Health-Related Quality of Life Among United States Service Members with Low Back Pain Receiving Usual Care Plus Chiropractic Care vs Usual Care Alone: Secondary Outcomes of a Pragmatic Clinical Trial.

OBJECTIVE: This study examines Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement Information System (PROMIS®)-29 v1.0 outcomes of chiropractic care in a multi-site, pragmatic clinical trial and compares the PROMIS measures to: 1) worst pain intensity from a numerical pain rating 0-10 scale, 2) 24-item Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ); and 3) global improvement (modified visual analog scale). DESIGN: A pragmatic, prospective, multisite, parallel-group comparative effectiveness clinical trial comparing usual medical care (UMC) with UMC plus chiropractic care (UMC+CC). SETTING: Three military treatment facilities. SUBJECTS: 750 active-duty military personnel with low back pain. METHODS: Linear mixed effects regression models estimated the treatment group differences. Coefficient of repeatability to estimate significant individual change. RESULTS: We found statistically significant mean group differences favoring UMC+CC for all PROMIS®-29 scales and the RMDQ score. Area under the curve estimates for global improvement for the PROMIS®-29 scales and the RMDQ, ranged from 0.79 to 0.83. CONCLUSIONS: Findings from this pre-planned secondary analysis demonstrate that chiropractic care impacts health-related quality of life beyond pain and pain-related disability. Further, comparable findings were found between the 24-item RMDQ and the PROMIS®-29 v1.0 briefer scales.

Assessing Adverse Events After Chiropractic Care at a Chiropractic Teaching Clinic: An Active-Surveillance Pilot Study.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to assess the feasibility of implementing an active-surveillance reporting system within a chiropractic teaching clinic and subsequently determining the frequency of adverse events (AEs) after treatment administered by chiropractic interns. METHODS: Interns were invited to collect data from patients using 3 questionnaires that recorded patient symptom change: 2 completed by the patient (before and 7 days after treatment) and 1 completed by the intern (immediately after treatment). Worsened and new symptoms were considered AEs. Qualitative interviews were conducted with clinicians and interns to assess the feasibility of implementing the reporting system, with resulting data categorized under 4 domains: acceptability, implementation, practicality, and integration. RESULTS: Of the 174 eligible interns, 80 (46.0%) collected data from 364 patient encounters, with 119 (32.7%) returning their posttreatment form. Of the 89 unique patients (mean age = 39.5 years; 58.4% female, 41.6% male), 40.1% presented with low back pain and 31.1% with neck pain. After treatment, 25 symptoms (8.9%) were identified as AEs, mostly reported by patients as worsening discomfort or pain. Data from qualitative interviews suggest that the AE reporting system was well accepted; however, proposed specific modifications include use of longitudinal electronic surveys. CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that it is feasible to conduct an active-surveillance reporting system at a chiropractic teaching clinic. Important barriers and facilitators were identified and will be used to inform future work regarding patient safety education and research.

Impact of Extremity Manipulation on Postural Sway Characteristics: A Preliminary, Randomized Crossover Study.

OBJECTIVE: Evaluate multisegmental postural sway after upper- vs lower-extremity manipulation. METHODS: Participants were healthy volunteers (aged 21-40 years). Upper- or lower-extremity manipulations were delivered in a randomized crossover design. Postural assessments were made pre-post manipulation, in floor and rocker board conditions. Analysis included traditional balance measures of pathlength and range and sample entropy (SampEn) to examine the temporal structure of sway of the head, trunk, and surface. RESULTS: No statistical changes in pathlength or sway range on the ground surface condition were observed. No increases in the amount of sway occurred in any condition. Chiropractic manipulation of either upper or lower extremities led to reductions in traditional measures of postural control on the rocker board. In the anteroposterior direction (sagittal plane), lower-extremity manipulation led to increased trunk SampEn while on the ground, and conversely a decreased SampEn while on the rocker board. In the mediolateral rocker board condition (frontal plane), manipulation elicited a change in SampEn that differed according to site of manipulation; upper-extremity manipulation increased SampEn, whereas lower-extremity manipulation reduced SampEn. CONCLUSION: Both upper- and lower-extremity manipulation influenced several measures of postural sway on both the ground and the rocker board. Lower-extremity manipulation improved the organization of sway at the trunk (anteroposterior direction) and the board (mediolateral direction). Given the reduction and reorganization of sway metrics seen in this study, we propose extending this line of research to the elderly who are at greatest risk of increased sway and falls.

Manual therapy for the pediatric population: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: This systematic review evaluates the use of manual therapy for clinical conditions in the pediatric population, assesses the methodological quality of the studies found, and synthesizes findings based on health condition. We also assessed the reporting of adverse events within the included studies and compared our conclusions to those of the UK Update report. METHODS: Six databases were searched using the following inclusion criteria: children under the age of 18 years old; treatment using manual therapy; any type of healthcare profession; published between 2001 and March 31, 2018; and English. Case reports were excluded from our study. Reference tracking was performed on six published relevant systematic reviews to find any missed article. Each study that met the inclusion criteria was screened by two authors to: (i) determine its suitability for inclusion, (ii) extract data, and (iii) assess quality of study. RESULTS: Of the 3563 articles identified, 165 full articles were screened, and 50 studies met the inclusion criteria. Twenty-six articles were included in prior reviews with 24 new studies identified. Eighteen studies were judged to be of high quality. Conditions evaluated were: attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), autism, asthma, cerebral palsy, clubfoot, constipation, cranial asymmetry, cuboid syndrome, headache, infantile colic, low back pain, obstructive apnea, otitis media, pediatric dysfunctional voiding, pediatric nocturnal enuresis, postural asymmetry, preterm infants, pulled elbow, suboptimal infant breastfeeding, scoliosis, suboptimal infant breastfeeding, temporomandibular dysfunction, torticollis, and upper cervical dysfunction. Musculoskeletal conditions, including low back pain and headache, were evaluated in seven studies. Twenty studies reported adverse events, which were transient and mild to moderate in severity. CONCLUSIONS: Fifty studies investigated the clinical effects of manual therapies for a wide variety of pediatric conditions. Moderate-positive overall assessment was found for 3 conditions: low back pain, pulled elbow, and premature infants. Inconclusive unfavorable outcomes were found for 2 conditions: scoliosis (OMT) and torticollis (MT). All other condition's overall assessments were either inconclusive favorable or unclear. Adverse events were uncommonly reported. More robust clinical trials in this area of healthcare are needed. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERA registration number: CRD42018091835.

Attitudes and Opinions of Doctors of Chiropractic Specializing in Pediatric Care Toward Patient Safety: A Cross-sectional Survey.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this cross-sectional survey was to evaluate attitudes and opinions of doctors of chiropractic (DCs) specializing in pediatric care toward patient safety. METHODS: The Medical Office Survey on Patient Safety Culture of the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality was adapted for providers who use spinal manipulation therapy and sent out to 2 US chiropractic organizations' pediatric council members (n = 400) between February and April 2014. The survey measured 12 patient safety dimensions and included questions on patient safety items and quality issues, information exchange, and overall clinic ratings. Data analyses included a percent composite average and a nonrespondent analysis. RESULTS: The response rate was 29.5% (n = 118). Almost one- third of respondents' patients were pediatric (≤17 years of age). DCs with a pediatric certification were 3 times more likely to respond (P < .001), but little qualitative differences were found in responses. The patient safety dimensions with the highest positive composite percentages were Organizational Learning (both administration and clinical) and Teamwork (>90%). Patient Care Tracking/Follow-up and Work Pressure and Pace were patient safety dimensions that had the lowest positive composite scores (<85%). The responses also indicated that there was concern regarding information exchange with insurance/third-party payors. Two quality issues identified for improvement were (1) updating a patient's medication list and (2) following up on critically abnormal results from a laboratory or imaging test within 1 day. The average overall patient safety rating score indicated that 83% of respondents rated themselves as "very good" or "excellent." CONCLUSIONS: Compared with 2014 Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality physician referent data from medical offices, pediatric DCs appear to have more positive patient safety attitudes and opinions. Future patient safety studies need to prospectively evaluate safety performance with direct feedback from patients and compare results with these self-assessed safety attitudes, as well as make further use of this survey to develop a comparable database for spinal manipulation providers.

Effect of Spinal Manipulation of Upper Cervical Vertebrae on Blood Pressure: Results of a Pilot Sham-Controlled Trial.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this pilot sham-controlled clinical trial was to estimate the treatment effect and safety of toggle recoil spinal manipulation for blood pressure management. METHODS: Fifty-one participants with prehypertension or stage 1 hypertension (systolic blood pressure ranging from 135 to 159 mm Hg or diastolic blood pressure ranging from 85 to 99 mm Hg) were allocated by an adaptive design to 2 treatments: toggle recoil spinal manipulation or a sham procedure. Participants were seen by a doctor of chiropractic twice weekly for 6 weeks and remained on their antihypertensive medications, as prescribed, throughout the trial. Blood pressure was assessed at baseline and after study visits 1, 6 (week 3), and 12 (week 6), with the primary end point at week 6. Analysis of covariance was used to compare mean blood pressure changes from baseline between groups at each end point, controlling for sex, age, body mass index, and baseline blood pressure. RESULTS: Adjusted mean change from baseline to week 6 was greater in the sham group (systolic, -4.2 mm Hg; diastolic, -1.6 mm Hg) than in the spinal manipulation group (systolic, 0.6 mm Hg; diastolic, 0.7 mm Hg), but the difference was not statistically significant. No serious and few adverse events were noted. CONCLUSIONS: Six weeks of toggle recoil spinal manipulation did not lower systolic or diastolic blood pressure when compared with a sham procedure. No serious adverse events from either treatment were reported. Our results do not support a larger clinical trial. Further research to understand the potential mechanisms of action involving upper cervical manipulation on blood pressure is warranted before additional clinical investigations are conducted.

Study protocol for patient response to spinal manipulation - a prospective observational clinical trial on physiological and patient-centered outcomes in patients with chronic low back pain.

BACKGROUND: Low back pain (LBP) is a major health issue due to its high prevalence rate and socioeconomic cost. While spinal manipulation (SM) is recommended for LBP treatment by recently published clinical guidelines, the underlying therapeutic mechanisms remain unclear. Spinal stiffness is routinely examined and used in clinical decisions for SM delivery. It has also been explored as a predictor for clinical improvement. Flexion-relaxation phenomenon has been demonstrated to distinguish between LBP and healthy populations. The primary objective of the current study is to collect preliminary estimates of variability and effect size for the associations of these two physiological measures with patient-centered outcomes in chronic LBP patients. Additionally biomechanical characteristics of SM delivery are collected with the intention to explore the potential dose-response relationship between SM and LBP improvement. METHODS/DESIGN: This is a prospective, observational study applying side-lying, high velocity, low amplitude SM as treatment for patients with LBP over a course of 6 weeks. Approximately 80 participants will be enrolled if they present with chronic LBP of 1, 2 or 3 in Quebec Task Force Classification for spinal disorders, a Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ) score ≥ 6, and persistent LBP ≥ 2 with a maximum ≥ 4 using numerical rating scale. Patient-centered outcomes include LBP using visual analog scale, RMDQ, and PROMIS-29. Lumbar spine stiffness is assessed using palpation, a hand-held instrumented device, and an automated device. Flexion-relaxation is assessed using surface electromyography at the third level of the lumbar spine. Biomechanical characteristics of SM are assessed using a self-reported, itemized description system, as well as advanced kinetic measures that will be applied to estimate forces and moments at the lumbar segment level targeted by SM. DISCUSSION: Beside alterations in material properties of the passive components of the spine, increased neuromuscular activity may also contribute to a stiffened spine. Examining changes in both spinal stiffness and flexion-relaxation along the course of the treatment provides an opportunity to understand if the therapeutic effect of SM is associated with its action on active and/or passive components of the spine. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT01670292 on clinicaltrials.gov.

Assessment of back pain behaviors, attitudes, and beliefs of chiropractic research conference attendees after a biopsychosocial educational workshop.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to assess the behaviors, attitudes, and beliefs of attendees of a chiropractic research conference (which included chiropractic students, clinicians, researchers, and educators) toward chronic low back pain (CLBP) before and after a biopsychosocial (BPS)-based CLBP educational workshop. METHODS: This single-arm intervention study used the Health Care Providers' Pain and Relationship Scale (HC-PAIRS) and CLBP-related clinic vignettes to assess behaviors, attitudes, and beliefs toward CLBP before and after a single 90-minute educational workshop. The HC-PAIRS is a self-reporting questionnaire that consists of 15 items rated on a 7-point rating scale, with a higher score suggesting a belief that pain is linked to movement and that recommendations should be given to avoid physical activities. RESULTS: The pre-education intervention HC-PAIRS and vignettes were completed by 40 of 56 attendees. A total of 18 participants completed the posteducation intervention HC-PAIRS and CLBP-related clinical vignettes. Most of participants identified as full-time clinicians, employees of the United States Department of Veterans Affairs, and musculoskeletal/neuromusculoskeletal providers. The pre-education intervention HC-PAIRS mean score was 44.8 (SD 9.22), and the postscore was 39.5 (SD 6.49). CONCLUSION: Findings suggest an immediate change in HC-PAIRS scores following a BPS-focused CLBP education intervention for a chiropractic audience. However, due to limitations related to sample size and target population, findings should be interpreted cautiously.

Assessing adverse events associated with chiropractic care in preschool pediatric population: a feasibility study.

BACKGROUND: Manual therapies are commonly used by healthcare professionals when caring for children. However, few prospective studies have evaluated their adverse events (AEs). This study aims to assess the feasibility of a pragmatic prospective study aiming to report the immediate and delayed (48-hours post-treatment) AEs associated with manual therapies in children aged 5 or younger. Preliminary data on AEs frequency are also reported. METHODS: Between July 2021 and March 2022, chiropractors were recruited through purposive sampling and via a dedicated Facebook group for Quebec chiropractors interested in pediatrics. Legal guardians of patients aged 5 or younger were invited to fill out an online information and consent form. AEs were collected using the SafetyNET reporting system, which had been previously translated by the research team. Immediate AEs were collected through a questionnaire filled out by the legal guardian immediately after the treatment, while delayed AEs were collected through a questionnaire sent by email to the legal guardian 48 h after the treatment. Feasibility was assessed qualitatively through feedback from chiropractors and quantitatively through recruitment data. RESULTS: Overall, a total of 28 chiropractors expressed interest following the Facebook publication, and 5 participated. An additional two chiropractors were enrolled through purposive sampling. In total, 80 legal guardians consented to their child's participation, and data from 73 children were included for the analysis of AEs. At least one AE was reported in 30% of children (22/73), and AEs were mainly observed immediately following the treatment (16/22). The most common AEs were irritability/crying (11 children) or fatigue/tiredness (11 children). Feasibility analysis demonstrated that regular communication between the research team and clinicians, as well as targeting clinicians who showed great interest in pediatrics, were key factors for successful research. CONCLUSION: Results suggest that it is feasible to conduct a prospective pragmatic study evaluating AEs associated with manual therapies in private practices. Direct communication with the clinicians, a strategic clinicians' recruitment plan, and the resulting administrative burden should be considered in future studies. A larger study is required to confirm the frequency of AEs reported in the current study. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov., NCT05409859, Registered on June 3 2022. https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT05409859 .

Attitudes, beliefs, and recommendations for persistent low back pain patients: cross-sectional surveys of students and faculty at a chiropractic college.

BACKGROUND: While the use of chiropractic care for persistent low back pain (PLBP) is prevalent, chiropractors' attitudes and beliefs related to PLBP patients are not fully understood. The purpose of this study was to assess the attitudes, beliefs and activity/work recommendations of students and faculty at a chiropractic college regarding PLBP patients. METHODS: The Health Care Providers Pain and Impairment Relationship Scale (HC-PAIRS) and clinical vignettes were requested to be completed by chiropractic students and faculty at Parker University in April 2018. Higher HC-PAIRS scores indicate stronger beliefs that PLBP justifies disability and limitation of activities. Activity and work recommendations from clinical vignettes were rated as "adequate", "neutral", or "inadequate", as defined in previous literature. Descriptive statistics, independent t-tests, and logistic regression were used to analyze results. RESULTS: Student and faculty response rates were 63.6% and 25.9%, respectively. Faculty mean HC-PAIRS scores (3.66 [SD:0.88]) were significantly lower than students' (4.41 [SD:0.71]). The percentage of faculty providing "adequate" activity (62.1%) and work (41.0%) recommendations was significantly greater than the percentage of students (activity: 33.9%, work: 21.2%) (p < 0.05). Higher HC-PAIRS scores in students were associated with decreased odds of providing "adequate" activity and work recommendations. CONCLUSIONS: Student and faculty attitudes and beliefs, and students' activity/work recommendations were found to be dissimilar to those from similar studies and less congruent with CPG recommendations. Lower HC-PAIRS scores increased the odds of students providing "adequate" activity and work recommendations to patients with PLBP. Results from this study may help guide future research and training opportunities.

A scoping review to explore the use of the Health Care Providers' Pain and Impairment Relationship Scale.

OBJECTIVES: Patients' interactions with health care providers influence back pain-related outcomes. The Health Care Providers' Pain and Impairment Relationship Scale (HC-PAIRS) is an instrument that assesses providers' attitudes and beliefs about patients with persistent back pain, with lower scores implying that persistent pain does not indicate disability or limitation of activities. This scoping review aims to explore the extent of research involving the HC-PAIRS. LITERATURE SURVEY: PubMed, Embase, and PEDro databases were searched from inception to April 2022. METHODS: Extracted HC-PAIRS scores were standardized to 15-item scores and categorized by profession, student or professional status, and pre/post-educational intervention to evaluate scores. Psychometric properties and educational interventions of the HC-PAIRS were described. RESULTS: After screening, 51 studies representing 10,416 participants were included. Student and professional scores were investigated in 24 and 29 studies, respectively. Twenty-one studies included educational interventions, with heterogenous follow-up. Psychometric properties of the HC-PAIRS were assessed in 10 studies and demonstrated acceptable reliability and validity. The overall baseline mean score among all participants was 55.34 (95% CI: 53.54-57.14) (students: 56.54 [56.54-60.87]; professionals: 51.67 [49.08-54.27]). Nurses (61.99 [55.66-68.31]) and non-health care professionals (65.30 [57.33-73.28]) had the highest overall baseline mean scores, whereas chiropractors (51.69 [33.73-69.66]), MDs/PAs (52.64 [47.27-58.00]), physical therapists (53.42 [50.67-56.17]), and exercise professionals (57.36 [49.39-65.33]) had lower scores. CONCLUSIONS: The HC-PAIRS has been used across many disciplines in both students and professionals and demonstrated acceptable reliability and validity. Professionals commonly treating back pain had lower HC-PAIRS scores. Future research could benefit from standardization of interventions and timing of follow-up assessments.

The World Federation of Chiropractic Global Patient Safety Task Force: a call to action.

BACKGROUND: The Global Patient Safety Action Plan, an initiative of the World Health Organization (WHO), draws attention to patient safety as being an issue of utmost importance in healthcare. In response, the World Federation of Chiropractic (WFC) has established a Global Patient Safety Task Force to advance a patient safety culture across all facets of the chiropractic profession. This commentary aims to introduce principles and call upon the chiropractic profession to actively engage with the Global Patient Safety Action Plan beginning immediately and over the coming decade. MAIN TEXT: This commentary addresses why the chiropractic profession should pay attention to the WHO Global Patient Safety Action Plan, and what actions the chiropractic profession should take to advance these objectives. Each strategic objective identified by WHO serves as a focal point for reflection and action. Objective 1 emphasizes the need to view each clinical interaction as a chance to improve patient safety through learning. Objective 2 urges the implementation of frameworks that dismantle systemic obstacles, minimizing human errors and strengthening patient safety procedures. Objective 3 supports the optimization of clinical process safety. Objective 4 recognizes the need for patient and family engagement. Objective 5 describes the need for integrated patient safety competencies in training programs. Objective 6 explains the need for foundational data infrastructure, ecosystem, and culture. Objective 7 emphasizes that patient safety is optimized when healthcare professionals cultivate synergy and partnerships. CONCLUSIONS: The WFC Global Patient Safety Task Force provides a structured framework for aligning essential considerations for patient safety in chiropractic care with WHO strategic objectives. Embracing the prescribed action steps offers a roadmap for the chiropractic profession to nurture an inclusive and dedicated culture, placing patient safety at its core. This commentary advocates for a concerted effort within the chiropractic community to commit to and implement these principles for the collective advancement of patient safety.

Chiropractic care and research priorities for the pediatric population: a cross-sectional survey of Quebec chiropractors.

BACKGROUND: Chiropractors commonly treat pediatric patients within their private practices. The objectives of this study were (1) to identify the treatment techniques and health advice used by Quebec chiropractors with pediatric patients; (2) to explore the research priorities of Quebec chiropractors for the pediatric population; and (3) to identify Quebec chiropractors' training in the field of pediatric chiropractics. METHODS: A web-based cross-sectional survey was conducted among all licensed Quebec chiropractors (Qc, Canada). Descriptive statistics were used to analyze all quantitative variables. RESULTS: The results showed that among the 245 respondents (22.8% response rate), practitioners adapted their treatment techniques based on their patients' age group, thus using softer techniques with younger pediatric patients and slowly gravitating toward techniques used with adults when patients reached the age of six. In terms of continuing education, chiropractors reported an average of 7.87 h of training on the subject per year, which mostly came from either Quebec's College of Chiropractors (OCQ) (54.7%), written articles (46.9%) or seminars and conferences (43.7%). Both musculoskeletal (MSK) and viscerosomatic conditions were identified as high research priorities by the clinicians. CONCLUSIONS: Quebec chiropractors adapt their treatment techniques to pediatric patients. In light of limited sources of continuing education in the field of pediatric chiropractics, practitioners mostly rely on the training provided by their provincial college and scientific publications. According to practitioners, future research priorities for pediatric care should focus on both MSK conditions and non-MSK conditions.

Chiropractic pediatric patient management and interdisciplinary collaboration: a descriptive cross-sectional study of chiropractors in Quebec.

BACKGROUND: Worldwide, many patients, including minors, seek chiropractic care. The purpose of this study was to investigate the practice characteristics of chiropractors who treat pediatric patients in Quebec, Canada. METHODS: We conducted a web-based cross-sectional survey of all licensed chiropractors working in Quebec (Canada). Data were collected using an adapted questionnaire. Descriptive statistics were produced for all the variables collected. RESULTS: Among our 245 participants (response rate: 21%), 63% were women, and half defined themselves as general musculoskeletal (MSK) health care practitioners. Nearly all participants reported seeing 0-5 new pediatric patients/week, and the most common pediatric age group was 6-12 years old (57%). Pediatric patients were most commonly referred by family members and "word of mouth". The respondents most frequently indicated that they strongly agreed with statements affirming their confidence in their own diagnostic capacities regarding MSK disorders with respect to all age groups as well as non-MSK disorders with regard to young teens. They reported a moderate level of agreement with similar statements concerning the diagnosis of non-MSK disorders in newborns, preschoolers, and children. Chiropractors rarely referred their pediatric patients to a nurse/family doctor or a pediatrician. When presented with potential pediatric red flags, the respondents commonly indicated that they would refer the patient to a physician in an emergency situation or for comanagement. CONCLUSION: Chiropractors in Quebec are confident in their diagnoses of pediatric MSK conditions and refer patients to physicians in the rare event of a worrisome presentation. However, some chiropractors may have expectations that are unsupported by evidence regarding the diagnosis and management of non-MSK complaints.

The influence of flexion distraction spinal manipulation on patients with lumbar spinal stenosis: A prospective, open-label, single-arm, pilot study.

OBJECTIVE: Evaluate chiropractic care including flexion distraction spinal manipulation for improving function, symptoms and performance-based mobility in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) using a pretest-posttest design. METHODS: Data were collected at baseline, midpoint and final visits prior to care on each visit. Objective data included Timed Up and Go, Five Times Sit to Stand, and balance (force plate). An additional balance assessment was also conducted after care on the baseline visit. Subjective data included: Activities-Specific Balance Confidence Scale, Zurich Claudication Questionnaire, and pain ratings. Balance data were securely transferred via iDrive; the others were collected via REDCap. RESULTS: Twelve patients (mean age = 83.5 years ± 5.71) completed the average midpoint visit at 9 visits and the final visit at 13.7 visits. Timed Up and Go and Five Times Sit to Stand Test decreased by 5.2 and 6.7 s at midpoint and 5.4 and 5.7 s at the final visit, respectively compared to the baseline visit (p < 0.05). Baseline visit pre-post reductions were found in anterior-posterior sample entropy and mean frequency of postural sway (p < 0.05). No balance change was found between baseline and mid or final visits. All subjective measures had statistically and clinically meaningful improvement. CONCLUSION: Significant improvement in objective and subjective outcomes were found after a pragmatic course of care including spinal manipulation in LSS patients.

Definition and classification for adverse events following spinal and peripheral joint manipulation and mobilization: A scoping review.

INTRODUCTION: Spinal and peripheral joint manipulation and mobilization are interventions used by many healthcare providers to manage musculoskeletal conditions. Although there are many reports of adverse events (or undesirable outcomes) following such interventions, there is no common definition for an adverse event or clarity on any severity classification. This impedes advances of patient safety initiatives and practice. This scoping review mapped the evidence of adverse event definitions and classification systems following spinal and peripheral joint manipulation and mobilization for musculoskeletal conditions in adults. METHODS: An electronic search of the following databases was performed from inception to February 2021: MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, Scopus, AMED, ICL, PEDro, Cochrane Library, Open Grey and Open Theses and Dissertations. Studies including adults (18 to 65 years old) with a musculoskeletal condition receiving spinal or peripheral joint manipulation or mobilization and providing an adverse event definition and/or classification were included. All study designs of peer-reviewed publications were considered. Data from included studies were charted using a standardized data extraction form and synthesised using narrative analysis. RESULTS: From 8248 identified studies, 98 were included in the final synthesis. A direct definition for an adverse event and/or classification system was provided in 69 studies, while 29 provided an indirect definition and/or classification system. The most common descriptors to define an adverse event were causality, symptom severity, onset and duration. Twenty-three studies that provided a classification system described only the end anchors (e.g., mild/minor and/or serious) of the classification while 26 described multiple categories (e.g., moderate, severe). CONCLUSION: A vast array of terms, definition and classification systems were identified. There is no one common definition or classification for adverse events following spinal and peripheral joint manipulation and mobilization. Findings support the urgent need for consensus on the terms, definition and classification system for adverse events related to these interventions.

The impact and public health response of chiropractors to the COVID-19 pandemic: a survey across four continents.

BACKGROUND: The unprecedented impact of COVID-19 on healthcare professionals has implications for healthcare delivery, including the public health guidance provided to patients. This study aims to assess the response and impact of COVID-19 on chiropractors internationally, and examines the public health response of chiropractors to the COVID-19 pandemic practising under a musculoskeletal spine-care versus subluxation-based care paradigm. METHODS: A survey was distributed to chiropractors in Australia, Canada, Denmark, Hong Kong, United Kingdom and United States (Oct. 2nd-Dec. 22nd, 2020) via professional bodies/publications, and social media. Questions were categorised into three domains: socio-demographic, public health response and business/financial impact. Multivariable logistic regression explored survey items associated with chiropractors practising under different self-reported paradigms. RESULTS: A total of 2061 chiropractors representing four global regions completed the survey. Our recruitment method did not allow the calculation of an accurate response rate. The vast majority initiated COVID-19 infection control changes within their practice setting, including increased disinfecting of treatment equipment (95%), frequent contact areas (94%) and increased hand hygiene (94%). While findings varied by region, most chiropractors (85%) indicated that they had implemented regulator advice on the use of personal protective equipment (PPE). Suspension of face-to-face patient care during the peak of the pandemic was reported by 49% of the participants with 26% implementing telehealth since the pandemic began. Chiropractors practising under a musculoskeletal spine-care paradigm were more likely to implement some/all regulator advice on patient PPE use (odds ratio [OR] = 3.25; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.57, 6.74) and practitioner PPE use (OR = 2.59; 95% CI 1.32, 5.08); trust COVID-19 public health information provided by government/World Health Organisation/chiropractic bodies (OR = 2.47; 95% CI 1.49, 4.10), and initiate patient telehealth in response to COVID-19 (OR = 1.46; 95% CI 1.02, 2.08) compared to those practising under a subluxation-based paradigm. CONCLUSIONS: Chiropractors who responded to our survey made substantial infectious control changes in response to COVID-19. However, there was regional variation in the implementation of the advised practitioner and patient use of PPE and limited overall use of telehealth consultations by chiropractors during COVID-19. Musculoskeletal spine-care chiropractors were more adaptive to certain COVID-19 public health changes within their practice setting than subluxation-based chiropractors.

Response to 'Methodological flaws on "manual therapy for the pediatric population: a systematic review" by Prevost et al. (2019)'.

Correspondence from Yu et al. identify methodological issues with the systematic review of manual therapy for pediatric manuscript. Like any research study, limitations are important for readers to keep in consideration when reviewing study findings. The primary authors maintain full confidence in the use of the review to provide practicing clinicians with a comprehensive overview of the limited and low-quality available evidence regarding manual therapies for the pediatric patient.

Immediate impact of extremity manipulation on dual task performance: a randomized, crossover clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Previous research demonstrated that manipulation of the extremities was associated with changes in multisegmental postural sway as well as improvement in a lower extremity balancing task. We were interested if these effects would extend to an upper extremity task. Our aim in this study was to investigate whether extremity manipulation could influence dual task performance where the explicit suprapostural task was balancing a water filled tube in the frontal plane. METHODS: Participants were healthy volunteers (aged 21-32 years). Upper- or lower-extremity manipulations were delivered in a participant and assessor blinded, randomized crossover, clinical trial. Postural (center of pressure) and suprapostural (tube motion) measurements in the frontal plane were made pre-post manipulation under eyes open and eyes closed conditions using a BTrackS™ force plate and a Shimmer inertial measurement unit, respectively. Pathlength, range, root mean square and sample entropy were calculated to describe each signal during the dual task performance. RESULTS: There was no main effect of manipulation or vision for the suprapostural task (tube motion). However, follow-up to interaction effects indicates that roll pathlength, range and root means square of tube motion all decreased (improvement) following lower extremity manipulation with eyes open. Regarding the postural task, there was a main effect of manipulation on mediolateral center of pressure such that pathlength reduced with both upper and lower extremity manipulation with larger decreases in pathlength values following upper extremity manipulation. CONCLUSION: Our findings show that manipulation of the extremities enhanced stability (e.g. tube stabilization and standing balance) on performance of a dual task. This furthers the argument that site-specific manipulations influence context specific motor behavior/coordination. However, as this study focused only on the immediate effects of extremity manipulation, caution is urged in generalizing these results to longer time frames until more work has been done examining the length of time these effects last. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov , NCT03877367 , Registered 15 March 2019. Data collection took place July 2019.