Radiography and Clinical Decision-Making in Chiropractic

A comparative effectiveness study of usual care, simple Chuna manual therapy, and complex Chuna manual therapy for the treatment of pelvic biomechanical lesions in patients with non-acute low back pain: a protocol for multicenter, randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Chuna manual therapy (CMT), a Korean manual therapy technique predominantly used for treating low back pain (LBP) and related disorders, lacks well-conceived research focusing on its comparative effectiveness, safety, and economic evaluation, particularly with respect to complex CMT with established CMT diagnostic algorithms. This study aims to illustrate a protocol for a randomized clinical study for comparative effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of complex CMT with simple CMT and usual care.

METHODS

This is a protocol for a three-armed, multicenter, assessor-blinded, pragmatic, randomized controlled trial study. A total of 81 patients suffering from non-acute LBP with pelvic biomechanical lesions (PBL), characterized by a pain duration of at least two weeks and a Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) score of 5 or higher, will be recruited from two Korean medicine hospitals. These participants will be randomly assigned to one of three groups: complex CMT plus usual care (UC; n = 27), simple CMT plus UC (n = 27), or UC groups (n = 27). They will undergo treatment for 4 weeks, and follow-up assessments will be performed 8 weeks after treatment completion. The primary outcome will be the NRS score of LBP, and secondary outcomes will include the Oswestry Disability Index, Patient Global Impression of Change, credibility and expectancy questionnaire, three-dimensional posture analysis indicators, quality of life assessment, economic evaluation, and safety assessments.

DISCUSSION

This will be the first study to assess the comparative effectiveness, safety, and cost-effectiveness of complex CMT compared to UC and simple/complex CMT in patients with LBP and PBL. We will also analyze useful diagnostic methods to help in clinical practice for CMT diagnosis.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinical Research Information Service (CRIS), KCT0009210. Registered on February 28, 2024.

Reliability of the Biomechanical Assessment of the Sagittal Lumbar Spine and Pelvis on Radiographs Used in Clinical Practice: A Systematic Review of the Literature

Background: Biomechanical analysis of the sagittal alignment of the lumbar spine and pelvis on radiographs is common in clinical practices including chiropractic, physical therapy, scoliosis-related thoraco-lumbo-sacral orthosis (TLSO) management, orthopedics, and neurosurgery. Of specific interest is the assessment of pelvic morphology and the relationship between angle of pelvic incidence, sacral slope, and lumbar lordosis to pain, disability, and clinical treatment of spine conditions. The current state of the literature on the reliability of common methods quantifying these parameters on radiographs is limited. Methods: The objective of this systematic review is to identify and review the available studies on the reliability of different methods of biomechanical analysis of sagittal lumbo-pelvic parameters used in clinical practice. Our review followed the recommendations of the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA). The design of this systematic review was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42023379873). Results: The search strategy yielded a total of 2387 articles. A total of 1539 articles were screened after deduplication and exclusion by automation tools, leaving 473 full-text articles that were retrieved. After exclusion, 64 articles met the inclusion criteria. The preponderance of the evidence showed good to excellent reliability for biomechanical assessment of sagittal lumbo-pelvic spine alignment. Conclusions: The results of this systematic review of the literature show that sagittal radiographic analysis of spinal biomechanics and alignment of the human lumbo-pelvic spine is a reliable tool for aiding diagnosis and management in clinical settings.

Chiropractors' perceptions on the use of spinal radiographs in clinical practice: a qualitative study

BACKGROUND

Radiography is commonly used in the assessment of spinal disorders, despite a lack of high-quality evidence demonstrating improved clinical outcomes or additional benefit to the patient. There is disagreement amongst chiropractors regarding the appropriate use of radiography for clinical management. This study aims to qualitatively explore chiropractors' perceptions on the use of spinal radiographs in clinical practice with respect to how they determine when to order radiographs; and how they use radiographs to inform clinical management.

METHODS

Online qualitative semi-structured interviews were conducted with 17 Australian chiropractors who currently manage patients with spinal disorders. Convienence, snowball, and purposive sampling strategies were used to ensure an appropriate breadth and depth of participant characterisitcs and beliefs. Interview data were recorded, transcribed and analysed using framework analysis.

RESULTS

Three themes were developed to describe how chiropractors determined when to order radiographs. These themes included specific findings from the clinical encounter that may inform clinical management, their perceptions of radiation risk, and the influence of clinical experience/intuition. Three themes and four subthemes were developed for how chiropractors use radiographs to inform their management. These themes explored the use of radiography for the application of chiropractic technique, as well as the role of radiographs in predicting patient prognosis, and as an educational tool to provide reassurance.

CONCLUSION

Australian chiropractors' decision-making around spinal radiography is diverse and can be influenced by a number of clinical and external factors. Previously unexplored uses of spinal radiography in clinical practice were highlighted. Some chiropractors reported potential benefits of radiography that are currently not supported by research evidence. Future research should address how radiographic findings are reported to patients with spinal disorders and how this could be optimised to improve patient outcomes.

Reliability Analysis of Vertebral Landmark Labelling on Lumbar Spine X-ray Images

Vertebral landmark labelling on X-ray images is important for objective and quantitative diagnosis. Most studies related to the reliability of labelling focus on the Cobb angle, and it is difficult to find studies describing landmark point locations. Since points are the most fundamental geometric feature that can generate lines and angles, the assessment of landmark point locations is essential. The aim of this study is to provide a reliability analysis of landmark points and vertebral endplate lines with a large number of lumbar spine X-ray images. A total of 1000 pairs of anteroposterior and lateral view lumbar spine images were prepared, and 12 manual medicine experts participated in the labelling process as raters. A standard operating procedure (SOP) was proposed by consensus of the raters based on manual medicine and provided guidelines for reducing sources of error in landmark labelling. High intraclass correlation coefficients ranging from 0.934 to 0.991 verified the reliability of the labelling process using the proposed SOP. We also presented means and standard deviations of measurement errors, which could be a valuable reference for evaluating both automated landmark detection algorithms and manual labelling by experts.

Comparison of Concordance between Chuna Manual Therapy Diagnostic Methods (Palpation, X-ray, Artificial Intelligence Program) in Lumbar Spine: An Exploratory, Cross-Sectional Clinical Study

Before Chuna manual therapy (CMT), a manual therapy applied in Korean medicine, CMT spinal diagnosis using palpation or X-ray is performed. However, studies on the inter-rater concordance of CMT diagnostic methods, concordance among diagnostic methods, and standard CMT diagnostic methods are scarce. Moreover, no clinical studies have used artificial intelligence (AI) programs for X-ray image-based CMT diagnosis. Therefore, this study sought a feasible and standard CMT spinal diagnostic method and explored the clinical applicability of the CMT-AI program. One hundred participants were recruited, and the concordance within and among different diagnostic modalities was analyzed by dividing them into manual diagnosis (MD), X-ray image-based diagnosis (XRD) by experts and non-experts, and XRD using a CMT-AI program by non-experts. Regarding intra-group concordance, XRD by experts showed the highest concordance (used as a gold standard when comparing inter-group concordance), followed by XRD using the AI program, XRD by non-experts, and then MD. Comparing diagnostic results between the groups, concordance with the gold standard was the highest for XRD using the AI program, followed by XRD by non-experts, and MD. Therefore, XRD is a more reasonable CMT diagnostic method than MD. Furthermore, the clinical applicability of the CMT-AI program is high.