniocervical Chiropractic Procedures – A Précis of Upper Cervical Chiropractic

By |August 9, 2015|Chiropractic Care, Upper Cervical Adjusting|

Craniocervical Chiropractic Procedures – A Précis of Upper Cervical Chiropractic

The Chiro.Org Blog


SOURCE:   J Can Chiropr Assoc 2015 (Jun);   59 (2):   173–192 ~ FULL TEXT


H. Charles Woodfield, III, BPhm, DC, Craig York, DC.
Roderic P. Rochester, DC, Scott Bales, DC,
Mychal Beebe, DC, Bryan Salminen, DC,
Jeffrey N. Scholten, DC .

Director of Research –
Upper Cervical Research Foundation,
Minneapolis, MN


Presented here is a narrative review of upper cervical procedures intended to facilitate understanding and to increase knowledge of upper cervical chiropractic care. Safety, efficacy, common misconceptions, and research are discussed, allowing practitioners, chiropractic students, and the general public to make informed decisions regarding utilization and referrals for this distinctive type of chiropractic care. Upper cervical techniques share the same theoretical paradigm in that the primary subluxation exists in the upper cervical spine. These procedures use similar assessments to determine if spinal intervention is necessary and successful once delivered. The major difference involves their use of either an articular or orthogonal radiograph analysis model when determining the presence of a misalignment. Adverse events following an upper cervical adjustment consist of mild symptomatic reactions of short-duration (< 24-hours). Due to a lack of quality and indexed references, information contained herein is limited by the significance of literature cited, which included non-indexed and/or non-peer reviewed sources.

KEYWORDS:   adverse events; atlas; cervical; chiropractic; chiropractic adjustment; craniocervical


 

From the Full-Text Article:

Introduction:

The indexed literature reports the existence of many upper cervical (UC) procedures. [1, 2] Presented here is a brief narrative review or narrative description of upper cervical techniques (UCT) with the intention of increasing knowledge and understanding regarding their effectiveness and utilization. Procedural similarities and differences between UCT are examined. As chiropractic goes the way of other healing professions through stratification into specialties, this characterization of upper cervical procedures can create appreciation and clarity both inside and outside the profession.

There are more articles like this @ our:

Chiropractic Technique Page

(more…)