Spinal Manipulation Treatment Research Articles

Chuna therapy include Space Spinal Conduction Exercise and Manipulation Treatment for Functional dyspepsia patients: A case report

Objectives: The purpose of this case study was to report the effect of Chuna therapy include Space Spinal Conduction Exercise and Manipulation Treatment for Functional dyspepsia patients.Methods: A 32-years-old male patients with functional dyspepsia visited the clinic ten times from March 17th 2023 to April 22th 2023. To assess the treatment outcomes, we used the Standard tool for pattern identification of Functional dyspepsia and Nepean Dyspepsia Index-Korean version (NDI-K) symptom score.Result: After treatment, Standard tool for pattern identification of Functional dyspepsia and Nepean Dyspepsia Index-Korean version (NDI-K) score decreased.Conclusion: Chuna therapy include Space Spinal Conduction Exercise and Manipulation Treatment was effective in the treatment of patient with Functional dyspepsia.

A Comparison of the Immediate Effects of Chiropractic Thoracic High-Velocity Low-Amplitude Manipulation Applied Supine and Prone on the Autonomic Nervous System

Thoracic manipulation is one of the spinal manipulative treatment methods frequently used by clinicians. However, when carrying out this task, several methods could be preferred. This study aimed to compare the immediate effects of supine and prone thoracic high-velocity-low-amplitude chiropractic manipulations on the autonomic nervous system. The study included 62 healthy and volunteer participants aged 18-45 years. Participants were randomly assigned to supine and prone manipulation groups. Both groups, heart rate variability data were obtained with the Elite HRV CorSense device for 1 minute before the application, systolic and diastolic blood pressures were measured, pulse and saturation values were recorded. After the measurement, supine chiropractic manipulation was applied to the mid-thoracic region and the same measurements were repeated. Heart rate variability data were analyzed with Elite HRV application, pulse rate, saturation, systolic and diastolic blood pressure values were recorded, and the results were statistically evaluated. In the intra-group comparison, LF/HF ratio increased in the prone group (p=0.025). When the difference between the groups was analyzed, the change in LF/HF ratio was found to be statistically significant between the two groups (p=0.008). The effect of prone application on the autonomic nervous system was found to be higher than supine application. This study revealed that prone and supine thoracic chiropractic HVLA application was effective on OSS in healthy individuals and that the efficiency of prone manipulation was significantly higher.

Comparative analysis of spinal stabilization techniques

Background: The purpose of this study was to compare different spinal stabilization techniques in terms of their effectiveness in providing stabilization and reducing pain. A systematic review was performed to identify relevant studies and analyze their findings. The studies were evaluated based on their methodological quality, sample size, and outcome measures. The results showed that the use of spinal bracing, spinal manipulation, and exercise-based treatments was found to be more effective than pharmacological interventions in providing spinal stabilization and reducing pain. The evidence suggests that a combination of these treatments may be more beneficial in providing adequate stabilization and reducing pain compared to a single intervention. Future research is needed to further explore the efficacy of different spinal stabilization techniques. Objective: The objective of this study was to compare and analyze the effectiveness of different spinal stabilization techniques in providing stabilization and reducing pain. Methodology: A systematic review was conducted department of orthopedic kth hospital Peshawar from jan 2020 to jan 2021 to identify relevant studies that evaluated the effectiveness of different spinal stabilization techniques in providing stabilization and reducing pain. The studies were evaluated based on their methodological quality, sample size, and outcome measures.

In vivo measurement of intradiscal pressure changes related to thrust and non-thrust spinal manipulation in an animal model: a pilot study

BackgroundThe intervertebral disc is a known back pain generator and is frequently the focus of spinal manipulative therapy evaluation and treatment. The majority of our current knowledge regarding intradiscal pressure (IDP) changes related to spinal manual therapy involves cadaveric studies with their inherent limitations. Additional in vivo animal models are needed to investigate intervertebral disc physiological and molecular mechanisms related to spinal manipulation and spinal mobilization treatment for low back disorders.MethodsMiniature pressure catheters (Millar SPR-1000) were inserted into either the L4-L5 or L5-L6 intervertebral disc of 3 deeply anesthetized adult cats (Oct 2012-May 2013). Changes in IDP were recorded during delivery of instrument-assisted spinal manipulation (Activator V® and Pulstar®) and motorized spinal flexion with/without manual spinous process contact.ResultsMotorized flexion of 30° without spinous contact decreased IDP of the L4-L5 disc by ~ 2.9 kPa, while physical contact of the L4 spinous process decreased IDP an additional ~ 1.4 kPa. Motorized flexion of 25° with L5 physical contact in a separate animal decreased IDP of the L5-L6 disc by ~ 1.0 kPa. Pulstar® impulses (setting 1–3) increased IDP of L4-L5 and L5-L6 intervertebral discs by ~ 2.5 to 3.0 kPa. Activator V® (setting 1–4) impulses increased L4-L5 IDP to a similar degree. Net changes in IDP amplitudes remained fairly consistent across settings on both devices regardless of device setting suggesting that viscoelastic properties of in vivo spinal tissues greatly dampen superficially applied manipulative forces prior to reaching deep back structures such as the intervertebral disc.ConclusionsThis study marks the first time that feline in vivo changes in IDP have been reported using clinically available instrument-assisted spinal manipulation devices and/or spinal mobilization procedures. The results of this pilot study indicate that a feline model can be used to investigate IDP changes related to spinal manual therapy mechanisms as well as the diminution of these spinal manipulative forces due to viscoelastic properties of the surrounding spinal tissues. Additional investigation of IDP changes is warranted in this and/or other in vivo animal models to provide better insights into the physiological effects and mechanisms of spinal manual therapy at the intervertebral disc level.

Utilization of chiropractic services in patients with osteoarthritis and spine pain at a publicly funded healthcare facility in Canada: A retrospective study.

Osteoarthritis (OA) is one of the most prevalent and disabling musculoskeletal diseases worldwide. There is preliminary evidence from experimental studies and consensus documents that chiropractic management may alleviate spine and/or extremity OA related pain in the short term. This research explores the potential relationship of a pragmatic course of care, including soft tissue therapy, spinal manipulation, and other treatments commonly delivered by chiropractors, to spine and extremity pain in patients with OA. A retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data from the chiropractic program at a publicly funded healthcare facility was conducted. The primary outcome measures for patients diagnosed with spine and/or extremity OA (n= 76) were numeric pain scores of each spinal and extremity region at baseline and discharge, and a change score was determined. Statistically significant improvements that exceed a clinically meaningful difference in pain numeric rating scale scores were demonstrated by point change reductions from baseline to discharge visits. Change scores exceeding a minimally clinically important difference of "2-points" were present in the sacroiliac (-2.91), extremity (-2.84), cervical (-2.73), thoracic (-2.61), and lumbar (-2.59) regions. Patients diagnosed with OA in a socioeconomically disadvantaged community demonstrated reductions in mean pain scores in both a clinically meaningful and statistically significant manner concurrent with a course of chiropractic care.

Factors Associated With Clinical Responses to Spinal Manipulation in Patients With Non-specific Thoracic Back Pain: A Prospective Cohort Study.

Introduction: The management of musculoskeletal disorders is complex and requires a multidisciplinary approach. Manual therapies, such as spinal manipulative therapy (SMT), are often recommended as an adjunct treatment and appear to have demonstrable effects on pain and short-term disability in several spinal conditions. However, no definitive mechanism that can explain these effects has been identified. Identifying relevant prognostic factors is therefore recommended for people with back pain.Objective: The main purpose of this study was to identify short-term candidate prognostic factors for clinically significant responses in pain, disability and global perceived change (GPC) following a spinal manipulation treatment in patients with non-specific thoracic back pain.Methods: Patients seeking care for thoracic spine pain were invited to participate in the study. Pain levels were recorded at baseline, post-intervention, and 1 week after a single session of SMT. Disability levels were collected at baseline and at 1-week follow-up. GPC was collected post-intervention and at 1-week follow-up. Biomechanical parameters of SMT, expectations for improvement in pain and disability, kinesiophobia, anxiety levels as well as perceived comfort of spinal manipulative therapy were assessed.Analysis: Differences in baseline characteristics were compared between patients categorized as responders or non-responders based on their pain level, disability level, and GPC at each measurement time point. Binary logistic regression was calculated if the statistical significance level of group comparisons (responder vs. non-responders) was equal to, or <0.2 for candidate prognostic factors.Results: 107 patients (62 females and 45 males) were recruited. Mean peak force averaged 450.8 N with a mean thrust duration of 134.9 ms. Post-intervention, comfort was associated with pain responder status (p < 0.05) and GPC responder status (p < 0.05), while expectation of disability improvement was associated with GPC responder status (p < 0.05). At follow-up, comfort and expectation of pain improvement were associated with responder GPC status (p < 0.05). No association was found between responder pain, disability or GPC status and biomechanical parameters of SMT at any time point.Discussion: No specific dosage of SMT was associated with short-term clinical responses to treatment. However, expectations of improvement and patient comfort during SMT were associated with a positive response to treatment.

Short-term effects of spinal thrust joint manipulation on postural sway in patients with chronic mechanical neck pain: a randomized controlled trial

Purpose Our aim was to compare the efficacy of spinal manipulation of the upper cervical spine (C1-C2) on postural sway in patients with chronic mechanical neck pain with the application of a combination of cervical (C3-C4), cervicothoracic (C7-T1) and thoracic spine (T5-T6) thrust joint manipulation. Methods One hundred eighty-six (n = 186) individuals with chronic mechanical neck pain were randomised to receive an upper cervical spine manipulation (n = 93) or three different spinal manipulation techniques applied to the cervical spine, cervicothoracic joint and thoracic spine (n = 93). Measures included the assessment of stabilometric parameters using the Medicapteurs S-Plate platform. Secondarily, neck pain was analysed using the Numeric Pain Rating Scale. Results We observe a decrease in the length of the centre of pressure path, average speed, medio-lateral and antero-posterior displacement with statistically significant results (p < 0.05) in the upper cervical manipulation group. Both interventions are equally effective in reducing neck pain after fifteen days (p < 0.001). Conclusion The application of upper cervical thrust joint manipulation is more effective in improving stabilometric parameters in patients with chronic mechanical neck pain. Trial registration: The study was registered in the Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trial Registry (no. ACTRN12619000546156). Implications for rehabilitation Patients who suffer from neck pain exhibit increased postural sway than asymptomatic subjects. Both spinal manipulation treatments applied in this study are equally effective in reducing neck pain. Spinal manipulation treatment on the upper cervical spine improves postural stability parameters.

Comparison of Two Spinal Manipulation Treatments in Patients With Chronic Mechanical Neck Pain

Comparison of Two Spinal Manipulation Treatments in Patients With Chronic Mechanical Neck Pain

Korean Medical Treatment Including Space Spinal Conduction Exercise and Manipulation Treatment for Spondylolisthesis: Three Case Reports

Korean Medical Treatment Including Space Spinal Conduction Exercise and Manipulation Treatment for Spondylolisthesis: Three Case Reports

Spinal manipulation frequency and dosage effects on clinical and physiological outcomes: a scoping review

IntroductionThe burden of musculoskeletal disorders increases every year, with low back and neck pain being the most frequently reported conditions for seeking manual therapy treatment. In recent years, manual therapy research has begun exploring the dose-response relationship between spinal manipulation treatment characteristics and both clinical and physiological response to treatment.ObjectiveThe purpose of this scoping review was to identify and appraise the current state of scientific knowledge regarding the effects of spinal manipulation frequency and dosage on both clinical and physiological responses.MethodsA scoping review was conducted to identify all available studies pertaining to our research question. Retrieved papers were screened using a 2-phase method, a selective sorting with titles and abstracts. Potentially relevant studies were read, and data was extracted for all included studies. Randomized control trials were assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool for quality assessment.ResultsThe search yielded 4854 publications from which 32 were included for analysis. Results were sorted by dosage or frequency outcomes, and divided into human or animal studies. Animal studies mainly focused on dosage and evaluated physiological outcomes only. Studies investigating spinal manipulation dosage effects involved both human and animal research, and showed that varying thrust forces, or thrust durations can impact vertebral displacement, muscular response amplitude or muscle spindle activity. Risk of bias analysis indicated only two clinical trials assessing frequency effects presented a low risk of bias. Although trends in improvement were observed and indicated that increasing the number of SM visits in a short period of time (few weeks) decreased pain and improve disability, the differences between the studied treatment frequencies, were often not statistically significant and therefore not clinically meaningful.ConclusionThe results of this study showed that SM dosage and frequency effects have been mostly studied over the past two decades. Definitions for these two concepts however differ across studies. Overall, the results showed that treatment frequency does not significantly affect clinical outcomes during and following a SM treatment period. Dosage effects clearly influence short-term physiological responses to SM treatment, but relationships between these responses and clinical outcomes remains to be investigated.

Physicians using spinal manipulative treatment in The Netherlands: a description of their characteristics and their patients

BackgroundVarious health care professionals apply Spinal Manipulative Treatment (SMT) in daily practice. While the characteristics of chiropractors and manual therapists and the characteristics of their patient populations are well described, there is little research about physicians who use SMT techniques. A distinct group of physicians in The Netherlands has been trained in musculoskeletal (MSK) medicine, which includes the use of SMT. Our objective was to describe the characteristics of these physicians and their patient population.MethodsAll registered MSK physicians were approached with questionnaires and telephone interviews to collect data about their characteristics. Data about patient characteristics were extracted from a web-based register. In this register physicians recorded basic patient data (age, gender, the type and duration of the main complaint, concomitant complaints and the type of referral) at the first consultation. Patients were invited to fill in web-based questionnaires to provide baseline data about previous treatments and the severity of their main complaint. Functional impairment was measured with Patient Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs).ResultsQuestionnaires were sent to 138 physicians of whom 90 responded (65%). Most physicians were trained in MSK medicine after a career in other medical specialities. They reported to combine their SMT treatment with a variety of diagnostic and treatment options part of which were only permissible for physicians, such as prescription medication and injections. The majority of patients presented with complaints of long duration (62.1% > 1 year), most frequently low back pain (48.1%) or neck pain (16.9%), with mean scores of 6.0 and 6.2, respectively, on a 0 to10 numerical rating scale (NRS) for pain intensity. Mean scores on all PROMs showed moderate impairment. Patients most frequently reported previous treatment by physical therapists (68.1%), manual therapists (37.7%) or chiropractors (17.0%).ConclusionOur study showed that MSK physicians in The Netherlands used an array of SMT techniques. They embedded their SMT techniques in a broad array of other diagnostic and treatment options, part of which were limited to medical doctors. Most patients consulted MSK physicians with spinal pain of long duration with moderate functional impairment.

Effect of spinal manipulative treatment on cardiovascular autonomic control in patients with acute low back pain

BackgroundThis study aimed to quantify the effect of spinal manipulative treatment (SMT) from an analysis of baroreflex, systolic blood pressure and heart rate variability (HRV) on patients with acute back pain. It was hypothesized that SMT would increase the parasympathetic cardiovascular autonomic control.MethodsTwenty-two patients with acute back pain were randomly divided into two groups: one receiving sham treatment (Sham) and the other receiving SMT. Recordings were completed during the first day and the seventh day, immediately before and after treatment on both days. ECG and systolic blood pressure were continuously recorded to compute cardiovascular variability and baroreflex sensitivity components. The perceived level of pain was measured with the numeric pain scale (NPS) 48 h before, just before and just after each treatment. The NPS ranged from 0 to 100% (peak of pain before treatment). ECG and systolic blood pressure recordings were analyzed in time frequency domain using the Smoothed pseudo Wigner-Ville distribution.ResultsRoot mean square of the successive differences, high frequency power of the heart rate variability, and high frequency baroreflex sensitivity differences between post and pre tests were higher in the SMT group than in the Sham group (p < 0.01), whereas no differences were observed with the other heart rate variability components. Also, no differences were observed with the systolic blood pressure components. Although the estimated pain scale values decreased over time, no difference was observed between the SMT and Sham groups.ConclusionsThis seems to be the first study to assess the effect of SMT on both heart rate variability and baroreflex sensitivity in patients with acute back pain. SMT can be seen to provoke an increase in parasympathetic control known to relate to a person’s healthy state. Thus, cardiovascular variability analysis may be a useful tool for clinicians to quantify and objectify the beneficial effects of spinal manipulation treatment.

Chiropractic spinal manipulation and the risk for acute lumbar disc herniation: a belief elicitation study.

Chiropractic spinal manipulation treatment (SMT) is common for back pain and has been reported to increase the risk for lumbar disc herniation (LDH), but there is no high quality evidence about this. In the absence of good evidence, clinicians can have knowledge and beliefs about the risk. Our purpose was to determine clinicians' beliefs regarding the risk for acute LDH associated with chiropractic SMT. Using a belief elicitation design, 47 clinicians (16 chiropractors, 15 family physicians and 16 spine surgeons) that treat patients with back pain from primary and tertiary care practices were interviewed. Participants' elicited incidence estimates of acute LDH among a hypothetical group of patients with acute low back pain treated with and without chiropractic SMT, were used to derive the probability distribution for the relative risk (RR) for acute LDH associated with chiropractic SMT. Chiropractors expressed the most optimistic belief (median RR 0.56; IQR 0.39-1.03); family physicians expressed a neutral belief (median RR 0.97; IQR 0.64-1.21); and spine surgeons expressed a slightly more pessimistic belief (median RR 1.07; IQR 0.95-1.29). Clinicians with the most optimistic views believed that chiropractic SMT reduces the incidence of acute LDH by about 60% (median RR 0.42; IQR 0.29-0.53). Those with the most pessimistic views believed that chiropractic SMT increases the incidence of acute LDH by about 30% (median RR 1.29; IQR 1.11-1.59). Clinicians' beliefs about the risk for acute LDH associated with chiropractic SMT varied systematically across professions, in spite of a lack of scientific evidence to inform these beliefs. These probability distributions can serve as prior probabilities in future Bayesian analyses of this relationship.

Clinical effect of traditional Chinese spinal orthopedic manipulation in treatment of Functional Abdominal Pain Syndrome

ObjectiveTo evaluate the clinical effect of Traditional Chinese Spinal Orthopedic Manipulation (TCSOM) in treating Functional Abdominal Pain Syndrome (FAPS) in comparison with Pinaverium Bromide (Dicetel, PBD), and to assess a possible cause for FAPS. Methods60 cases of FAPS patients were randomly assigned to the TCSOM group and PBD group according to the random number table method. The TCSOM group was treated with thumb pressing manipulation, every other day in the first week, and once every three days in the second week, for 5 times treatments. Patients in the PBD group were instructed to take 50mg 3 times a day, consistently for 2 weeks. The symptoms of pre-treatment and post-treatment were assessed on a visual analog scale (VAS) pain score. A symptom improvement rating (SIR) was implemented in order to evaluate the effects of the treatments, and to statistically compare the two groups. ResultsThe symptoms of 21 patients of the TCSOM group were resolved soon after the first spinal manipulation treatment and 4 cases were significantly improved. The VAS pain scores in the TCSOM group were significantly lower than those in the PBD group after 2 weeks treatment. According to the SIR based on VAS, the TCSOM research group included 20 cases with excellent results, 8 cases with good, and 2 cases with poor. There were no side effects in the TCSOM group after treatment. Based on VAS, the PBD research group reported 6 cases with excellent results, 8 cases with good and 16 cases with poor. All cases were statistically analyzed, revealing a significant difference (P<0.001) between the two groups. ConclusionTCSOM group performed much better than PBD group for relief of the symptoms of FAPS. Thumb pressing manipulation on the thoracic and/or lumbar region can correct the displacement of inter-vertebral discs and/or vertebra, resolving the stimuli caused by pressure exerting on the nerves and vessels around the spine. Treatmentwith thumb pressing manipulation on the Back-Shu acupoints, the Jiaji (EX-B2) and the governor vessel acupoint had a very good clinical effect for abdominal pain indicating that it is an effective treatment for FAPS.

Effects of spinal manipulation on sensorimotor function in low back pain patients – A randomised controlled trial

BackgroundLow back pain (LBP) is a major health problem in industrialized societies. Spinal manipulation (SM) is often used for treating LBP, though the therapeutic mechanisms remain elusive. Research suggests that sensorimotor changes may be involved in LBP. It is hypothesized that SM may generate its beneficial effects by affecting sensorimotor functions. ObjectivesTo compare changes in sensorimotor function, as measured by postural sway and response to sudden load, in LBP patients following the delivery of high-velocity low amplitude (HVLA)-SM or low-velocity variable amplitude (LVVA)-SM versus a sham control intervention. DesignA three-arm (1:1:1 ratio) randomized controlled trial. MethodsA total of 221 participants who were between 21 and 65 years, having LBP intensity (numerical rating scale) ≥4 at either phone screen or the first baseline visit and ≥2 at phone screen and both baseline visits, and Quebec Task Force diagnostic classifications of 1, 2, 3 or 7 were enrolled to receive four SM treatments over two weeks. Study outcomes were measured at the first and fifth visits with the examiners blinded from participant group assignment. ResultsThe LVVA-SM group demonstrated a significant increase in medial-to-lateral postural excursion on the soft surface at the first visit when compared to the control group. No other significant between-group differences were found for the two sensorimotor tests, whether during the first visit or over two weeks. ConclusionsIt appears that short-term SM does not affect the sensorimotor functions as measured by postural sway and response to sudden load in this study.

Effect of spinal manipulation on brain functional activity in patients with lumbar disc herniation

To investigate the effects of spinal manipulation (SM) on brain functional activity in patients with lumbar disc herniation (LDH). Eleven patients with LDH were recruited in the study. All patients received 6 times of lumbar SM treatment and then clinical efficacy was evaluated. All patients received brain functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) scans before and after SM treatment. Three subjects dropped out and 8 subjects completed the study, among whom 4 cases were effective and 4 ineffective after SM treatment. The required pressure value producing the same level (VAS 50) pain was (7.43 ± 1.47) kg and (10.53 ± 0.55) kg before and after SM treatment in effective patients(P<0.05); however, there was no significant difference in ineffective patients (P>0.05). Compared to pre-treatment level, the brain functional activity in effective patients was mainly inhibited, the inhibited areas were located in the right side of prefrontal cortex and cerebellum; while the brain functional activity was generally enhanced in ineffective patients. SM can affect the brain functional activity of patients with LDH, the inhibited areas is mainly located in prefrontal cortex and cerebellum when SM treatment is effective.

Do Manual Therapies Help Low Back Pain? A Comparative Effectiveness Meta-analysis

Meta-analysis methodology was extended to derive comparative effectiveness information on spinal manipulation for low back pain. Determine relative effectiveness of spinal manipulation therapies (SMTs), medical management, physical therapies, and exercise for acute and chronic nonsurgical low back pain. Results of spinal manipulation treatments of nonsurgical low back pain are equivocal. Nearly 40 years of SMT studies were not informative. Studies were chosen on the basis of inclusion in prior evidence syntheses. Effect sizes were converted to standardized mean effect sizes and probabilities of recovery. Nested model comparisons isolated nonspecific from treatment effects. Aggregate data were tested for evidential support as compared with shams. Of 84% acute pain variance, 81% was from nonspecific factors and 3% from treatment. No treatment for acute pain exceeded sham's effectiveness. Most acute results were within 95% confidence bands of that predicted by natural history alone. For chronic pain, 66% of 98% was nonspecific, but treatments influenced 32% of outcomes. Chronic pain treatments also fit within 95% confidence bands as predicted by natural history. Though the evidential support for treating chronic back pain as compared with sham groups was weak, chronic pain seemed to respond to SMT, whereas whole systems of clinical management did not. Meta-analyses can extract comparative effectiveness information from existing literature. The relatively small portion of outcomes attributable to treatment explains why past research results fail to converge on stable estimates. The probability of treatment superiority matched a binomial random process. Treatments serve to motivate, reassure, and calibrate patient expectations--features that might reduce medicalization and augment self-care. Exercise with authoritative support is an effective strategy for acute and chronic low back pain.

A pilot randomized controlled trial comparing the efficacy of exercise, spinal manipulation, and neuro emotional technique for the treatment of pregnancy-related low back pain.

BackgroundThis pilot randomized controlled trial evaluated the feasibility of conducting a full scale study and compared the efficacy of exercise, spinal manipulation, and a mind-body therapy called Neuro Emotional Technique for the treatment of pregnancy-related low back pain, a common morbidity of pregnancy.MethodsHealthy pregnant women with low back pain of insidious onset were eligible to enroll in the study at any point in their pregnancy. Once enrolled, they remained in the study until they had their babies. Women were randomly allocated into one of three treatment groups using opaque envelopes. The treatment schedule paralleled the prenatal care schedule and women received individualized intervention. Our null hypothesis was that spinal manipulation and Neuro Emotional Technique would perform no better than exercise in enhancing function and decreasing pain. Our primary outcome measure was the Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire and our secondary outcome measure was the Numeric Pain Rating Scale. Intention to treat analysis was conducted. For the primary analysis, regression was conducted to compare groups on the outcome measure scores. In a secondary responder analysis, difference in proportions of participants in attaining 30% and 50% improvement were calculated. Feasibility factors for conducting a future larger trial were also evaluated such as recruitment, compliance to study protocols, cost, and adverse events.ResultsFifty-seven participants were randomized into the exercise (n = 22), spinal manipulation (n = 15), and Neuro Emotional Technique (n = 20) treatment arms. At least 50% of participants in each treatment group experienced clinically meaningful improvement in symptoms for the Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire. At least 50% of the exercise and spinal manipulation participants also experienced clinically meaningful improvement for the Numeric Pain Rating Scale. There were no clinically meaningful or statistically significant differences between groups in any analysis.ConclusionsThis pilot study demonstrated feasibility for recruitment, compliance, safety, and affordability for conducting a larger study in the future. Spinal manipulation and exercise generally performed slightly better than did Neuro Emotional Technique for improving function and decreasing pain, but the study was not powered to detect the between-group differences as statistically significant.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov (Identifier: NCT00937365).

Athletic Trainers Should Utilize Spinal Manipulation in Clinical Practice

y athletic training practice revolves around one thing: my patient. Health care is a customer service industry; there is simply no other way to define a health care profession. Patients are our customers, and if not treated appropriately, they will take their business elsewhere. Therefore, it is always in our best interest to provide them with therapeutic procedures that are safe and most effective for resolution of the condition. When a treatment technique is both safe and effective, it represents a “model practice” or “standard of care” for the condition. A common problem I see among my patients is low back pain. Often, patients with similar lumbar spine pathology present with substantially different activity limitations and participation restrictions. For example, every herniated disk does not present the same symptoms. Some patients present nonspecific low back pain, whereas others have neurologic symptoms radiating distally, and some are completely asymptomatic. To treat each one in the same manner, solely on the basis of diagnosis, is counterintuitive. Patients that present specific clusters of signs and symptoms will benefit from one of three treatment approaches: (a) specific exercise, (b) stabilization, or (c) manipulation. Within these proposed treatment subgroups, the strongest evidence supports spinal manipulation treatments. In fact, a clinical prediction rule (CPR) to identify patients who will derive benefit from spinal manipulation has been validated. The CPR incorporates five criteria: 1

Chiropractic spinal manipulative treatment of cervicogenic dizziness using Gonstead method: a case study

Objective The purpose of this case report is to present the response of a patient with chronic nonresponsive cervicogenic dizziness to chiropractic care. Case report A 29-year-old man had a 10-year history of progressive cervicogenic dizziness with symptoms including a sensation of excessive motion, imbalance, and spinning associated with neck pain and stiffness. After treatment, he reported a reduction in pain and dizziness and an improved quality of life following Gonstead method of chiropractic spinal manipulative therapy. Conclusion This case study suggests that a patient with nonresponsive cervicogenic dizziness might respond to chiropractic spinal manipulative therapy approach using Gonstead method.