Systematic Review to Inform a World Health Organization (WHO) Clinical Practice Guideline: Benefits and Harms of Transcutaneous Electrical Nerve Stimulation (TENS) for Chronic Primary Low Back Pain in Adults.

PURPOSE: To evaluate benefits and harms of transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) for chronic primary low back pain (CPLBP) in adults to inform a World Health Organization (WHO) standard clinical guideline. METHODS: We searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) from various electronic databases from July 1, 2007 to March 9, 2022. Eligible RCTs targeted TENS compared to placebo/sham, usual care, no intervention, or interventions with isolated TENS effects (i.e., combined TENS with treatment B versus treatment B alone) in adults with CPLBP. We extracted outcomes requested by the WHO Guideline Development Group, appraised the risk of bias, conducted meta-analyses where appropriate, and graded the certainty of evidence using GRADE. RESULTS: Seventeen RCTs (adults, n = 1027; adults ≥ 60 years, n = 28) out of 2010 records and 89 full text RCTs screened were included. The evidence suggested that TENS resulted in a marginal reduction in pain compared to sham (9 RCTs) in the immediate term (2 weeks) (mean difference (MD) = -0.90, 95% confidence interval -1.54 to -0.26), and a reduction in pain catastrophizing in the short term (3 months) with TENS versus no intervention or interventions with TENS specific effects (1 RCT) (MD = -11.20, 95% CI -17.88 to -3.52). For other outcomes, little or no difference was found between TENS and the comparison interventions. The certainty of the evidence for all outcomes was very low. CONCLUSIONS: Based on very low certainty evidence, TENS resulted in brief and marginal reductions in pain (not deemed clinically important) and a short-term reduction in pain catastrophizing in adults with CPLBP, while little to no differences were found for other outcomes.

Systematic Review to Inform a World Health Organization (WHO) Clinical Practice Guideline: Benefits and Harms of Needling Therapies for Chronic Primary Low Back Pain in Adults.

PURPOSE: Evaluate benefits and harms of needling therapies (NT) for chronic primary low back pain (CPLBP) in adults to inform a World Health Organization (WHO) standard clinical guideline. METHODS: Electronic databases were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing NT compared with placebo/sham, usual care, or no intervention (comparing interventions where the attributable effect could be isolated). We conducted meta-analyses where indicated and graded the certainty of evidence. RESULTS: We screened 1831 citations and 109 full text RCTs, yeilding 37 RCTs. The certainty of evidence was low or very low across all included outcomes. There was little or no difference between NT and comparisons across most outcomes; there may be some benefits for certain outcomes. Compared with sham, NT improved health-related quality of life (HRQoL) (physical) (2 RCTs; SMD = 0.20, 95%CI 0.07; 0.32) at 6 months. Compared with no intervention, NT reduced pain at 2 weeks (21 RCTs; MD = - 1.21, 95%CI - 1.50; - 0.92) and 3 months (9 RCTs; MD = - 1.56, 95%CI - 2.80; - 0.95); and reduced functional limitations at 2 weeks (19 RCTs; SMD = - 1.39, 95%CI - 2.00; - 0.77) and 3 months (8 RCTs; SMD = - 0.57, 95%CI - 0.92; - 0.22). In older adults, NT reduced functional limitations at 2 weeks (SMD = - 1.10, 95%CI - 1.71; - 0.48) and 3 months (SMD = - 1.04, 95%CI - 1.66; - 0.43). Compared with usual care, NT reduced pain (MD = - 1.35, 95%CI - 1.86; - 0.84) and functional limitations (MD = - 2.55, 95%CI - 3.70; - 1.40) at 3 months. CONCLUSION: Based on low to very low certainty evidence, adults with CPLBP experienced some benefits in pain, functioning, or HRQoL with NT; however, evidence showed little to no differences for other outcomes.

Systematic Review to Inform a World Health Organization (WHO) Clinical Practice Guideline: Benefits and Harms of Structured and Standardized Education or Advice for Chronic Primary low back pain in Adults.

PURPOSE: Evaluate benefits and harms of education/advice for chronic primary low back pain (CPLBP) in adults to inform a World Health Organization (WHO) standard clinical guideline. METHODS: Electronic databases were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing education/advice compared with placebo/sham, usual care, or no intervention (including comparison interventions where the attributable effect of education/advice could be isolated). We conducted meta-analyses and graded the certainty of evidence. RESULTS: We screened 2514 citations and 86 full text RCTs and included 15 RCTs. Most outcomes were assessed 3 to 6 months post-intervention. Compared with no intervention, education/advice improved pain (10 RCTs, MD = -1.1, 95% CI -1.63 to -0.56), function (10 RCTs, SMD = -0.51, 95% CI -0.89 to -0.12), physical health-related quality of life (HRQoL) (2 RCTs, MD = 24.27, 95% CI 12.93 to 35.61), fear avoidance (5 RCTs, SMD = -1.4, 95% CI -2.51 to -0.29), depression (1 RCT; MD = 2.10, 95% CI 1.05 to 3.15), and self-efficacy (1 RCT; MD = 4.4, 95% CI 2.77 to 6.03). Education/advice conferred less benefit than sham Kinesio taping for improving fear avoidance regarding physical activity (1 RCT, MD = 5.41, 95% CI 0.28 to 10.54). Compared with usual care, education/advice improved pain (1 RCT, MD = -2.10, 95% CI -3.13 to -1.07) and function (1 RCT, MD = -7.80, 95% CI -14.28 to -1.32). There was little or no difference between education/advice and comparisons for other outcomes. For all outcomes, the certainty of evidence was very low. CONCLUSION: Education/advice in adults with CPLBP was associated with improvements in pain, function, HRQoL, and psychological outcomes, but with very low certainty.

Quality of Reporting Using Good Reporting of A Mixed Methods Study Criteria in Chiropractic Mixed Methods Research: A Methodological Review.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this review was to examine the reporting in chiropractic mixed methods research using Good Reporting of A Mixed Methods Study (GRAMMS) criteria. METHODS: In this methodological review, we searched MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, and the Index to Chiropractic Literature from the inception of each database to December 31, 2020, for chiropractic studies reporting the use of both qualitative and quantitative methods or mixed qualitative methods. Pairs of reviewers independently screened titles, abstracts, and full-text studies, extracted data, and appraised reporting using the GRAMMS criteria and risk of bias with the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT). Generalized estimating equations were used to explore factors associated with reporting using GRAMMS criteria. RESULTS: Of 1040 citations, 55 studies were eligible for review. Thirty-seven of these 55 articles employed either a multistage or convergent mixed methods design, and, on average, 3 of 6 GRAMMS items were reported among included studies. We found a strong positive correlation in scores between the GRAMMS and MMAT instruments (r = 0.78; 95% CI, 0.66-0.87). In our adjusted analysis, publications in journals indexed in Web of Science (adjusted odds ratio = 2.71; 95% CI, 1.48-4.95) were associated with higher reporting using GRAMMS criteria. Three of the 55 studies fully adhered to all 6 GRAMMS criteria, 4 studies adhered to 5 criteria, 10 studies adhered to 4 criteria, and the remaining 38 adhered to 3 criteria or fewer. CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that reporting in chiropractic mixed methods research using GRAMMS criteria was poor, particularly among studies with a higher risk of bias.

Healthcare students' attitudes towards patient centred care: a systematic review with meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Patient centred care is commonly recommended in clinical practice guidelines to improve patient outcomes and reduce healthcare costs. Identifying measurement tools used to assess healthcare students' attitudes towards patient centered care and determining their attitudes is the first step to ensuring patient centred care is provided in the future. The primary aim of this review was to describe the measurement tools used to assess healthcare students' attitudes towards patient centred care. The secondary aim was to quantify healthcare students' attitudes towards patient centred care. METHODS: An electronic database search was conducted in MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL from inception until March 1, 2021, with combined terms relating to 'patient centred care', 'attitudes', and 'healthcare students'. Studies that quantitatively assessed healthcare students' attitudes towards patient centred care were included. Measurement tools used in the included studies were qualitatively described. Meta-analysis was conducted to quantify healthcare students' attitudes towards patient centred care and assess the respective influence of gender, profession, and study geographical location on healthcare students' attitudes towards patient centred care. RESULTS: The electronic search identified 3948 total studies. One hundred twenty-nine full texts were screened, and 49 studies were included. There were 16 measurement tools used to assess healthcare students' attitudes towards patient centered care. Most studies (53%, n = 26) used the Patient-Practitioner Orientation Scale (PPOS) to assess patient centered care. Meta-analyses of 20 studies with 26 total groups resulted in a pooled mean PPOS score of 4.16 on a 0-6 scale (95% Confidence Interval [CI]: 3.95, 4.37), indicating low attitudes towards patient centered care. Additional analyses found that women have significantly higher attitudes towards patients centred care than men (pooled effect 0.14 [95% CI: 0.05, 0.23], n = 8 studies) and mean PPOS scores appear similar among sub-groups of only medical students (pooled mean 4.13, 95% CI: 3.85, 4.42, n = 13 studies) and only American healthcare students (pooled mean 4.49, 95% CI: 4.35, 4.64, n = 5 studies). CONCLUSIONS: Several different measurement tools have been used to assess healthcare students' attitudes towards patient centred care, but the most commonly used is the PPOS. Our results indicate that healthcare students have low attitudes towards patient centred care. Future studies should evaluate if attitudes towards patient centred care can be improved during healthcare education.

Best-Practice Recommendations for Chiropractic Care for Pregnant and Postpartum Patients: Results of a Consensus Process.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this project was to develop a best-practices document on chiropractic care for pregnant and postpartum patients with low back pain (LBP), pelvic girdle pain (PGP), or a combination. METHODS: A modified Delphi consensus process was conducted. A multidisciplinary steering committee of 11 health care professionals developed 71 seed statements based on their clinical experience and relevant literature. A total of 78 panelists from 7 countries were asked to rate the recommendations (70 chiropractors and representatives from 4 other health professions). Consensus was reached when at least 80% of the panelists deemed the statement to be appropriate along with a median response of at least 7 on a 9-point scale. RESULTS: Consensus was reached on 71 statements after 3 rounds of distribution. Statements included informed consent and risks, multidisciplinary care, key components regarding LBP during pregnancy, PGP during pregnancy and combined pain during pregnancy, as well as key components regarding postpartum LBP, PGP, and combined pain. Examination, diagnostic imaging, interventions, and lifestyle factors statements are included. CONCLUSION: An expert panel convened to develop the first best-practice consensus document on chiropractic care for pregnant and postpartum patients with LBP or PGP. The document consists of 71 statements on chiropractic care for pregnant and postpartum patients with LBP and PGP.

Chiropractic Care of Adults With Postpartum-Related Low Back, Pelvic Girdle, or Combination Pain: A Systematic Review.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to conduct a systematic review (SR) of the literature to assess the effectiveness of specific chiropractic care options commonly used for postpartum low back pain (LBP), pelvic girdle pain (PGP), or combination (LBP and PGP) pain. METHODS: A search strategy was developed. Interventions were those manual or other nonpharmacologic therapies commonly used by chiropractors (not requiring additional certifications). The outcomes were self-reported changes in pain or disability self-reported outcomes. We used the Scottish Intercollegiate Guideline Network checklists. Strength of the evidence (excluding cohort studies) was determined using an adapted version of the US Preventive Services Task Force criteria as described in the UK report. RESULTS: Of the 1611 published articles, 16 were included. These were 5 SRs, 10 randomized controlled trials (RCTs), and 1 cohort study. Postpartum LBP (1 RCT): moderate, favorable strength for spinal manipulation therapy/mobilization. Postpartum PGP (4 RCTs): moderate, unclear strength for exercise; and inconclusive, unclear strength for patient education. Postpartum LBP or PGP (3 SRs and 4 RCTs): inconclusive, unclear strength for exercise, self-management, and physiotherapy; while osteopathic manipulative therapy was inconclusive, favorable. CONCLUSION: No treatment option was identified as having sufficient evidence to make a clear recommendation. This SR identified a scarcity of literature regarding chiropractic care and back pain for postpartum women, as well as inconsistency among the terms LBP, PGP, and combination pain.

Chiropractic Care for Adults With Pregnancy-Related Low Back, Pelvic Girdle Pain, or Combination Pain: A Systematic Review.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to conduct a systematic review (SR) of the literature to assess the effectiveness of chiropractic care options commonly used for pregnancy-related low back pain (LBP), pelvic girdle pain (PGP), or combination pain for both experienced practitioners and students of chiropractic. METHODS: We included procedures that were commonly used by chiropractors and not requiring additional certifications. Outcomes were self-reported changes in pain or disability. We used the Scottish Intercollegiate Guideline Network checklists to assess outcomes. For strength of evidence, we used the adapted version of the US Preventive Services Task Force criteria as described in the UK report. RESULTS: Fifty articles were included from 18 SRs, 30 randomized controlled trials (RCTs), and 2 cohort studies. Pregnancy LBP (7 SRs and 12 RCTs): moderate, favorable evidence for electrotherapy and osteopathic manipulative therapy; inconclusive, favorable strength for chiropractic care, exercise, and support devices; and inconclusive, unclear strength for spinal manipulative therapy. Pregnancy PGP (4 SRs and 4 RCTs): inconclusive, favorable strength for exercise; and inconclusive, unclear evidence for patient education, information, and support devices. Pregnancy LBP or PGP (13 SRs and 12 RCTs): moderate, unclear evidence for complementary and alternative medicine; moderate, unclear evidence for exercise; inconclusive, favorable evidence for multimodal care, patient education, and physiotherapy; and inconclusive, unclear strength for spinal manipulative therapy, osteopathic manipulative therapy, and support devices. CONCLUSION: Although there is a lack of conclusive evidence, many of the interventions have moderate or unclear but favorable evidence.

Response of Practicing Chiropractors during the Early Phase of the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Descriptive Report.

OBJECTIVE: The coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has strained all levels of healthcare and it is not known how chiropractic practitioners have responded to this crisis. The purpose of this report is to describe responses by a sample of chiropractors during the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: We used a qualitative-constructivist design to understand chiropractic practice during the COVID-19 pandemic, as described by the participants. A sample of chiropractic practitioners (doctors of chiropractic, chiropractors) from various international locations were invited to participate. Each described the public health response to COVID-19 in their location and the actions that they took in their chiropractic practices from April 20 through May 4, 2020. A summary report was created from their responses and common themes were identified. RESULTS: Eighteen chiropractic practitioners representing 17 locations and 11 countries participated. A variety of practice environments were represented in this sample, including, solo practice, mobile practice, private hospital, US Veterans Administration health care, worksite health center, and group practice. They reported that they recognized and abided by changing governmental regulations. They observed their patients experience increased stress and mental health concerns resulting from the pandemic. They adopted innovative strategies, such as telehealth, to do outreach, communicate with, and provide care for patients. They abided by national and World Health Organization recommendations and they adopted creative strategies to maintain connectivity with patients through a people-centered, integrated, and collaborative approach. CONCLUSION: Although the chiropractors in this sample practiced in different cities and countries, their compliance with local regulations, concern for staff and patient safety, and people-centered responses were consistent. This sample covers all 7 World Federation of Chiropractic regions (ie, African, Asian, Eastern Mediterranean, European, Latin American, North American, and Pacific) and provides insights into measures taken by chiropractors during the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic. This information may assist the chiropractic profession as it prepares for different scenarios as new evidence about this disease evolves.

Evidence-based practice, research utilization, and knowledge translation in chiropractic: a scoping review.

BACKGROUND: Evidence-based practice (EBP) gaps are widespread across health disciplines. Understanding factors supporting the uptake of evidence can inform the design of strategies to narrow these EBP gaps. Although research utilization (RU) and the factors associated with EBP have been reported in several health disciplines, to date this area has not been reviewed comprehensively in the chiropractic profession. The purpose of this review was to report on the current state of knowledge on EBP, RU, and knowledge translation (KT) in chiropractic. METHODS: A scoping review using the Arksey and O'Malley framework was used to systematically select and summarize existing literature. Searches were conducted using a combination of keywords and MeSH terms from the earliest date available in each database to May 2015. Quantitative and thematic analyses of the selected literature were conducted. RESULTS: Nearly 85 % (56/67) of the included studies were conducted in Canada, USA, UK or Australia. Thematic analysis for the three categories (EBP, RU, KT) revealed two themes related to EBP (attitudes and beliefs of chiropractors; implementation of EBP), three related to RU (guideline adherence; frequency and sources of information accessed; and perceived value of websites and search engines), and three related to KT (knowledge practice gaps; barriers and facilitators to knowledge use; and selection, tailoring, and implementation of interventions). EBP gaps were noted in the areas of assessment of activity limitation, determination of psychosocial factors influencing pain, general health indicators, establishing a prognosis, and exercise prescription. While most practitioners believed EBP and research to be important and a few studies suggested that traditional and online educational strategies could improve patient care, use of EBP and guideline adherence varied widely. CONCLUSION: Findings suggest that the majority of chiropractors hold favourable attitudes and beliefs toward EBP. However, much remains to be done for chiropractors to routinely apply evidence into clinical practice. Educational strategies aimed at practicing chiropractors can lead to more EBP and improved patient care. The chiropractic profession requires more robust dissemination and implementation research to improve guideline adherence and patient health outcomes.

What interventions improve walking ability in neurogenic claudication with lumbar spinal stenosis? A systematic review.

PURPOSE: To investigate what interventions can improve walking ability in neurogenic claudication with lumbar spinal stenosis. METHODS: We searched CENTRAL, Medline, EMBASE, CINAHL and ICL databases up to June 2012. Only randomized controlled trials published in English and measuring walking ability were included. Data extraction, risk of bias assessment, and quality of the evidence evaluation were performed using methods of the Cochrane Back Review Group. RESULTS: We accepted 18 studies with 1,220 participants. There is very low quality evidence that calcitonin is no better than placebo or paracetamol regardless of mode of administration. There is low quality evidence that prostaglandins, and very low quality evidence that gabapentin or methylcobalamin, improves walking distance. There is low and very low quality evidence that physical therapy was no better in improving walking ability compared to no treatment, oral diclofenac plus home exercises, or combined manual therapy and exercise. There is very low quality evidence that epidural injections improve walking distance up to 2 weeks compared to placebo. There is low- and very low-quality evidence that various direct decompression surgical techniques show similar significant improvements in walking ability. There is low quality evidence that direct decompression is no better than non-operative treatment in improving walking ability. There is very low quality evidence that indirect decompression improves walking ability compared to non-operative treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Current evidence for surgical and non-surgical treatment to improve walking ability is of low and very low quality and thus prohibits recommendations to guide clinical practice.

Core stability exercises for low back pain in athletes: a systematic review of the literature.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to systematically review the evidence for the effectiveness of core stability exercises for treating athletes with low back pain (LBP). DATA SOURCES: We searched several databases (Medline, AMED, CINAHL, SportDiscus, and EMBASE). Our eligibility criteria consisted of articles published in a peer-reviewed journal in English, using any prospective clinical study design, where athletes with nonspecific LBP were treated with core stability exercises in at least 1 study arm, and back pain intensity and/or disability were used as outcome measures. All included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were assessed for risk of bias using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool, whereas non-RCT studies were assessed for quality using the Downs and Black checklist. MAIN RESULTS: Five studies including 151 participants met the inclusion criteria, including 2 RCTs. The quality of the literature on this topic was deemed to be low overall, with only 1 non-RCT having a moderate quality score, and 1 RCT having a lower risk of bias. Four studies reported statistically significant decreases in back pain intensity in their core stability intervention group. CONCLUSIONS: The quantity and quality of literature on the use of core stability exercises for treating LBP in athletes is low. The existing evidence has been conducted on small and heterogeneous study populations using interventions that vary drastically with only mixed results and short-term follow-up. This precludes the formulation of strong conclusions, and additional high quality research is clearly needed.

A commentary on the use of mixed methods in chiropractic research: Part 2: findings and recommendations for improving future chiropractic mixed methods studies.

In part 1 of this commentary, we presented an overview of mixed methods research and the rationales for using this methodology with examples from the chiropractic literature. We also introduced readers to the three core mixed methods study designs, as well as the advantages and challenges of employing a mixed methods approach. In part 2 of this series, we provide a summary of the primary and secondary findings from our doctoral work involving mixed methods research and make recommendations for improving the reporting and conduct of future chiropractic mixed methods studies.

Commentaire sur l'utilisation de méthodes mixtes dans la recherche en chiropratique. Partie 2: résultats et recommandations pour améliorer les futures études sur les méthodes mixtes en chiropratique.Dans la première partie de cette étude, nous avons présenté un aperçu de la recherche par méthodes mixtes et les raisons d'utiliser cette méthodologie à l'aide d'exemples provenant des ouvrages sur la chiropratique. Nous avons également présenté aux lecteurs les trois principaux modèles d'étude des méthodes mixtes, ainsi que les avantages et les difficultés liés à l'utilisation de ces méthodes. Dans la deuxième partie de cette série, nous présentons un résumé des résultats primaires et secondaires de notre travail de doctorat concernant les méthodes mixtes de recherche et nous formulons des recommandations pour améliorer les rapports et la conduite des futures études sur les méthodes mixtes en chiropratique.

A commentary on the use of mixed methods in chiropractic research: Part 3: integration of qualitative research with randomized controlled trials.

This is the third of three papers in our series of articles on the use of mixed methods in chiropractic research. In this commentary, we discuss the mixed methods experimental (or intervention) design. This design is a complex mixed methods research design in which qualitative research is integrated with randomized controlled trials. We provide a brief overview of this study design as well as a case example from the literature to illustrate how this approach can be applied to research within the chiropractic profession.

Étude sur l'utilisation de méthodes mixtes dans la recherche en chiropratique. Partie 3: intégration de la recherche qualitative aux essais cliniques randomisés.Cet article est le troisième d'une série de trois articles sur l'utilisation de méthodes mixtes dans la recherche en chiropratique. Dans cet article, nous abordons le modèle expérimental (ou d'intervention) des méthodes mixtes. Il s'agit d'un modèle complexe de recherche par méthodes mixte dans lequel la recherche qualitative est intégrée à des essais cliniques randomisés. Nous présentons un aperçu de ce modèle d'étude ainsi qu'un exemple issu des ouvrages spécialisés afin d'illustrer la manière dont cette approche peut être appliquée à la recherche dans le domaine de la chiropratique.

A commentary on the use of mixed methods in chiropractic research: Part 1: overview of mixed methods research.

We recently each completed doctoral programs where the major focus of our work was in mixed methods research. In the first part of this three-part commentary, we present an overview of mixed methods research. In the second part, we present a summary of our primary and secondary research findings from our doctoral work involving mixed methods. In a third paper, we will discuss integrating qualitative research with randomized controlled trials and how this mixed methods study design can be applied to research within the chiropractic profession. Our aim with these papers is to increase awareness amongst the chiropractic community of the value (and challenges) of using this unique methodology. We also make recommendations for improving the quality of reporting and conduct of future chiropractic mixed methods studies. Further dissemination of this work will occur through online webinars and conference presentations.

Étude sur l'utilisation de méthodes mixtes dans la recherche en chiropratique. Partie 1: aperçu des méthodes mixtes de rechercheNous avons récemment terminé chacun un programme de doctorat dont l'objectif principal était les méthodes mixtes de recherche. Dans la première partie de cette étude en trois parties, nous présentons un aperçu sur les méthodes mixtes de recherche. Dans la deuxième partie, nous présentons un résumé des résultats de nos recherches primaires et secondaires dans le cadre de nos travaux de doctorat impliquant des méthodes mixtes. Dans un troisième article, nous discuterons de l'intégration de la recherche qualitative aux essais cliniques randomisés et de la manière dont ce modèle d'étude mixte peut être appliqué à la recherche au sein de la profession chiropratique.L'objectif de ces articles est de sensibiliser la communauté chiropratique à la valeur (et aux difficultés) de l'utilisation de cette méthodologie unique. Nous formulons également des recommandations pour améliorer la qualité des rapports et la conduite des futures études sur les méthodes mixtes en chiropratique. La diffusion de ce travail se fera par des webinaires en ligne et des présentations lors de conférences.

Nonoperative treatment for lumbar spinal stenosis with neurogenic claudication.

BACKGROUND: Lumbar spinal stenosis with neurogenic claudication is one of the most commonly diagnosed and treated pathological spinal conditions. It frequently afflicts the elderly population. OBJECTIVES: To systematically review the evidence for the effectiveness of nonoperative treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis with neurogenic claudication. SEARCH METHODS: CENTRAL, MEDLINE, CINAHL, and Index to Chiropractic Literature (ICL) databases were searched up to June 2012. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomized controlled trials published in English, in which at least one arm provided data on nonoperative treatments DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used the standard methodological procedures expected by The Cochrane Collaboration. Risk of bias in each study was independently assessed by two review authors using the 12 criteria recommended by the Cochrane Back Review Group (Furlan 2009). Dichotomous outcomes were expressed as relative risk, continuous outcomes as mean difference or standardized mean difference; uncertainty was expressed with 95% confidence intervals. If possible a meta-analysis was performed, otherwise results were described qualitatively. GRADE was used to assess the quality of the evidence. MAIN RESULTS: From the 8635 citations screened, 56 full-text articles were assessed and 21 trials (1851 participants) were included. There was very low-quality evidence from six trials that calcitonin is no better than placebo or paracetamol, regardless of mode of administration or outcome assessed. From single small trials, there was low-quality evidence for prostaglandins, and very low-quality evidence for gabapentin or methylcobalamin that they improved walking distance. There was very low-quality evidence from a single trial that epidural steroid injections improved pain, function, and quality of life, up to two weeks, compared with home exercise or inpatient physical therapy. There was low-quality evidence from a single trial that exercise is of short-term benefit for leg pain and function compared with no treatment. There was low and very low-quality evidence from six trials that multimodal nonoperative treatment is less effective than indirect or direct surgical decompression with or without fusion. A meta-analysis of two trials comparing direct decompression with or without fusion to multimodal nonoperative care found no significant difference in function at six months (mean difference (MD) -3.66, 95% CI -10.12 to 2.80) and one year (MD -6.18, 95% CI -15.03 to 2.66), but at 24 months a significant difference was found favouring decompression (MD -4.43, 95% CI -7.91 to -0.96). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Moderate and high-quality evidence for nonoperative treatment is lacking and thus prohibits recommendations for guiding clinical practice. Given the expected exponential rise in the prevalence of lumbar spinal stenosis with neurogenic claudication, large high-quality trials are urgently needed.

The spinal stenosis pedometer and nutrition lifestyle intervention (SSPANLI) randomized controlled trial protocol.

BACKGROUND: Because of symptoms, people with lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) are often inactive, and this sedentary behaviour implies risk for diseases including obesity. Research has identified body mass index as the most powerful predictor of function in LSS. This suggests that function may be improved by targeting weight as a modifiable factor. An e-health lifestyle intervention was developed aimed at reducing fat mass and increasing physical activity in people with LSS. The main components of this intervention include pedometer-based physical activity promotion and nutrition education. METHODS/DESIGN: The Spinal Stenosis Pedometer and Nutrition Lifestyle INTERVENTION (SSPANLI) was developed and piloted with 10 individuals. The protocol for a randomized controlled trail comparing the SSPANLI intervention to usual non-surgical care follows. One hundred six (106) overweight or obese individuals with LSS will be recruited. Baseline and follow-up testing includes dual energy x-ray absorptiometry, blood draw, 3-day food record, 7-day accelerometry, questionnaire, maximal oxygen consumption, neurological exam, balance testing and a Self-Paced Walking Test. INTERVENTION: During Week 1, the intervention group will receive a pedometer, and a personalized consultation with both a Dietitian and an exercise specialist. For 12 weeks participants will log on to the e-health website to access personal step goals, walking maps, nutrition videos, and motivational quotes. Participants will also have access to in-person Coffee Talk meetings every 3 weeks, and meet with the Dietitian and exercise specialist at week 6. The control group will proceed with usual care for the 12-week period. Follow-up testing will occur at Weeks 13 and 24. DISCUSSION: This lifestyle intervention has the potential to provide a unique, non-surgical management option for people with LSS. Through decreased fat mass and increased function, we may reduce risk for obesity, chronic diseases of inactivity, and pain. The use of e-health interventions provides an opportunity for patients to become more involved in managing their own health. Behaviour changes including increased physical activity, and improved dietary habits promote overall health and quality of life, and may decrease future health care needs in this population. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov, NCT01902979.

Chiropractic management of benign paroxysmal positional vertigo using the Epley maneuver: a case series.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this case series is to describe the management of benign paroxysmal positional vertigo in a chiropractic clinical setting. CLINICAL FEATURES: Eight patients (4 women, 4 men) with symptoms of persistent benign paroxysmal positional vertigo presented for chiropractic care. The outcome measures included self-reported resolution of vertigo, a Short Form 12 Health Survey, Measure Yourself Medical Outcome Profile, and the Dix-Hallpike maneuver. Outcome measures were assessed at initial assessment, 6 days, 30 days, and 3 months postintervention. INTERVENTION AND OUTCOME: The patients underwent one or more canalith repositioning procedures (Epley maneuver). Scores in each of the categories decreased from the initial to 6-day assessment and then again at the 30-day assessment. The effects of the treatment on the Short Form 12 scores showed changes between the initial assessment and 30 days posttreatment. CONCLUSION: The patients in this case series demonstrated reduction in symptoms with chiropractic management.

Investigating the research capacity and productivity of Canadian sports chiropractors.

Objectives: To investigate the research capacity and productivity of Canadian sports chiropractors. Methods: A cross-sectional survey (phase one) and scoping review (phase two) investigated the research capacity and productivity (from 2015-2020) of the Canadian sports chiropractic field. Results: Most respondents (72%) reported obtaining research training from fellowship and master's programs, with only 2 (1%) PhD qualifications identified. Approximately, 30% reported active involvement in research, with 28% being part-time clinician researchers. Access to human and technological research resources were limited. We identified 67 publications and 16 conference presentations within a five-year period, with clinical, population health, and basic science research as the areas most studied. Conclusion: The research effort of Canadian sports chiropractors is primarily conducted by clinicians involved in research on a part-time basis. Its research outputs predominantly reflect the research requirements of the RCCSS(C) Sports Sciences Residency Program, highlighting its contribution in developing capacity and producing research for the Canadian sports chiropractic field.

Objectifs: Étudier la capacité de recherche et la productivité des chiropraticiens du sport Canadiens. Méthodes: Une enquête transversale (première phase) et un examen de la portée (deuxième phase) ont permis d'étudier la capacité de recherche et la productivité (de 2015 à 2020) du domaine de la chiropratique sportive au Canada. Résultats: La plupart des répondants (72 %) ont déclaré avoir obtenu une formation en recherche dans le cadre de programmes de bourses et de maîtrises, et seulement 2 (1 %) ont indiqué avoir obtenu un doctorat. Environ 30 % des répondants ont déclaré participer activement à la recherche, 28 % d'entre eux étant des cliniciens-chercheurs à temps partiel. L'accès aux ressources humaines et technologiques de la recherche était limité. Nous avons recensé 67 publications et 16 présentations de conférences sur une période de cinq ans, les domaines les plus étudiés étant la recherche clinique, la recherche sur la santé des populations et la recherche en sciences fondamentales. Conclusion: L'effort de recherche des chiropraticiens du sport canadiens est principalement mené par des cliniciens impliqués dans la recherche à temps partiel. Leurs résultats de recherche reflètent surtout les exigences de recherche du programme de résidence en sciences du sport du Collège royal des sciences chiropratiques du sport du Canada (RCCSS(C)), soulignant leur contribution au développement des capacités et à la production de recherches pour le domaine de la chiropratique du sport au Canada.

Developing key performance indicators for the Canadian chiropractic profession: a modified Delphi study.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study is to develop a list of performance indicators to assess the status of the chiropractic profession in Canada. METHOD: We conducted a 4-round modified Delphi technique (March 2018-January 2020) to reach consensus among experts and stakeholders on key status indicators for the chiropractic profession using online questionnaires. During the first round, experts suggested indicators for preidentified themes. Through the following two rounds, the importance and feasibility of each indicator was rated on an 11-point Likert scale, and their related potential sources of data identified. In the final round, provincial stakeholders were recruited to rate the importance of the indicators within the 90th percentile and identified those most important to their organisation. RESULTS: The first round generated 307 preliminary indicators of which 42 were selected for the remaining rounds, and eleven were preferentially selected by most of the provincial stakeholders. Experts agreed the feasibility of all indicators was high, and that data could be collected through a combination of data obtained from professional liability insurance records and survey(s) of the general population, patients, and chiropractors. CONCLUSIONS: A set of performance indicators to assess the status of the Canadian chiropractic profession emerged from a scientific and stakeholder consensus.