Support Chiropractic Research!

Low Back Pain

Primary Care for Low Back Pain

By |March 29, 2020|Alternative Medicine, Low Back Pain, Usual Medical Care|

Primary Care for Low Back Pain: We Don’t Know the Half of It

The Chiro.Org Blog

SOURCE:   Pain. 2020 (Apr); 161 (4): 663–665

Peter Croft; Saurabb Sharma; Nadine E. Foster

Primary Care Centre Versus Arthritis,
School of Primary, Community and Social Care,
Keele University, Keele, United Kingdom.

Evidence-based medicine helps health care professionals and patients decide best care, drawing on research about effectiveness and safety of interventions. Systematic reviews summarise the evidence; guidelines report consensus between experts (including patients) on interpreting it for everyday practice. Although guideline recommendations are only one component of shared decisions that will vary patient-to-patient, the hoped-for outcome is health benefit for each individual. Guidelines also inform starker decisions by policymakers and health care leaders — for example, when to withdraw approval or funding for a poorly evidenced or harmful intervention. To assess whether all this research-driven activity is useful, 2 questions need answering: how well are guidelines followed in real-life practice and do patients benefit in the long-term?

In a new systematic review, Kamper et al. [9] tackle the first question in relation to first-contact care for patients with low back pain provided by family practice and emergency department physicians. (aka “usual medical care”) As the authors state, low back pain has major significance for the international pain community. It is the leading single cause of years lost to disability globally, [17] and there is good evidence for what constitutes best first-contact treatment. [6] The review selected best-quality studies of routine health care data to investigate whether first-contact physicians are putting back pain guidelines into practice (“usual care”).

There are more articles like this @ our:

MEDICARE Page and the:



Does Manual Therapy Affect Functional and Biomechanical

By |February 11, 2020|Low Back Pain|

Does Manual Therapy Affect Functional and Biomechanical Outcomes of a Sit-To-Stand Task in a Population with Low Back Pain? A Preliminary Analysis

The Chiro.Org Blog

SOURCE:   Chiropractic & Manual Therapies 2020 (Jan 24)

Giancarlo Carpino, Steven Tran, Stuart Currie, Brian Enebo, Bradley S. Davidson, and Samuel J. Howarth

Division of Research and Innovation,
Canadian Memorial Chiropractic College,
Toronto, ON M2H 3 J1 Canada

INTRODUCTION:   Manual therapy (MT) hypothetically affects discrepant neuromuscular control and movement observed in populations with low back pain (LBP). Previous studies have demonstrated the limited influence of MT on movement, predominately during range of motion (ROM) testing. It remains unclear if MT affects neuromuscular control in mobility-based activities of daily living (ADLs). The sit-to-stand (STS) task represents a commonly-performed ADL that is used in a variety of clinical settings to assess functional and biomechanical performance.

OBJECTIVE:   To determine whether MT affects functional performance and biomechanical performance during a STS task in a population with LBP.

METHODS:   Kinematic data were recorded from the pelvis and thorax of participants with LBP, using an optoelectronic motion capture system as they performed a STS task before and after MT from November 2011 to August 2014. MT for each participant consisted of two high-velocity low-amplitude spinal manipulations, as well as two grade IV mobilizations of the lumbar spine and pelvis targeted toward the third lumbar vertebra and sacroiliac joint in a side-lying position; the order of these treatments was randomized. Pelvis and thorax kinematic data were used to derive the time-varying lumbar angle in the sagittal plane for each STS trial.

There are more articles like this @ our:



Inappropriate Use of Skeletal Muscle Relaxants in Geriatric Patients

By |January 20, 2020|Low Back Pain, Muscle Relaxants|

Inappropriate Use of Skeletal Muscle Relaxants in Geriatric Patients

The Chiro.Org Blog

SOURCE:   U. S. Pharmacist 2020 (Jan 21); 45 (1): 25–29

Caressa Trueman, PharmD, RPh, Shana Castillo, PharmD, RPh
Karen K. O’Brien, BS Pharm, PharmD, RPh, Eric Hoie, PharmD, RPh

Creighton University School of Pharmacy and Health Professions
Omaha, Nebraska

Falls in geriatric patients cost the United States billions of dollars each year and contribute to morbidity and mortality in this population. Polypharmacy can significantly contribute to the fall risk, especially those medications that are on the Beers Criteria list. Skeletal muscle relaxants are on this list, and an increased risk of falls is associated with their use. These medications are inappropriately used as an alternative to conventional pain medications and can be as harmful as opioids in the geriatric population. Education of patients and prescribers is necessary in order to prevent inappropriate muscle-relaxant use and to lessen the risk of falls.

In the United States, an estimated 29 million falls occurred in 46 million people older than age 65 years in 2014, and 7 million of those falls resulted in injuries. [1] In 2015, estimated medical costs related to fatal and nonfatal falls totaled more than $49 billion. [2]

There are more articles like this @ our:

LOW BACK PAIN Page and the:



The Effect of Spinal Manipulation on Brain Neurometabolites

By |December 3, 2019|Low Back Pain, Neurology|

The Effect of Spinal Manipulation on Brain Neurometabolites in Chronic Nonspecific Low Back Pain Patients: A Randomized Clinical Trial

The Chiro.Org Blog

SOURCE:   Irish Journal of Medical Science 2019 (Nov 26) [Epub]

Daryoush Didehdar, Fahimeh Kamali, Amin Kordi Yoosefinejad, Mehrzad Lotfi

Department of Physical Therapy,
School of Rehabilitation Sciences,
Shiraz University of Medical Sciences,
Shiraz, Iran.

BACKGROUND:   In patients with chronic nonspecific low back pain (NCLBP), brain function changes due to the neuroplastic changes in different regions.

AIM:   The current study aimed to evaluate the brain metabolite changes after spinal manipulation, using proton magnetic resonance spectroscopy (1H-MRS).

METHODS:   In the current study, 25 patients with NCLBP aged 20-50 years were enrolled. Patients were randomly assigned to lumbopelvic manipulation or sham. Patients were evaluated before and 5 weeks after treatment by the Numerical Rating Scale (NRS), the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and 1H-MRS.

RESULTS:   After treatment, severity of pain and functional disability were significantly reduced in the treatment group vs. sham group (p < 0.05). After treatment, N-acetyl aspartate (NAA) in thalamus, insula, dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) regions, as well as choline (Cho) in the thalamus, insula, and somatosensory cortex (SSC) regions, had increased significantly in the treatment group compared with the sham group (p < 0.05). A significant increase was further observed in NAA in thalamus, anterior cingulate cortex (ACC), and SCC regions along with Cho metabolite in thalamus and SCC regions after treatment in the treatment group compared with the baseline measures (p < 0.05).

There are more articles like this @ our:

LOW BACK Section


Nonpharmacological Treatment of Army Service Members

By |November 12, 2019|Low Back Pain, Veterans|

Nonpharmacological Treatment of Army Service Members with Chronic Pain Is Associated with Fewer Adverse Outcomes After Transition to the Veterans Health Administration

The Chiro.Org Blog

SOURCE:   J Gen Intern Med. 2019 (Oct 28) [Epub]

Esther L. Meerwijk, PhD, MSN , Mary Jo Larson, PhD, MPA, Eric M. Schmidt, PhD, Rachel Sayko Adams, PhD, MPH, Mark R. Bauer, MD, Grant A. Ritter, PhD, Chester Buckenmaier III, MD, and Alex H. S. Harris, PhD, MS

VA Health Services Research & Development,
Center for Innovation to Implementation (Ci2i),
VA Palo Alto Health Care System,
Menlo Park, CA, USA.

BACKGROUND:   Potential protective effects of nonpharmacological treatments (NPT) against long-term pain-related adverse outcomes have not been examined.

OBJECTIVE:   To compare active duty U.S. Army service members with chronic pain who did/did not receive NPT in the Military Health System (MHS) and describe the association between receiving NPT and adverse outcomes after transitioning to the Veterans Health Administration (VHA).

DESIGN AND PARTICIPANTS:   A longitudinal cohort study of active duty Army service members whose MHS healthcare records indicated presence of chronic pain after an index deployment to Iraq or Afghanistan in the years 2008-2014 (N = 142,539). Propensity score-weighted multivariable Cox proportional hazard models tested for differences in adverse outcomes between the NPT group and No-NPT group.

EXPOSURES:   NPT received in the MHS included acupuncture/dry needling, biofeedback, chiropractic care, massage, exercise therapy, cold laser therapy, osteopathic spinal manipulation, transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation and other electrical manipulation, ultrasonography, superficial heat treatment, traction, and lumbar supports.

There are more articles like this @ our:

Low Back Pain Page


Awareness of Axial Spondyloarthritis Among Chiropractors

By |October 20, 2019|Low Back Pain|

Awareness of Axial Spondyloarthritis Among Chiropractors and Osteopaths: Findings From a UK Web-based Survey

The Chiro.Org Blog

SOURCE:   Rheumatol Adv Pract. 2019 (Sep 30)

Cee Y Yong, Jill Hamilton, Jatinder Benepal, Katie Griffiths, Zoë E Clark, Amanda Rush, Raj Sengupta, Jane Martindale, and Karl Gaffney

Department of Rheumatology,
North West Anglia NHS Foundation Trust,

OBJECTIVE:   Chiropractors and osteopaths are important professional partners in the management of axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA). In view of recent advances in diagnosis and treatment, we sought to understand their current knowledge and working practices.

METHODS:   A Web-based survey was advertised to chiropractors and osteopaths via the Royal College of Chiropractors and the Institute of Osteopathy.

RESULTS:   Of 382 completed responses [237 chiropractors (62%) and 145 osteopaths (38%)], all were familiar with AS, but only 63 and 25% were familiar with the terms axSpA and non-radiographic axSpA, respectively. Seventy-seven per cent were confident with inflammatory back pain. Respondents routinely asked about IBD (91%), psoriasis (81%), acute anterior uveitis (49%), peripheral arthritis (71%), genitourinary/gut infection (56%), enthesitis (30%) and dactylitis (20%). Eighty-seven per cent were aware of the association between axSpA and HLA-B27. Only 29% recognized that axSpA was common in women. Forty per cent recommend an X-ray (pelvic in 80%) and, if normal, 27% would recommend MRI of the sacroiliac joints and whole spine. Forty-four per cent were aware of biologic therapies. Forty-three per cent were confident with the process of onward referral to rheumatology via the general practitioner (GP). The principal perceived barrier to onward referral was reluctance by the GP to accept their professional opinion.

There are more articles like this @ our:

Low Back Pain Page