A Systems Approach for Assessing Low Back Pain Care Quality in Veterans Health Administration Chiropractic Visits: A Cross-Sectional Analysis.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to explore a systemwide process for assessing components of low back pain (LBP) care quality in Veterans Health Administration (VHA) chiropractic visits using electronic health record (EHR) data. METHODS: We performed a cross-sectional quality improvement project. We randomly sampled 1000 on-station VHA chiropractic initial visits occurring from October 1, 2017, to September 30, 2018, for patients with no such visits within the prior 12 months. Characteristics of LBP visits were extracted from VHA national EHR data via structured data queries and manual chart review. We developed quality indicators for history and/or examination and treatment procedures using previously published literature and calculated frequencies of visits meeting these indicators. Visits meeting our history and/or examination and treatment indicators were classified as "high-quality" visits. We performed a regression analysis to assess associations between demographic/clinical characteristics and visits meeting our quality criteria. RESULTS: There were 592 LBP visits identified. Medical history, physical examination, and neurologic examination were documented in 76%, 77%, and 63% of all LBP visits, respectively. Recommended treatments, such as any manipulation, disease-specific education/advice, and therapeutic exercise, occurred in 75%, 69%, and 40% of chronic visits (n = 383), respectively. In acute/subacute visits (n = 37), any manipulation (92%), manual soft tissue therapy (57%), and disease-specific advice/education (54%) occurred most frequently. Female patients and those with a neck pain comorbid diagnosis were significantly less likely to have a "high-quality" visit, while other regression associations were non-significant. CONCLUSION: This study explored a systemwide process for assessing components of care quality in VHA chiropractic visits for LBP. These results produced a potential framework for uniform assessment of care quality in VHA chiropractic visits for LBP and highlight potential areas for improvements in LBP care quality assessments.

The importance of setting and therapeutic relationships when delivering chiropractic care to those living with disadvantage.

BACKGROUND: Chiropractic is a mostly privatised health profession within Australia, with people experiencing disadvantage typically having limited access due to financial barriers. However, some universities within Australia offer community outreach clinics where students provide chiropractic care to people living with disadvantage. This demographic experiences higher rates of chronic conditions including musculoskeletal complaints and requires subsidisation to access privatised care. This need also offers opportunity for the chiropractic profession to work within community healthcare teams. A mixed-methods observational study was used to investigate how the unique setting of a student chiropractic community clinic may influence the experience and outcomes of those who attend. METHODS: Three patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) investigated client outcomes: Measure Yourself Medical Outcome Profile (MYMOP); European Five Domain Five Level Quality of Life Questionnaire (EQ-5D-5L); and the Patient Enablement Instrument. The PROMs data were analysed descriptively and inferentially. Interviews were conducted with clients who had received chiropractic care, chiropractic students, clinical supervisors and staff of the centre. Interview data were coded using thematic analysis, and themes were formed using Bronfenbrenner's socio-ecological systems framework and non-participant observations. RESULTS: Thirty-seven participants completed baseline PROMs and 17 completed follow-ups after four treatments. Seventy-two percent of participants nominated their primary complaint as chronic. Significant change was noted in general health and wellbeing for the MYMOP, pain and disability for the EQ-5D-5L and index scores for the EQ-5D-5L suggested improved health and wellbeing. Most clients experienced higher levels of enablement post treatment. Twelve participants were interviewed (four were clients), with five themes emerging from the interview data. Clients reported their lived experiences impacted their health problems and attending the clinic offered benefits beyond improvement of pain and disability. CONCLUSIONS: Interview data suggested that these benefits were due to a combination of therapy, the setting and the relationships formed within that setting. Complementing this, PROM data suggested clients experienced better levels of health and wellbeing and decreased levels of pain and disability. Findings indicated that people who experienced disadvantage may receive broader benefits from attending community centres offering chiropractic care. Services such as chiropractic may be complementary in meeting the healthcare needs of those experiencing disadvantage.

Guideline-concordant utilization of magnetic resonance imaging in adults receiving chiropractic manipulative therapy vs other care for radicular low back pain: a retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Lumbar magnetic resonance imaging (LMRI) is often performed early in the course of care, which can be discordant with guidelines for non-serious low back pain. Our primary hypothesis was that adults receiving chiropractic spinal manipulative therapy (CSMT) for incident radicular low back pain (rLBP) would have reduced odds of early LMRI over 6-weeks' follow-up compared to those receiving other care (a range of medical care, excluding CSMT). As a secondary hypothesis, CSMT recipients were also expected to have reduced odds of LMRI over 6-months' and 1-years' follow-up. METHODS: A national 84-million-patient health records database including large academic healthcare organizations (TriNetX) was queried for adults age 20-70 with rLBP newly-diagnosed between January 31, 2012 and January 31, 2022. Receipt or non-receipt of CSMT determined cohort allocation. Patients with prior lumbar imaging and serious pathology within 90 days of diagnosis were excluded. Propensity score matching controlled for variables associated with LMRI utilization (e.g., demographics). Odds ratios (ORs) of LMRI over 6-weeks', 6-months', and 1-years' follow-up after rLBP diagnosis were calculated. RESULTS: After matching, there were 12,353 patients per cohort (mean age 50 years, 56% female), with a small but statistically significant reduction in odds of early LMRI in the CSMT compared to other care cohort over 6-weeks' follow-up (9%, 10%, OR [95% CI] 0.88 [0.81-0.96] P = 0.0046). There was a small but statistically significant increase in odds of LMRI among patients in the CSMT relative to the other care cohort over 6-months' (12%, 11%, OR [95% CI] 1.10 [1.02-1.19], P < 0.0174) and 1-years' follow-up (14%, 12%, OR [95% CI] 1.21 [1.13-1.31], P < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that patients receiving CSMT for newly-diagnosed rLBP are less likely to receive early LMRI than patients receiving other care. However, CSMT recipients have a small increase in odds of LMRI over the long-term. Both cohorts in this study had a relatively low rate of early LMRI, possibly because the data were derived from academic healthcare organizations. The relationship of these findings to other patient care outcomes and cost should be explored in a future randomized controlled trial. REGISTRATION: Open Science Framework ( https://osf.io/t9myp ).

Limited prognostic value of pain duration in non-specific neck pain patients seeking chiropractic care.

BACKGROUND: Pain chronicity is considered an important prognostic factor for outcome. Here, it was investigated whether pain duration influences outcome when only chronic patients (pain >3 months) are considered. Secondary aims were to determine, in patients of any pain duration, how much variance in outcome is explained by pain duration and whether pain duration truly predicts outcomes, that is out-of-sample prediction in independent data. METHODS: Secondary analysis of a cohort study of neck pain patients. Patients were assessed before start of treatment and at 1-week, 1-, 3-, 6- and 12-month follow-up. Outcomes were patient global impression of change (PGIC) and percent change in patients' perceived pain intensity, rated on a numerical rating scale (NRS). Regression analyses (linear and logistic) and supervised machine learning were used to test the influence of pain duration on PGIC and percent NRS change at 1-week, 1-, 3-, 6- and 12-month follow-up within sample and out-of-sample. Separate analyses were performed for the full sample (n = 720) and for chronic patients (n = 238) only. RESULTS: No relationship between pain duration and outcome was found for chronic patients only. For the full sample, statistical relationships between pain duration and outcomes were observed at all tested follow-up time points. However, the amount of variance in outcome explained by pain duration was low and no out-of-sample prediction was possible. CONCLUSIONS: Pain duration did not emerge as an important predictor of outcome in this database of 720 neck pain patients receiving chiropractic treatment. SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT: The relatively large dataset of neck pain patients challenges the widely accepted wisdom that pain duration is an important predictor of pain outcomes and that very chronic patients might only have a small likelihood of getting better. It is postulated that these results are important for the attitude of the first encounter between healthcare professionals and chronic patients.

Development and evaluation of the MAINTAIN instrument, selecting patients suitable for secondary or tertiary preventive manual care: the Nordic maintenance care program.

BACKGROUND: Chiropractic maintenance care (MC) has been found to be effective for patients classified as dysfunctional by the West Haven-Yale Multidimensional Pain Inventory (MPI). Although displaying good psychometric properties, the instrument was not designed to be used in clinical practice to screen patients for stratified care pathways. The aim was to develop a brief clinical instrument with the intent of identifying dysfunctional patients with acceptable diagnostic accuracy. METHODS: Data from 249 patients with a complete MPI dataset from a randomized clinical trial that investigated the effect and cost-effectiveness of MC with a 12-month follow-up was used in this cross-sectional analysis. A brief screening instrument was developed to identify dysfunctional patients, with a summary measure. Different cut-offs were considered with regards to diagnostic accuracy using the original instrument's classification of dysfunctional patients as a reference. Very good diagnostic accuracy was defined as an area under the curve (AUC) metric between 0.8 and 0.9. The instrument was then externally validated in 3 other existing datasets to assess model transportability across populations and medical settings. RESULTS: Using an explorative approach, the MAINTAIN instrument with 10 questions (0-6 Likert responses) capturing 5 dimensions (pain severity, interference, life control, affective distress, and support) was developed, generating an algorithm-based score ranging from - 12 to 48. Reporting a MAINTAIN score of 18 or higher, 146 out of the 249 patients were classified as dysfunctional with 95.8% sensitivity and 64.3% specificity. At a score of 22 or higher, 109/249 were classified as dysfunctional with 81.1% sensitivity and 79.2% specificity. AUC was estimated to 0.87 (95% CI 0.83, 0.92) and Youden's index was highest (0.70) at a score of 20. The diagnostic accuracy was similar and high across populations with minor differences in optimal thresholds for identifying dysfunctional individuals. CONCLUSION: The MAINTAIN instrument has very good diagnostic accuracy with regards to identifying dysfunctional patients and may be used as a decision aid in clinical practice. By using 2 thresholds, patients can be categorized into "low probability (- 12 to 17)", "moderate probability (18 to 21)", and "high probability (22 to 48)" of having a good outcome from maintenance care for low back pain. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinical trials.gov; NCT01539863; registered February 28, 2012; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01539863 .

"Like Peanut Butter and Jelly": A Qualitative Study of Chiropractic Care and Home Exercise Among Older Adults With Spinal Disability.

OBJECTIVE: A mixed-methods, randomized controlled trial comparing short- and long-term chiropractic care and exercise therapy for spinal disability in older adults found no between-group differences in the primary outcome. However, those who received long-term management reported greater improvement in neck pain, self-efficacy, function, and balance. This nested qualitative study explored participants' perceptions of the benefits and drawbacks of chiropractic care and exercise for spine-related outcomes, with an emphasis on understanding what makes treatment for spine-related problems worthwhile. METHODS: Of 171 individual interviews conducted after completing study treatment, 50 participants (25 per treatment group) were randomly selected for this analysis. Qualitative descriptive analysis included dual coding of verbatim transcripts by 2 investigators (MM and SAS), which was further distilled into a consensus-derived codebook of themes and organized using NVIVO software. RESULTS: Participants described trial interventions as complementary to one another for spine-related disability. Chiropractic care was viewed as improving spinal pain and controlling symptoms, while exercise therapy was noted for its long-term impact on self-efficacy and self-management. These older adults considered changes in pain, global sense of improvement, and improved biomechanical function as making treatment worthwhile. CONCLUSION: Older adults valued nonpharmacologic treatment options that aided them in controlling spine-related symptoms, while empowering them to maintain clinical benefit gained after a course of chiropractic spinal manipulation and exercise. The complementary nature of provider-delivered and active care modalities may be an important consideration when developing care plans. This study underscores the importance of understanding participants' values and experiences when interpreting study results and applying them to practice.

Chiropractic case reports: a review and bibliometric analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To determine publication trends, gaps, and predictors of citation of chiropractic case reports (CRs). METHODS: A bibliometric review was conducted by searching PubMed, Index to Chiropractic Literature (ICL), and Google Scholar to identify PubMed-indexed CRs, which were screened according to selection criteria. Case reports were categorized by International Classification of Disease (ICD-10) code, patient age, topic describing case management or adverse effects of care, focus being spinal or non-spinal, journal type, integrative authorship, title metrics, and citation metrics. Binary logistic regression was used to identify independent predictors of citations per year and total citations greater than the median values. RESULTS: The search identified 1176 chiropractic CRs meeting selection criteria. There was an increasing trend of CRs having a case management topic, non-spinal focus, non-chiropractic journal, neuromusculoskeletal-focus, diagnosis of vascular pathology, and a decreasing trend of adverse effect vascular pathology CRs. Independent predictors of greater total citations (or citation rate) included ICD-10 categories of perinatal conditions, infections, "case" in title, case management topic, and physical therapy, integrative, and dental journal type. Predictors of fewer citations included diseases of the blood, neoplasms, other findings not elsewhere classified, a title > 11 words, and multidisciplinary authorship. ICD-10 categories describing non-musculoskeletal diseases and special populations such as pediatrics, pregnancy, and perinatal conditions had few CRs. CONCLUSION: Chiropractic CRs are diversifying from spine-related topics. Chiropractors are encouraged to publish objective, structured CRs within defined research gaps. Published CRs can inform the design of future research studies with a higher level of clinical relevance and evidence.

Assessment of Studies Evaluating Spinal Manipulative Therapy and Infectious Disease and Immune System Outcomes: A Systematic Review.

Importance: Claims that spinal manipulative therapy (SMT) can improve immune function have increased substantially during the COVID-19 pandemic and may have contributed to the rapid spread of both accurate and inaccurate information (referred to as an infodemic by the World Health Organization). Objective: To identify, appraise, and synthesize the scientific literature on the efficacy and effectiveness of SMT in preventing the development of infectious disease or improving disease-specific outcomes in patients with infectious disease and to examine the association between SMT and selected immunological, endocrine, and other physiological biomarkers. Evidence Review: A literature search of MEDLINE, the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, the Index to Chiropractic Literature, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Embase was conducted from inception to April 15, 2020. Randomized clinical trials and cohort studies were included. Eligible studies were critically appraised, and evidence with high and acceptable quality was synthesized using the Synthesis Without Meta-Analysis guideline. Findings: A total of 2593 records were retrieved; after exclusions, 50 full-text articles were screened, and 16 articles reporting the findings of 13 studies comprising 795 participants were critically appraised. The literature search found no clinical studies that investigated the efficacy or effectiveness of SMT in preventing the development of infectious disease or improving disease-specific outcomes among patients with infectious disease. Eight articles reporting the results of 6 high- and acceptable-quality RCTs comprising 529 participants investigated the effect of SMT on biomarkers. Spinal manipulative therapy was not associated with changes in lymphocyte levels or physiological markers among patients with low back pain or participants who were asymptomatic compared with sham manipulation, a lecture series, and venipuncture control groups. Spinal manipulative therapy was associated with short-term changes in selected immunological biomarkers among asymptomatic participants compared with sham manipulation, a lecture series, and venipuncture control groups. Conclusions and Relevance: In this systematic review of 13 studies, no clinical evidence was found to support or refute claims that SMT was efficacious or effective in changing immune system outcomes. Although there were limited preliminary data from basic scientific studies suggesting that SMT may be associated with short-term changes in immunological and endocrine biomarkers, the clinical relevance of these findings is unknown. Given the lack of evidence that SMT is associated with the prevention of infectious diseases or improvements in immune function, further studies should be completed before claims of efficacy or effectiveness are made.

The effect of chiropractic care on infantile colic: results from a single-blind randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Chiropractic care is commonly used to treat infantile colic. However large trials with parental blinding are missing. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to evaluate the effect of chiropractic care on infantile colic. METHOD: This is a multicenter, single-blind randomized controlled trial conducted in four Danish chiropractic clinics, 2015-2019. Information was distributed in the maternity wards and by maternal and child health nurses. Children aged 2-14 weeks with unexplained excessive crying were recruited through home visits and randomized (1:1) to either chiropractic care or control group. Both groups attended the chiropractic clinic twice a week for 2 weeks. The intervention group received chiropractic care, while the control group was not treated. The parents were not present in the treatment room and unaware of their child's allocation. The primary outcome was change in daily hours of crying before and after treatment. Secondary outcomes were changes in hours of sleep, hours being awake and content, gastrointestinal symptoms, colic status and satisfaction. All outcomes were based on parental diaries and a final questionnaire. RESULTS: Of 200 recruited children, 185 completed the trial (treatment group n = 96; control group n = 89). Duration of crying in the treatment group was reduced by 1.5 h compared with 1 h in the control group (mean difference - 0.6, 95% CI - 1.1 to - 0.1; P = 0.026), but when adjusted for baseline hours of crying, age and chiropractic clinic, the difference was not significant (P = 0.066). The proportion obtaining a clinically important reduction of 1 h of crying was 63% in the treatment group and 47% in the control group (p = 0.037), and NNT was 6.5. We found no effect on any of the secondary outcomes. CONCLUSION: Excessive crying was reduced by half an hour in favor of the group receiving chiropractic care compared with the control group, but not at a statistically significant level after adjustments. From a clinical perspective, the mean difference between the groups was small, but there were large individual differences, which emphasizes the need to investigate if subgroups of children, e.g. those with musculoskeletal problems, benefit more than others from chiropractic care. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinical Trials NCT02595515 , registered 2 November 2015.

Identifying potential treatment effect modifiers of the effectiveness of chiropractic care to infants with colic through prespecified secondary analyses of a randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: A recent trial identified large variation in effect of chiropractic care for infantile colic. Thus, identification of possible effect modifiers could potentially enhance the clinical reasoning to select infants with excessive crying for chiropractic care. Therefore, the aim of this study is to identify potential treatment effect modifiers which might influence the effect of chiropractic care for excessive crying in infancy. METHODS: Design: Prespecified secondary analyses of data from a randomised controlled trial. The analyses are partly confirmative and partly exploratory. SETTING: Four chiropractic clinics in Denmark. PARTICIPANTS: Infants aged 2-14 weeks with unexplained excessive crying. Of the 200 infants randomised (1:1), 103 were assigned to a chiropractic care group and 97 to a control group. INTERVENTION: Infants in the intervention group received chiropractic care for 2 weeks, while the control group was not treated. Main analyses: The outcome was change in daily hours of crying. Fifteen baseline variables and 6 general variables were selected as potential effect modifiers, and indices based on these were constructed. Factor analyses, latent class analyses and prognosis were used to construct other potentially modifying variables. Finally, an attempt at defining a new index aiming at optimal prediction of the treatment effect was made. The predictive value for all resulting variables were examined by considering the difference in mean change in crying time between the two treatment groups, stratified by the values of the candidate variables, i.e. interaction analyses. RESULTS: None of the predefined items or indices were shown to be useful in identifying colicky infants with potentially larger gain from manual therapy. However, more baseline hours of crying (p = 0.029), short duration of symptoms (p = 0.061) and young age (p = 0.089) were all associated with an increased effect on the outcome of hours of crying. CONCLUSION: Musculoskeletal indicators were not shown to be predictive of an increased benefit for colicky infants from chiropractic treatment. However, increased benefit was associated with early treatment and a high level of baseline crying, suggesting that the most severely affected infants have the greatest potential of benefiting from manual therapy. This finding requires validation by future studies. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinical Trials NCT02595515 , registered 2 November 2015.

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.

Effectiveness of chiropractic manipulation versus sham manipulation for recurrent headaches in children aged 7-14 years - a randomised clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: To investigate the effectiveness of chiropractic spinal manipulation versus sham manipulation in children aged 7-14 with recurrent headaches. METHODS: Design: A two-arm, single-blind, superiority randomised controlled trial. SETTING: One chiropractic clinic and one paediatric specialty practice in Denmark, November 2015 to August 2020. PARTICIPANTS: 199 children aged 7 to 14 years, with at least one episode of headache per week for the previous 6 months and at least one musculoskeletal dysfunction identified. INTERVENTIONS: All participants received standard oral and written advice to reduce headaches. In addition, children in the active treatment group received chiropractic spinal manipulation and children in the control group received sham manipulation for a period of 4 months. Number and frequency of treatments were based on the chiropractor's individual evaluation in the active treatment group; the children in the control group received approximately eight visits during the treatment period. PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURES: 'Number of days with headache', 'pain intensity' and 'medication' were reported weekly by text messages, and global perceived effect by text message after 4 months. A planned fixed sequence strategy based on an initial outcome data analysis was used to prioritize outcomes. 'Number of days with headache' and 'pain intensity' were chosen as equally important outcomes of highest priority, followed by global perceived effect and medication. The significance level for the first two outcomes was fixed to 0.025 to take multiplicity into account. RESULTS: Chiropractic spinal manipulation resulted in significantly fewer days with headaches (reduction of 0.81 vs. 0.41, p = 0.019, NNT = 7 for 20% improvement) and better global perceived effect (dichotomized into improved/not improved, OR = 2.8 (95% CI: 1.5-5.3), NNT = 5) compared with a sham manipulation procedure. There was no difference between groups for pain intensity during headache episodes. Due to methodological shortcomings, no conclusions could be drawn about medication use. CONCLUSIONS: Chiropractic spinal manipulation resulted in fewer headaches and higher global perceived effect, with only minor side effects. It did not lower the intensity of the headaches. Since the treatment is easily applicable, of low cost and minor side effects, chiropractic spinal manipulation might be considered as a valuable treatment option for children with recurrent headaches. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, identifier NCT02684916 , registered 02/18/2016 - retrospectively registered.

Perceptions of Chiropractic Care Among Women With Migraine: A Qualitative Substudy Using a Grounded-Theory Framework.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to characterize expectations, attitudes, and experiences of individuals with migraine who were randomly assigned to receive chiropractic care delivered within a randomized controlled trial in a hospital-based integrative care center. METHODS: This qualitative substudy was conducted as a part of a 2-arm pilot pragmatic randomized controlled trial investigating a multimodal model of chiropractic care for women with episodic migraine (4-13 migraines per month). Women were randomly assigned to chiropractic care (10 sessions over 14 weeks) plus enhanced usual care vs enhanced usual care alone. Semistructured interviews were conducted at baseline and 14-week follow-up with 15 randomly selected participants from the 29 participants randomized to the chiropractic group. Qualitative analysis was performed by 2 independent reviewers using a constant comparative method of analysis for generating grounded theory. RESULTS: Integrating baseline and follow-up interviews, 3 themes emerged: over the course of treatment with chiropractic care, participants became more aware of the role of musculoskeletal tension, pain, and posture in triggering migraine; participants revised their prior conceptions of chiropractic care beyond spinal manipulation; and participants viewed the chiropractor-patient relationship as an essential and valuable component to effectively managing their migraines. CONCLUSION: In this qualitative study, women with episodic migraine after receiving comprehensive chiropractic care described chiropractic as a multimodal intervention where they learned about musculoskeletal contributions to migraine, discovered new ways to affect their symptoms, and developed a collaborative patient-practitioner relationship. The results of this study provide insights into perceptions of chiropractic care among women with migraine and suggestions for future trials.

Assessing the Significance of Individual Change in 2 Samples of Patients in Treatment for Low Back Pain Using 5 Different Statistical Indicators.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to estimate the significance of individual change using 5 statistical indicators in 2 samples of patients treated for low back pain. METHODS: This secondary analysis used observational and clinical trial data from 2 samples of patients with low back pain to compare 5 ways of estimating significant individual change on the Impact Stratification Score (ISS) administered at the following 2 time points: 3 months apart in an observational study of 1680 patients undergoing chiropractic care, and 6 weeks apart in a randomized trial of 750 active-duty military personnel with low back pain. The following 5 methods were compared: (1) standard deviation index; (2) standard error of measurement (SEM); (3) standard error of estimate (SEE); (4) standard error of prediction (SEP); and (5) the reliable change index (RCI). The ISS is the sum of the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS)-29 v2.1 physical function, pain interference, and pain intensity scores and is scored to have a possible range of 8 (least impact) to 50 (greatest impact). RESULTS: The amount of change on the ISS needed for significant individual change in both samples was 5 for the SEM and for the SEE and 7 for the SEP and RCI. CONCLUSIONS: The results of the current study provide some preliminary support for use of the SEP or the RCI to identify significant individual change and provide estimated thresholds of individual change that can be used for the ISS. The SEP and RCI estimates of significant change were consistent with retrospective ratings of change of at least moderately better in prior research. These 2 were less likely than other methods to classify people with low back pain as responders who have not actually gotten better (false positive). In contrast, the SEM and SEE were less likely to miss real change (false negative).

Cost comparison of two approaches to chiropractic care for patients with acute and sub-acute low Back pain care episodes: a cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Low back pain (LBP) imposes a costly burden upon patients, healthcare insurers, and society overall. Spinal manipulation as practiced by chiropractors has been found be cost-effective for treatment of LBP, but there is wide variation among chiropractors in their approach to clinical care, and the most cost-effective approach to chiropractic care is uncertain. To date, little has been published regarding the cost effectiveness of different approaches to chiropractic care. Thus, the current study presents a cost comparison between chiropractic approaches for patients with acute or subacute care episodes for low back pain. METHODS: We employed a retrospective cohort design to examine costs of chiropractic care among patients diagnosed with acute or subacute low back pain. The study time period ranged between 07/01/2016 and 12/22/2017. We compared cost outcomes for patients of two cohorts of chiropractors within health care system: Cohort 1) a general network of providers, and Cohort 2) a network providing conservative evidence-based care for rapid resolution of pain. We used generalized linear regression modeling to estimate the comparative influence of demographic and clinical factors on expenditures. RESULTS: A total of 25,621 unique patients were included in the analyses. The average cost per patient for Cohort 2 (mean allowed amount $252) was lower compared to Cohort 1 (mean allowed amount $326; 0.77, 95% CI 0.75-0.79, p < .001). Patient and clinician related factors such as health plan, provider region, and sex also significantly influenced costs. CONCLUSIONS: This study comprehensively analyzed cost data associated with the chiropractic care of adults with acute or sub-acute low back pain cared by two cohorts of chiropractic physicians. In general, providers in Cohort 2 were found to be significantly associated with lower costs for patient care as compared to Cohort 1. Utilization of a clinical model characterized by a patient-centered clinic approach and standardized, best-practice clinical protocols may offer lower cost when compared to non-standardized clinical approaches to chiropractic care.

The Utilization of Joint Mobilization As Part of a Comprehensive Program to Manage Carpal Tunnel Syndrome: A Systematic Review.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this review is to identify the role of joint mobilization for individuals with Carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS). METHODS: A systematic search of 5 electronic databases (PubMed, CINAHL, Scopus, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and SPORTDiscus) was performed to identify eligible full-text randomized clinical trials related to the clinical question. Joint mobilization had to be included in one arm of the randomized clinical trials to be included. Two reviewers independently participated in each step of the screening process. A blinded third reviewer assisted in cases of discrepancy. The PEDro scale was used to assess quality. RESULTS: Ten articles were included after screening 2068 titles. In each article where joint mobilization was used, positive effects in pain, function, or additional outcomes were noted. In most cases, the intervention group integrating joint mobilization performed better than the comparison group not receiving joint techniques. CONCLUSION: In the articles reviewed, joint mobilization was associated with positive clinical effects for persons with CTS. No studies used joint mobilization in isolation; therefore, results must be interpreted cautiously. This review indicates that joint mobilization might be a useful adjunctive intervention in the management of CTS.

Exploring supervised machine learning approaches to predicting Veterans Health Administration chiropractic service utilization.

BACKGROUND: Chronic spinal pain conditions affect millions of US adults and carry a high healthcare cost burden, both direct and indirect. Conservative interventions for spinal pain conditions, including chiropractic care, have been associated with lower healthcare costs and improvements in pain status in different clinical populations, including veterans. Little is currently known about predicting healthcare service utilization in the domain of conservative interventions for spinal pain conditions, including the frequency of use of chiropractic services. The purpose of this retrospective cohort study was to explore the use of supervised machine learning approaches to predicting one-year chiropractic service utilization by veterans receiving VA chiropractic care. METHODS: We included 19,946 veterans who entered the Musculoskeletal Diagnosis Cohort between October 1, 2003 and September 30, 2013 and utilized VA chiropractic services within one year of cohort entry. The primary outcome was one-year chiropractic service utilization following index chiropractic visit, split into quartiles represented by the following classes: 1 visit, 2 to 3 visits, 4 to 6 visits, and 7 or greater visits. We compared the performance of four multiclass classification algorithms (gradient boosted classifier, stochastic gradient descent classifier, support vector classifier, and artificial neural network) in predicting visit quartile using 158 sociodemographic and clinical features. RESULTS: The selected algorithms demonstrated poor prediction capabilities. Subset accuracy was 42.1% for the gradient boosted classifier, 38.6% for the stochastic gradient descent classifier, 41.4% for the support vector classifier, and 40.3% for the artificial neural network. The micro-averaged area under the precision-recall curve for each one-versus-rest classifier was 0.43 for the gradient boosted classifier, 0.38 for the stochastic gradient descent classifier, 0.43 for the support vector classifier, and 0.42 for the artificial neural network. Performance of each model yielded only a small positive shift in prediction probability (approximately 15%) compared to naïve classification. CONCLUSIONS: Using supervised machine learning to predict chiropractic service utilization remains challenging, with only a small shift in predictive probability over naïve classification and limited clinical utility. Future work should examine mechanisms to improve model performance.

Measurement and Analysis of Biomechanical Outcomes of Chiropractic Adjustment Performance in Chiropractic Education and Practice.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to compare biomechanical measures of chiropractic adjustment performance of the McTimoney toggle-torque-recoil (MTTR) technique among students and chiropractors. METHODS: Fifty-three participants (15 year-3 [Y3] and 16 year-5 chiropractic students and 22 McTimoney chiropractors [DCs]) participated in this study. Each applied 10 MTTR thrusts to a dynamic load cell, 5 each with their left and right hands. Biomechanical variables including preload force, peak force, time to peak force, thrust duration, and total thrust time were computed from each of the force-time histories and compared within groups using a series of 2-way analysis of variance to evaluate the effects of sex and handedness, and between groups to determine the effect of experience using a series of 3-way analysis of variance. The Games-Howell post hoc test was used to further assess pairwise comparisons. RESULTS: Mean time to peak force was more than 3 × shorter for DCs (69.96 ms) compared with Y3 students (230.36 ms) (P = .030). Likewise, mean thrust duration was also found to be nearly 2.5-fold significantly shorter for DCs (117.77 ms) compared with Y3 students (283.84 ms) (P = .030). The DCs took significantly less total thrust time (mean = 1.27 seconds) in administering MTTR thrusts than Y3 students (1.89 seconds) (P = .006). No significant differences were found among any of the 3 clinician groups for peak force or in time to peak force or thrust duration for comparisons of all 10 MTTR thrusts among year-5 students and DCs. Higher peak forces were observed for thrusts delivered with clinicians' dominant hands (P = .001), and the fastest thrusts were found for the dominant hands of DCs (P = .001). Sex had no significant effect on biomechanical variables. The Y3 students had significant greater variability in thrust times for each hand and for analyses of both hands combined (P = .001). CONCLUSION: Training and experience were found to result in shorter MTTR thrust times and other biomechanical variables that have been identified as important factors in the mechanisms of chiropractic adjustments. Identification of such biomechanical markers as performance outcomes may be of assistance in providing feedback for training in chiropractic education and technique application.

Predictors of visit frequency for patients using ongoing chiropractic care for chronic low back and chronic neck pain; analysis of observational data.

BACKGROUND: Chronic spinal pain is prevalent, expensive and long-lasting. Several provider-based nonpharmacologic therapies have now been recommended for chronic low-back pain (CLBP) and chronic neck pain (CNP). However, healthcare and coverage policies provide little guidance or evidence regarding the long-term use of this care. To provide one glimpse into the long-term use of nonpharmacologic provider-based care, this study examines the predictors of visit frequency in a large sample of patients with CLBP and CNP using ongoing chiropractic care. METHODS: Observational data were collected from a large national sample of chiropractic patients in the US with non-specific CLBP and CNP. Visit frequency was defined as average number of chiropractic visits per month over the 3-month study period. Potential baseline predictor variables were entered into two sets of multi-level models according to a defined causal theory-in this case, Anderson's Behavioral Model of Health Services Use. RESULTS: Our sample included 852 patients with CLBP and 705 with CNP. Visit frequency varied significantly by chiropractor/clinic, so our models controlled for this clustering. Patients with either condition used an average of 2.3 visits per month. In the final models visit frequency increased (0.44 visits per month, p = .008) for those with CLBP and some coverage for chiropractic, but coverage had little effect on visits for patients with CNP. Patients with worse function or just starting care also had more visits and those near to ending care had fewer visits. However, visit frequency was also determined by the chiropractor/clinic where treatment was received. Chiropractors who reported seeing more patients per day also had patients with higher visit frequency, and the patients of chiropractors with 20 to 30 years of experience had fewer visits per month. In addition, after controlling for both patient and chiropractor characteristics, the state in which care was received made a difference, likely through state-level policies and regulations. CONCLUSIONS: Chiropractic patients with CLBP and CNP use a range of visit frequencies for their ongoing care. The predictors of these frequencies could be useful for understanding and developing policies for ongoing provider-based care.

The Nordic maintenance care program: maintenance care reduces the number of days with pain in acute episodes and increases the length of pain free periods for dysfunctional patients with recurrent and persistent low back pain - a secondary analysis of a pragmatic randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: A recent study showed that chiropractic patients had fewer days with bothersome (activity-limiting) low back pain (LBP) when receiving care at regular pre-planned intervals regardless of symptoms ('maintenance care', MC) compared to receiving treatment only with a new episode of LBP. Benefit varied across psychological subgroups. The aims of this study were to investigate 1) pain trajectories around treatments, 2) recurrence of new episodes of LBP, and 3) length of consecutive pain-free periods and total number of pain-free weeks, for all study participants as well as for each psychological subgroup. METHODS: A secondary analysis of data from a randomized controlled trial of patients (n = 319) seeking chiropractic care for recurrent or persistent LBP used 52 weekly estimates of days with bothersome (activity-limiting) LBP. First, a generalized estimating equations analysis was used to compare the pain trajectory before and after the initial treatment in every new treatment period. Thereafter, a time-to-event analysis (using Cox regression) estimated time to/risk of a new LBP episode. The analyses were performed on i) all study participants and ii) separately for each psychological sub-group (named adaptive copers, interpersonally distressed and dysfunctional) classified by the West Haven-Yale Multidimensional Pain Inventory. RESULTS: Patients receiving MC had flat pain trajectories around each new treatment period and reported fewer days with pain compared to patients receiving the control intervention. The entire effect was attributed to the dysfunctional subgroup who reported fewer days with activity limiting pain within each new LBP episode as well as longer total pain-free periods between episodes with a difference of 9.8 weeks (CI 95% 3.3, 16.3) compared to the control group. There were no differences in the time to/risk of a new episode of LBP in either of the subgroups. CONCLUSION: Data support the use of MC in a stratified care model targeting dysfunctional patients for MC. For a carefully selected group of patients with recurrent and persistent LBP the clinical course becomes more stable and the number of pain-free weeks between episodes increases when receiving MC. Understanding how subgroups of patients are likely to be affected by MC may help align patients' and clinicians' expectations based on realistic outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinical trials.gov; NCT01539863; February 22, 2012.