1
|
Measuring the Appropriateness of Spinal Manipulation for Chronic Low Back and Chronic Neck Pain in Chiropractic Patients. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2021; 46:1344-1353. [PMID: 34517404 PMCID: PMC8438222 DOI: 10.1097/brs.0000000000004009] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/01/2023]
Abstract
STUDY DESIGN RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method (RUAM) applied to chiropractic manipulation for patients with chronic low-back pain (CLBP) and chronic neck pain (CNP). OBJECTIVE Determine the rate of appropriate care provided by US chiropractors. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA Spinal manipulation has been shown effective for CLBP and CNP but may not be appropriate for all patients with these conditions. METHODS Ratings of the appropriateness of spinal and cervical manipulation previously developed by two RUAM expert panels were applied to data abstracted from random samples of patient charts from chiropractors in six US regions to determine the appropriateness of manipulation for each patient. RESULTS Of 125 chiropractors sampled, 89 provided charts that could be abstracted. Of the 2128 charts received, 1054 were abstracted. Charts received but not abstracted included 460 that were unusable (e.g., illegible), and 555 did not have CLBP or CNP. Across the abstracted charts 72% had CLBP, 57% had CNP, and 29% had both; 84% of patients with CLBP and 86% with CNP received manipulation. Patients with CLBP who had minor neurologic findings, sciatic nerve irritation, or no joint dysfunction were significantly less likely to receive manipulation. Patients with CNP who had substantial trauma etiology, no joint dysfunction, or no radiographs were significantly less likely to receive manipulation. Most manipulation for CLBP (64%) was appropriate and most manipulation for CNP (93%) was for patients where appropriateness was uncertain or equivocal. The proportions of patients receiving inappropriate manipulation for either condition were low (1%-3%) as were the numbers of patients presenting to these chiropractors for which manipulation was inappropriate. CONCLUSION Chiropractors in this US sample tend to provide manipulation to very few patients with CLBP or CNP for which it is inappropriate. However, more research is needed to determine which patients with CNP benefit from manipulation.Level of Evidence: 4.
Collapse
|
2
|
Busse JW, Pallapothu S, Vinh B, Lee V, Abril L, Canga A, Riva JJ, Viggiani D, Dilauro M, Harvey MP, Pagé I, Bhela AK, Sandhu S, Makanjuola O, Hassan MT, Moore A, Gauthier CA, Price DJ. Attitudes towards chiropractic: a repeated cross-sectional survey of Canadian family physicians. BMC FAMILY PRACTICE 2021; 22:188. [PMID: 34525953 PMCID: PMC8442384 DOI: 10.1186/s12875-021-01535-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/06/2021] [Accepted: 09/01/2021] [Indexed: 12/15/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Many primary care patients receive both medical and chiropractic care; however, interprofessional relations between physicians and chiropractors are often suboptimal which may adversely affect care of shared patients. We surveyed Canadian family physicians in 2010 to explore their attitudes towards chiropractic and re-administered the same survey a decade later to explore for changes in attitudes. METHODS A 50-item survey administered to a random sample of Canadian family physicians in 2010, and again in 2019, that inquired about demographic variables, knowledge and use of chiropractic. Imbedded in our survey was a 20-item chiropractic attitude questionnaire (CAQ); scores could range from 0 to 80 with higher scores indicating more positive attitudes toward chiropractic. We constructed a multivariable regression model to explore factors associated with CAQ scores. RESULTS Among eligible physicians, 251 of 685 in 2010 (37% response rate) and 162 of 2429 in 2019 (7% response rate) provided a completed survey. Approximately half of respondents (48%) endorsed a positive impression of chiropractic, 27% were uncertain, and 25% held negative views. Most respondents (72%) referred at least some patients for chiropractic care, mainly due to patient request or lack of response to medical care. Most physicians believed that chiropractors provide effective therapy for some musculoskeletal complaints (84%) and disagreed that chiropractic care was beneficial for non-musculoskeletal conditions (77%). The majority agreed that chiropractic care was a useful supplement to conventional care (65%) but most respondents (59%) also indicated that practice diversity among chiropractors presented a barrier to interprofessional collaboration. In our adjusted regression model, attitudes towards chiropractic showed trivial improvement from 2010 to 2019 (0.31 points on the 80-point CAQ; 95%CI 0.001 to 0.62). More negative attitudes were associated with older age (- 1.55 points for each 10-year increment from age 28; 95%CI - 2.67 to - 0.44), belief that adverse events are common with chiropractic care (- 1.41 points; 95% CI - 2.59 to - 0.23) and reported use of the research literature (- 6.04 points; 95% CI - 8.47 to - 3.61) or medical school (- 5.03 points; 95% CI - 7.89 to - 2.18) as sources of knowledge on chiropractic. More positive attitudes were associated with endorsing a relationship with a specific chiropractor (5.24 points; 95% CI 2.85 to 7.64), family and friends (4.06 points; 95% CI 1.53 to 6.60), or personal treatment experience (4.63 points; 95% CI 2.14 to 7.11) as sources of information regarding chiropractic. CONCLUSIONS Although generally positive, Canadian family physicians' attitudes towards chiropractic are diverse, and most physicians felt that practice diversity among chiropractors was a barrier to interprofessional collaboration.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jason W Busse
- Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence, and Impact, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada. .,Department of Anesthesia, Michael G. DeGroote School of Medicine, McMaster University, HSC-2V9, 1280 Main St. West, Hamilton, ON, L8S 4K1, Canada.
| | | | - Brian Vinh
- Department of Health Sciences, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada
| | - Vivienne Lee
- The School of Interdisciplinary Science, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada
| | - Lina Abril
- Department of Health Sciences, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada
| | - Albana Canga
- Institute for Work & Health, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - John J Riva
- Department of Family Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada
| | - Daniel Viggiani
- Department of Kinesiology, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, ON, Canada
| | - Marc Dilauro
- Michael G. DeGroote School of Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada
| | - Marie-Pierre Harvey
- Département de chiropratique, Université du Québec à Trois-Rivières, QC, Trois-Rivières, Canada
| | - Isabelle Pagé
- Département de chiropratique, Université du Québec à Trois-Rivières, QC, Trois-Rivières, Canada.,Center for Interdisciplinary Research in Rehabilitation and Social Integration (Cirris), Quebec City, QC, Canada
| | - Avneet K Bhela
- Department of Biology, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada
| | - Serena Sandhu
- Department of Biology, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada
| | | | | | - Ainsley Moore
- Department of Family Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada
| | | | - David J Price
- Department of Family Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Hawk C, Amorin-Woods L, Evans MW, Whedon JM, Daniels CJ, Williams RD, Parkin-Smith G, Taylor DN, Anderson D, Farabaugh R, Walters SA, Schielke A, Minkalis AL, Crivelli LS, Alpers C, Hinkeldey N, Hoang J, Caraway D, Whalen W, Cook J, Redwood D. The Role of Chiropractic Care in Providing Health Promotion and Clinical Preventive Services for Adult Patients with Musculoskeletal Pain: A Clinical Practice Guideline. J Altern Complement Med 2021; 27:850-867. [PMID: 34314609 DOI: 10.1089/acm.2021.0184] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/14/2022] Open
Abstract
Objective: To develop evidence-based recommendations on best practices for delivery of clinical preventive services by chiropractors and to offer practical resources to empower provider applications in practice. Design: Clinical practice guideline based on evidence-based recommendations of a panel of practitioners and experts on clinical preventive services. Methods: Synthesizing the results of a literature search for relevant clinical practice guidelines and systematic reviews, a multidisciplinary steering committee with training and experience in health promotion, clinical prevention, and/or evidence-based chiropractic practice drafted a set of recommendations. A Delphi panel of experienced practitioners and faculty, primarily but not exclusively chiropractors, rated the recommendations by using the formal consensus methodology established by the RAND Corporation/University of California. Results: The Delphi consensus process was conducted during January-February 2021. The 65-member Delphi panel reached a high level of consensus on appropriate application of clinical preventive services for screening and health promotion counseling within the chiropractic scope of practice. Interprofessional collaboration for the successful delivery of clinical preventive services was emphasized. Recommendations were made on primary, secondary, tertiary, and quaternary prevention of musculoskeletal pain. Conclusions: Application of this guideline in chiropractic practice may facilitate consistent and appropriate use of screening and preventive services and foster interprofessional collaboration to promote clinical preventive services and contribute to improved public health.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Cheryl Hawk
- Texas Chiropractic College, Pasadena, Texas, USA
| | | | - Marion W Evans
- University of Southern Mississippi, Hattiesburg, Mississippi, USA
| | - James M Whedon
- Southern California University of Health Sciences, Whittier, California, USA
| | | | | | | | | | - Derek Anderson
- VA Puget Sound Health Care System American Lake Division, Tacoma, Washington, USA
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | - Jason Cook
- VA Tennessee Valley Healthcare System, Nashville, Tennessee, USA
| | | |
Collapse
|
4
|
Hawk C, Whalen W, Farabaugh RJ, Daniels CJ, Minkalis AL, Taylor DN, Anderson D, Anderson K, Crivelli LS, Cark M, Barlow E, Paris D, Sarnat R, Weeks J. Best Practices for Chiropractic Management of Patients with Chronic Musculoskeletal Pain: A Clinical Practice Guideline. J Altern Complement Med 2020; 26:884-901. [PMID: 32749874 PMCID: PMC7578188 DOI: 10.1089/acm.2020.0181] [Citation(s) in RCA: 22] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/07/2023] Open
Abstract
Objective: To develop an evidence-based clinical practice guideline (CPG) through a broad-based consensus process on best practices for chiropractic management of patients with chronic musculoskeletal (MSK) pain. Design: CPG based on evidence-based recommendations of a panel of experts in chronic MSK pain management. Methods: Using systematic reviews identified in an initial literature search, a steering committee of experts in research and management of patients with chronic MSK pain drafted a set of recommendations. Additional supportive literature was identified to supplement gaps in the evidence base. A multidisciplinary panel of experienced practitioners and educators rated the recommendations through a formal Delphi consensus process using the RAND Corporation/University of California, Los Angeles, methodology. Results: The Delphi process was conducted January-February 2020. The 62-member Delphi panel reached consensus on chiropractic management of five common chronic MSK pain conditions: low-back pain (LBP), neck pain, tension headache, osteoarthritis (knee and hip), and fibromyalgia. Recommendations were made for nonpharmacological treatments, including acupuncture, spinal manipulation/mobilization, and other manual therapy; modalities such as low-level laser and interferential current; exercise, including yoga; mind-body interventions, including mindfulness meditation and cognitive behavior therapy; and lifestyle modifications such as diet and tobacco cessation. Recommendations covered many aspects of the clinical encounter, from informed consent through diagnosis, assessment, treatment planning and implementation, and concurrent management and referral. Appropriate referral and comanagement were emphasized. Conclusions: These evidence-based recommendations for a variety of conservative treatment approaches to the management of common chronic MSK pain conditions may advance consistency of care, foster collaboration between provider groups, and thereby improve patient outcomes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Cheryl Hawk
- Texas Chiropractic College, Pasadena, TX, USA
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | - David Paris
- VA Northern CA Health Care System, Redding, CA, USA
| | - Richard Sarnat
- Advanced Medicine Integration Group, L.P., Columbus, OH, USA
| | | |
Collapse
|