Support Chiropractic Research!

A Survey of American Chiropractic Association Members’ Experiences

By |April 24, 2018|Integrative Care|

A Survey of American Chiropractic Association Members’ Experiences, Attitudes, and Perceptions of Practice in Integrated Health Care Settings

The Chiro.Org Blog

SOURCE:   J Chiropractic Medicine 2015 (Dec); 14 (4): 227–239

Leo J. Bronston, DC, Lauren E. Austin-McClellan, DC, MS, Anthony J. Lisi, DC, Kevin C. Donovan, DC, and Walter W. Engle, DC

University of Bridgeport College of Chiropractic,
Bridgeport, CT;
Staff Chiropractor,
VA Connecticut Healthcare System,
West Haven, CT.

OBJECTIVE:   The purpose of this study is to examine the self-report of experiences, attitudes, and perceived educational needs of American Chiropractic Association members regarding practice in integrated health care settings.

METHODS:   This was a descriptive observational study of the American Chiropractic Association members. Participants completed an electronic survey reporting their current participation and interest in chiropractic integrated practice.

RESULTS:   The survey was completed in 2011 by 1142 respondents, for a response rate of 11.8%. The majority of respondents (82.9%) did not currently practice in an integrated setting, whereas 17.1% did. Those practicing in various integrated medical settings reported delivering a range of diagnostic, therapeutic, and case management services. Participation in administrative and scholarly activities was less common. Respondents not practicing in integrated settings reported being interested in delivering a very similar array of clinical services. Doctors of chiropractic practicing in hospital or outpatient medical facilities reported frequent engagement in interprofessional collaboration. Both nonintegrated and integrated respondents reported very similar educational interests on a range of clinical topics.

There are more articles like this @ our:

Integrated Health Care and Chiropractic Page


Integration of Doctors of Chiropractic Into Private Sector Health Care

By |April 13, 2018|Integrative Care|

Integration of Doctors of Chiropractic Into Private Sector Health Care Facilities in the United States: A Descriptive Survey

The Chiro.Org Blog

SOURCE:   J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 2018 (Feb); 41 (2): 149–155

Stacie A. Salsbury, PhD, RN, Christine M. Goertz, DC, PhD, Elissa J. Twist, DC, MS, Anthony J. Lisi, DC

Palmer Center for Chiropractic Research,
Palmer College of Chiropractic,
Davenport, Iowa.

OBJECTIVE:   The purpose of this study was to describe the demographic, facility, and practice characteristics of doctors of chiropractic (DCs) working in private sector health care settings in the United States.

METHODS:   We conducted an online, cross-sectional survey using a purposive sample of DCs (n = 50) working in integrated health care facilities. The 36-item survey collected demographic, facility, chiropractic, and interdisciplinary practice characteristics, which were analyzed with descriptive statistics.

RESULTS:   The response rate was 76% (n = 38). Most respondents were men and mid-career professionals with a mean 21 years of experience in chiropractic. Doctors of chiropractic reported working in hospitals (40%), multispecialty offices (21%), ambulatory clinics (16%), or other (21%) health care settings. Most (68%) were employees and received salary compensation (59%). The median number of DCs per setting was 2 (range 1–8). Most DCs used the same health record as medical staff and worked in the same clinical setting. More than 60% reported co-management of patients with medical professionals. Integrated DCs most often received and made referrals to primary care, physical medicine, pain medicine, orthopedics, and physical or occupational therapy. Although in many facilities the DCs were exclusive providers of spinal manipulation (43%), in most, manipulative therapies also were delivered by physical therapists and osteopathic or medical physicians. Informal face-to-face consultations and shared health records were the most common communication methods.

There are more articles like this @ our:

Integrated Health Care and Chiropractic Page


Conservative Spine Care: Opportunities to Improve the Quality

By |February 21, 2018|Integrative Care|

Conservative Spine Care: Opportunities to Improve the Quality and Value of Care

The Chiro.Org Blog

SOURCE:   Popul Health Manag. 2013 (Dec); 16 (6): 390–396

Thomas M. Kosloff, DC, David Elton, DC, Stephanie A. Shulman, DVM, MPH, Janice L. Clarke, RN, Alexis Skoufalos, EdD, and Amanda Solis, MS

Physical Health, Optum Health,
Kingston, New York.

Low back pain (LBP) has received considerable attention from researchers and health care systems because of its substantial personal, social, work-related, and economic consequences. A narrative review was conducted summarizing data about the epidemiology, care seeking, and utilization patterns for LBP in the adult US population. Recommendations from a consensus of clinical practice guidelines were compared to findings about the current state of clinical practice for LBP. The impact of the first provider consulted on the quality and value of care was analyzed longitudinally across the continuum of episodes of care. The review concludes with a description of recently published evidence that has demonstrated that favorable health and economic outcomes can be achieved by incorporating evidence-informed decision criteria and guidance about entry into conservative low back care pathways.

From the FULL TEXT Article:


The united states has the most expensive and complex health care system in the world, [1] yet the magnitude of funds spent on the system has failed to provide commensurate benefits in terms of quality, access, and cost performance. [2]

There are more articles like this @ our:

Integrated Health Care and Chiropractic Page and the:

Chiropractors as the Spinal Health Care Experts Page


My Rotation Through a VA Pain Medicine Clinic

By |January 31, 2018|Integrative Care|

My Rotation Through a VA Pain Medicine Clinic

The Chiro.Org Blog

SOURCE:   ACA News ~ January 29, 2018

By Stephanie Halloran, DC

Part of a series on the chiropractic residency program in the VA health care system

Some of the most valuable knowledge you gain in the Veterans Affairs (VA) chiropractic residency program comes from rotating in other specialties. Within the VA Connecticut Healthcare System, I rotate at both the West Haven and Newington locations. Thus far, I have spent time in rheumatology, physiatry, women’s clinic (primary care), neurology, pain medicine and the interventional pain clinic. Although each rotation has contributed greatly to my clinical acumen, this post will primarily focus on pain medicine.

Pain medicine is a medical subspecialty generally comprised of anesthesiologists, physiatrists or neurologists who have completed an additional one-year post-residency fellowship. As the name implies, these specialists manage overall pain with a goal of improving quality of life for patients. In the private sector, this is done through a combination of medication and interventional procedures, while in the VA the focus is primarily on the latter. This is due to the VA system allocating the majority of medication management to primary care physicians. That’s not to say a VA pain physician will not provide suggestions for medication management when indicated, but they will not prescribe or manage this medication.

Within the VA system, pain management generally manages spinal conditions such as stenosis, non-surgical disc herniation, musculoskeletal trigger points, symptomatic spondylosis and unspecified radicular pain with absence of progressive neurological deficits. Sound familiar? Essentially, this department treats very similar conditions as chiropractors treat but with interventional procedures.

If you are like me at the beginning of my residency, you are currently asking, or have already Googled, what interventional procedures are. Interventional procedures include medial branch block, radiofrequency ablation, epidural steroid injection, sacroiliac (SI) joint corticosteroid injection and musculoskeletal trigger point corticosteroid injection. Intervention selection is determined by identifying the most likely pain generator and presence or absence of radicular symptoms. Below I have broken down each procedure into axial and radicular categories and provided a brief explanation of the goal.

Axial pain: symptomatic spondylosis, SI joint arthritis/dysfunction


Perspectives of Older Adults on Co-management of Low Back

By |January 26, 2018|Integrative Care|

Perspectives of Older Adults on Co-management of Low Back Pain by Doctors of Chiropractic and Family Medicine Physicians: A Focus Group Study

The Chiro.Org Blog

SOURCE:   BMC Complement Altern Med. 2013 (Sep 16); 13: 225

Kevin J Lyons, Stacie A Salsbury, Maria A Hondras, Mark E Jones, Andrew A Andresen and Christine M Goertz

Palmer Center for Chiropractic Research,
Palmer College of Chiropractic,
Davenport, IA, USA.

BACKGROUND:   While older adults may seek care for low back pain (LBP) from both medical doctors (MDs) and doctors of chiropractic (DCs), co-management between these providers is uncommon. The purposes of this study were to describe the preferences of older adults for LBP co-management by MDs and DCs and to identify their concerns for receiving care under such a treatment model.

METHODS:   We conducted 10 focus groups with 48 older adults who received LBP care in the past year. Interviews explored participants’ care seeking experiences, co-management preferences, and perceived challenges to successful implementation of a MD–DC co-management model. We analyzed the qualitative data using thematic content analysis.

RESULTS:   Older adults considered LBP co-management by MDs and DCs a positive approach as the professions have complementary strengths. Participants wanted providers who worked in a co-management model to talk openly and honestly about LBP, offer clear and consistent recommendations about treatment, and provide individualized care. Facilitators of MD–DC co-management included collegial relationships between providers, arrangements between doctors to support interdisciplinary referral, computer systems that allowed exchange of health information between clinics, and practice settings where providers worked in one location. Perceived barriers to the co-management of LBP included the financial costs associated with receiving care from multiple providers concurrently, duplication of tests or imaging, scheduling and transportation problems, and potential side effects of medication and chiropractic care. A few participants expressed concern that some providers would not support a patient-preferred co-managed care model.

There are more articles like this @ our:

Senior Care Page and the:

Low Back Pain Page and the:

Integrated Health Care Page


A Model of Integrative Care for Low-back Pain

By |January 23, 2018|Integrative Care|

A Model of Integrative Care for Low-back Pain

The Chiro.Org Blog

SOURCE:   J Altern Complement Med. 2012 (Apr); 18 (4): 354–362

David M. Eisenberg, MD, Julie E. Buring, ScD, Andrea L. Hrbek, Roger B. Davis, ScD, Maureen T. Connelly, MD, Daniel C. Cherkin, PhD, Donald B. Levy, MD, Mark Cunningham, Bonnie O’Connor, PhD, and Diana E. Post, MD

Division of General Medicine and Primary Care,
Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center,
Harvard Medical School,
Boston, MA 02115, USA.

OBJECTIVES:   While previous studies focused on the effectiveness of individual complementary and alternative medical (CAM) therapies, the value of providing patients access to an integrated program involving multiple CAM and conventional therapies remains unknown. The objective of this study is to explore the feasibility and effects of a model of multidisciplinary integrative care for subacute low-back pain (LBP) in an academic teaching hospital.

DESIGN:   This was a pilot randomized trial comparing an individualized program of integrative care (IC) plus usual care to usual care (UC) alone for adults with LBP.

SUBJECTS:   Twenty (20) individuals with LPB of 3-12 weeks’ duration were recruited from an occupational health clinic and community health center.

INTERVENTIONS:   Participants were randomized to 12 weeks of individualized IC plus usual care versus UC alone. IC was provided by a trained multidisciplinary team offering CAM therapies and conventional medical care.

OUTCOME MEASURES:   The outcome measures were symptoms (pain, bothersomeness), functional status (Roland-Morris score), SF-12, worry, and difficulty performing three self-selected activities.

RESULTS:   Over 12 weeks, participants in the IC group had a median of 12.0 visits (range 5-25). IC participants experienced significantly greater improvements at 12 weeks than those receiving UC alone in symptom bothersomeness (p=0.02) and pain (p=0.005), and showed greater improvement in functional status (p=0.08). Rates of improvement were greater for patients in IC than UC in functional status (p=0.02), bothersomeness (p=0.002), and pain scores (p=0.001). Secondary outcomes of self-selected most challenging activity, worry, and the SF-12 also showed improvement in the IC group at 12 weeks. These differences persisted at 26 weeks, but were no longer statistically significant.

There are more articles like this @ our:

Integrated Health Care Page and the:

Low Back Pain Page