Best Practices for Chiropractic Management of Adult Patients With Mechanical Low Back Pain: A Clinical Practice Guideline for Chiropractors in the United States.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this paper was to update the previously published 2016 best-practice recommendations for chiropractic management of adults with mechanical low back pain (LBP) in the United States. METHODS: Two experienced health librarians conducted the literature searches for clinical practice guidelines and other relevant literature, and the investigators performed quality assessment of included studies. PubMed was searched from March 2015 to September 2021. A steering committee of 10 experts in chiropractic research, education, and practice used the most current relevant guidelines and publications to update care recommendations. A panel of 69 experts used a modified Delphi process to rate the recommendations. RESULTS: The literature search yielded 14 clinical practice guidelines, 10 systematic reviews, and 5 randomized controlled trials (all high quality). Sixty-nine members of the panel rated 38 recommendations. All but 1 statement achieved consensus in the first round, and the final statement reached consensus in the second round. Recommendations covered the clinical encounter from history, physical examination, and diagnostic considerations through informed consent, co-management, and treatment considerations for patients with mechanical LBP. CONCLUSION: This paper updates a previously published best-practice document for chiropractic management of adults with mechanical LBP.

Federal Employees' Compensation Act and Mandating the Use of X-ray for Chiropractic Management of Federal Employees: An Exploration of Concerns and a Call to Action.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this article is to explore concerns regarding sections of the federal workers' compensation law that apply to the treatment and management of work-related injuries of federal employees by chiropractors, and to offer a call to action for change. DISCUSSION: A 1974 amendment to the Federal Employees' Compensation Act (FECA) stipulates that chiropractic services rendered to injured federal workers are reimbursable. However, the only reimbursable chiropractic treatment is "manual manipulation of the spine to correct a subluxation as demonstrated by X-ray to exist." This means the chiropractor must take radiographs in order to be reimbursed. As with other health care professions, chiropractors are expected to practice according to best practices guided by studies in the scientific literature. Yet in the federal workers' compensation arena, this law requires chiropractors to practice in a manner that is fiscally wasteful, contradicts current radiology standards, and may expose patients to unnecessary X-ray radiation. Presently, there is discord between what the law mandates, chiropractic training and scope, and what professional guidelines recommend. In this article we discuss how FECA creates problems in the following 7 categories: direct harm, indirect harm, contradiction of best practices, ethical dilemma, barriers to conservative treatment, fiscal waste, and discrimination. CONCLUSION: The 1974 FECA provision requiring chiropractors to take radiographs regardless of presenting medical necessity should be updated to reflect current chiropractic education, training, and best practice. To resolve this discrepancy, we suggest that the radiographic requirement and the limitations placed on chiropractic physicians should be removed.

Clinical Practice Guideline: Chiropractic Care for Low Back Pain.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this article is to provide an update of a previously published evidence-based practice guideline on chiropractic management of low back pain. METHODS: This project updated and combined 3 previous guidelines. A systematic review of articles published between October 2009 through February 2014 was conducted to update the literature published since the previous Council on Chiropractic Guidelines and Practice Parameters (CCGPP) guideline was developed. Articles with new relevant information were summarized and provided to the Delphi panel as background information along with the previous CCGPP guidelines. Delphi panelists who served on previous consensus projects and represented a broad sampling of jurisdictions and practice experience related to low back pain management were invited to participate. Thirty-seven panelists participated; 33 were doctors of chiropractic (DCs). In addition, public comment was sought by posting the consensus statements on the CCGPP Web site. The RAND-UCLA methodology was used to reach formal consensus. RESULTS: Consensus was reached after 1 round of revisions, with an additional round conducted to reach consensus on the changes that resulted from the public comment period. Most recommendations made in the original guidelines were unchanged after going through the consensus process. CONCLUSIONS: The evidence supports that doctors of chiropractic are well suited to diagnose, treat, co-manage, and manage the treatment of patients with low back pain disorders.

Consensus terminology for stages of care: acute, chronic, recurrent, and wellness.

OBJECTIVE: As the chiropractic profession delineates its role in the emerging health care marketplace, it will become increasingly important that the scope of appropriate chiropractic care is clearly defined relative to overall patient case management. Therefore, the Council on Chiropractic Guidelines and Practice Parameters engaged in a multidisciplinary consensus process addressing the terminology related to "levels of care." METHODS: A formal consensus process was conducted in early 2009, following the RAND/UCLA method for rating appropriateness. Panelists were selected to provide a broad representation of the profession in terms of geographic location and organizational affiliation, and an attempt was made to include members of other professions, including representation from third-party payors. The Delphi process was conducted electronically in January-February 2009. A nominal group panel was conducted through an online meeting service using an experienced group facilitator. Twenty-seven panelists were selected; all but 3 were doctors of chiropractic. Six of the panelists had experience as consultants with third-party payors. RESULTS: Fifteen seed statements were circulated to the Delphi panel. Consensus was reached on all statements after 3 Delphi rounds, with further refinements made through the nominal group panel. CONCLUSIONS: By using a recognized formal consensus process, the Council on Chiropractic Guidelines and Practice Parameters has endeavored to establish a set of terms that are acceptable to the chiropractic community in order to facilitate their use within the broader health care community.

Chiropractic management of low back disorders: report from a consensus process.

OBJECTIVE: Although a number of guidelines addressing manipulation, an important component of chiropractic professional care, exist, none to date have incorporated a broad-based consensus of chiropractic research and clinical experts representing mainstream chiropractic practice into a practical document designed to provide standardized parameters of care. The purpose of this project was to develop such a document. METHODS: Development of the document began with seed materials, from which seed statements were distilled. These were circulated electronically to the Delphi panel until consensus was reached, which was considered to be present when there was agreement by at least 80% of the panelists. RESULTS: The panel consisted of 40 clinically experienced doctors of chiropractic, representing 15 chiropractic colleges and 16 states, as well as both the American Chiropractic Association and the International Chiropractic Association. The panel reached 80% consensus of the 27 seed statements after 2 rounds. Specific recommendations regarding treatment frequency and duration, as well as outcome assessment and contraindications for manipulation were agreed upon by the panel. CONCLUSIONS: A broad-based panel of experienced chiropractors was able to reach a high level (80%) of consensus regarding specific aspects of the chiropractic approach to care for patients with low back pain, based on both the scientific evidence and their clinical experience.

Resolution of cervical radiculopathy in a woman after chiropractic manipulation.

OBJECTIVE: To describe a case regarding a woman with 2-level cervical disk herniation with radicular symptoms conservatively treated with chiropractic care including high-velocity, low-amplitude (HVLA) manipulation with complete resolution of her symptoms. CLINICAL FEATURES: A 40-year-old woman developed right finger paresthesia and neck pain. Results of electrodiagnostics were normal, but clinical examination revealed subtle findings of cervical radiculopathy. A subsequent magnetic resonance imaging revealed a large right posterolateral disk protrusion and spur impinging on the right hemicord with moderate to severe central canal and right neuroforaminal stenosis at C5-6 and C6-7. She was treated with HVLA manipulation to the cervical spine, as well as soft tissue techniques, traction, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, and exercise. INTERVENTION AND OUTCOME: Her clinical findings and symptoms resolved within 90 days of initiating care and did not return in 1 year. There were no untoward effects, including transient ones. CONCLUSION: This case describes the clinical presentation and course of a patient with multilevel large herniated disks and associated radiculopathy who was treated with HVLA manipulation and other conservative approaches and appeared to have good outcomes.