Angular Kinematics of Chiropractic Supine Cervical Spine Manipulation: Rotational Measures and Comparisons to Doctor and Recipient Perceptions.

OBJECTIVES: The primary purposes of this study were to measure axial rotation during supine cervical spinal manipulative therapy (cSMT) and to record recipients' and doctors' perceptions of rotational magnitudes. METHODS: Experienced doctors of chiropractic (DCs) provided supine cSMT and acted as recipients of cSMT. Participants who received SMT wore inertial measurement units attached to the forehead and sternum for motion capture. Afterward, recipients and DCs completed questionnaires asking about their perceptions of motion. Data were analyzed for magnitudes of axial rotation at peak thrust and correlations with patient and doctor perceptions. Secondary analyses included angular velocity, angular acceleration, and other kinematic variables. RESULTS: We recorded 23 SMT events with 14 DCs. Rotation at thrust peaks averaged 32.4° (17.4°). Doctors' and recipients' perceptions of rotation were higher than measured values 45% and 50% of the time, respectively. Maximum angular velocity and acceleration averaged 221.9°/s (124.9) and 4786.5°/s2 (2456.6), respectively. We found no correlation between perceptions and velocity or acceleration; doctors' perceptions had an inverse correlation with measurements. CONCLUSION: On average, we found rotation during supine cSMT to be 32°. Both DCs and SMT recipients overestimated rotation compared with actual measurements. These factors should be considered in discussions of rotation and SMT.

Adverse events from spinal manipulations in the pregnant and postpartum periods: a systematic review and update.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study is to update a previous critical review of adverse events in pregnant and postpartum populations. METHODS: The following databases were searched: PubMed, CINAHL, Index to Chiropractic Literature, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews/Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and MEDLINE. We included all study design types as it was determined a priori that there would not be enough high-quality research on spinal manipulative therapy (SMT) in these populations to make any determinations. The Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN) and CARE (CAse REport) checklists were used for quality rating. RESULTS: This update found one case study that demonstrated a serious adverse event in the cervical spine following SMT and a handful of minor and transient adverse events in the low back following SMT. CONCLUSIONS: There was limited evidence of adverse events following SMT in these populations. Although we are calling for improved reporting of such events in future studies, it may be that such injuries are rare.

CONTEXTE: La présente étude vise à mettre à jour les résultats d'un examen critique des effets défavorables des manipulations vertébrales chez la femme enceinte et la femme en postpartum. MÉTHODOLOGIE: On a interrogé les bases de données suivantes : PubMed, CINAHL, Index to Chiropractic Literature, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews/ Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials et MEDLINE. On a retenu toutes les études parce qu'il avait été établi antérieurement que le nombre de recherches de bonne qualité sur les manipulations vertébrales (MV) chez la femme enceinte et la femme en postpartum était insuffisant pour trancher toute question. On s'est servi des listes de vérification Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN) et CARE (CAse REport) pour évaluer la qualité des études. RÉSULTATS: Une étude de cas faisait état d'un grave effet indésirable à la colonne cervicale après des MV et d'une poignée d'effets indésirables mineurs et transitoires à la colonne lombaire. CONCLUSIONS: Il existe peu de preuves que les MV ont des effets indésirables chez les populations à l'étude. Il faudrait plus de données. Mais il est permis d'affirmer que ces effets indésirables sont rares.

Low-Level Laser Light Therapy Dosage Variables vs Treatment Efficacy of Neuromusculoskeletal Conditions: A Scoping Review.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this scoping review was to identify and synthesize literature on dosage variables on the efficacy of low-level laser therapy (LLLT) for neuromusculoskeletal conditions. METHODS: A scoping literature review was conducted by searching the following databases: the Cochrane Library, the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Medline, the Physiotherapy Evidence Database, the Index to Chiropractic Literature, manufacturer websites, and online guidelines. The search was modeled after STARLITE criteria. The reporting used Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR). Articles were included if LLLT was used in any treatment group for a neuromusculoskeletal complaint with dosage and effectiveness reported. This was tabulated by source, dosage variables, conditions, outcome measures, and conclusions. Data were charted in Excel format. Frequency counts were performed on ordinal data. Descriptive statistics were computed for the continuous data. RESULTS: A total of 86 articles were included in the review. They revealed a broad range of musculoskeletal conditions and diverse dosage parameters. Seven individual parameters were found that would alter the dosage. Although duration of application is an independent clinical factor, the negative-outcome studies were inconsistent in duration. There was lack of statistical difference between the studies with improved vs unimproved outcomes. No statistical differences were noted between the dosage parameters and efficacy. CONCLUSION: Although many articles were found on LLLT for neuromusculoskeletal conditions, the studies had amorphous parameters. A heterogeneity of reported doses precluded the synthesis of sufficient evidence to correlate dosage variables with improved or unimproved outcomes. Therefore, based on the current literature, dosage variables for the efficacy of LLLT for neuromusculoskeletal conditions are uncertain at this time.

Survey of chiropractic clinicians on self-reported knowledge and recognition of concussion injuries.

Background: There has been little study of the recognition of mild traumatic brain injury (MTBI) by the chiropractic practitioner, or of the inquiry by the clinician to assess those patients who may be suffering from the condition, but fail to report the symptoms. Although severe cases of TBI are more often recognized and treated by attendance to hospital or emergency room, MTBI is less recognizable and would present a long-term risk to the patient. Given the clinical risk associated with failure to recognize such injuries, training of the clinician in the subtle signs of MTBI is imperative. What we currently know about training in the recognition of MTBI is from limited recent knowledge based studies. This study is intended to assess the self-reported mild traumatic brain injury (MTBI) knowledge, recognition and treatment by chiropractic practitioners. Methods: A previously published standardized set of survey items was distributed to a captive audience of chiropractic practitioners at the July 2016 Texas Chiropractic College annual symposium. The sample population was a convenience sample of chiropractic clinicians who were assessed for MTBI knowledge and common practices. Results: There was a response rate of 43% of the 125 attendees. The survey demonstrated confidence in MTBI diagnosis. Average MTBI knowledge and recognition score was only 27% ± 22%. Frequency of MTBI patients presenting to the chiropractic clinician office was an average of less than one per month. Sixty nine percent (69%) of the clinicians relied upon their history and clinical exam for diagnosis. There was no knowledge of the Balance Error Scoring system and only 20% utilized the Standardized Concussion Assessment Tool (SCAT). The primary action of the chiropractic clinician who suspected MTBI was to refer to a neurological specialist (76%). A small minority of practitioners would provide treatment. Conclusions: There is an overconfidence of the chiropractic practitioner in recognition of MTBI which is incongruent with the low knowledge scores. Further education of the chiropractic clinician is warranted. Trial registration: University Hospital Medical Information Network Clinical Trials Registry. Retrospectively registered (UMIN-CTR), trial number: UMIN#000029744 (Receipt# R000033980) data: October 27, 2017.​Date of enrollment 7/14/2016.

Adverse events from spinal manipulation in the pregnant and postpartum periods: a critical review of the literature.

BACKGROUND: The safety of spinal manipulation during pregnancy and the postpartum periods has been a matter of debate among manual therapists. Spinal manipulative therapy during these periods is a commonly performed intervention as musculoskeletal pain is common in these patients. To date there has not been an evaluation of the literature on this topic exclusively. METHODS: A literature search was conducted on PubMed, CINAHL and the Index to Chiropractic Literature along with reference searching for articles published in English and French in the peer-reviewed literature that documented adverse effects of spinal manipulation during either pregnancy or postpartum. Case reports, case series, and any other clinical study designs were deemed acceptable for inclusion, as were systematic reviews. The appropriate Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN) tools were used to rate included articles for quality when applicable. RESULTS: Five articles identifying adverse events in seven subjects following spinal manipulation were included in this review, along with two systematic reviews. The articles were published between 1978 and 2009. Two articles describing adverse effects from spinal manipulation on two postpartum patients were included, while the remaining three articles on five patients with adverse effects following spinal manipulation were on pregnant patients. Injury severity ranged from minor injury such as increasing pain after treatment that resolved within a few days to more severe injuries including fracture, stroke, and epidural hematoma. SIGN scores of the prospective observational cohort study and systematic reviews indicated acceptable quality. CONCLUSIONS: There are only a few reported cases of adverse events following spinal manipulation during pregnancy and the postpartum period identified in the literature. While improved reporting of such events is required in the future, it may be that such injuries are relatively rare.

Defining the effect of cervical manipulation on vertebral artery integrity: establishment of an animal model.

BACKGROUND: Cervical spine manipulation is most often performed to affect relief of musculoskeletal complaints of the head and neck. Performed typically without complication, this modality is thought to be a potential cause of cerebrovascular injury, although a cause-effect relation has yet to be established. To explore this relation, an experimental platform is needed that is accessible and biologically responsive. OBJECTIVE: To establish an animal model capable of accommodating (1) direct study of its vertebral arteries and (2) creation of controlled interventions simulating arterial injury. STUDY DESIGN: Descriptive. METHODS: Under fluoroscopic guidance, an ultrasonic catheter was inserted into the left vertebral artery of 3 anesthetized dogs. The ultrasonic probe was then drawn proximally through the artery at a specific rate, and cross-sectional images of the vessel were collected. These images were then reconstructed to provide a variety of 2- and 3-dimensional representations of the vessel. This procedure was repeated after the overinflation and/or displacement of an angiographic balloon within the vertebral artery itself. RESULTS: The resulting ultrasonic images were able to delineate the structural layers that constitute the vertebral artery. Analysis of 2- and 3-dimensional reconstructions before and after angiographic intervention revealed the creation of discrete vascular injuries (aneurysm or dissection). CONCLUSIONS: For the first time, an animal model has been established that permits direct interrogation of the internal structures of the vertebral artery. This model can also be manipulated to create "preexisting" vascular injuries that are thought to be possible prerequisites for cerebrovascular injury associated with manipulation. As a result, an experimental platform has been established that is capable of providing investigators of all backgrounds with the ability to quantify biologic and mechanical outcomes of cervical manipulation.