Safety of cervical spine manipulation: are adverse events preventable and are manipulations being performed appropriately? A review of 134 case reports

Effectiveness and safety of manual therapy when compared with oral pain medications in patients with neck pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

This systematic review and meta-analysis seeks to investigate the effectiveness and safety of manual therapy (MT) interventions compared to oral pain medication in the management of neck pain.

METHODS

We searched from inception to March 2023, in Cochrane Central Register of Controller Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, Allied and Complementary Medicine (AMED) and Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL; EBSCO) for randomized controlled trials that examined the effect of manual therapy interventions for neck pain when compared to medication in adults with self-reported neck pain, irrespective of radicular findings, specific cause, and associated cervicogenic headaches. We used the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 tool to assess the potential risk of bias in the included studies, and the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations (GRADE) approach to grade the quality of the evidence.

RESULTS

Nine trials (779 participants) were included in the meta-analysis. We found low certainty of evidence that MT interventions may be more effective than oral pain medication in pain reduction in the short-term (Standardized Mean Difference: -0.39; 95% CI -0.66 to -0.11; 8 trials, 676 participants), and moderate certainty of evidence that MT interventions may be more effective than oral pain medication in pain reduction in the long-term (Standardized Mean Difference: - 0.36; 95% CI - 0.55 to - 0.17; 6 trials, 567 participants). We found low certainty evidence that the risk of adverse events may be lower for patients that received MT compared to the ones that received oral pain medication (Risk Ratio: 0.59; 95% CI 0.43 to 0.79; 5 trials, 426 participants).

CONCLUSIONS

MT may be more effective for people with neck pain in both short and long-term with a better safety profile regarding adverse events when compared to patients receiving oral pain medications. However, we advise caution when interpreting our safety results due to the different level of reporting strategies in place for MT and medication-induced adverse events. Future MT trials should create and adhere to strict reporting strategies with regards to adverse events to help gain a better understanding on the nature of potential MT-induced adverse events and to ensure patient safety.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

PROSPERO registration number: CRD42023421147.

Comparison of the Effects of Cervical Thrust Manipulation and Exercise in Mechanical Neck Pain: A Randomized Controlled Trial

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to compare the effectiveness of cervical thrust manipulation and exercise in patients with mechanical neck pain (MNP).

METHOD

Sixty (mean age 31.45 ± 7.31 years) patients were randomized into three groups: manipulation (Group 1); exercise (Group 2); and manipulation plus exercise (Group 3). All interventions were performed 2 days a week for 6 weeks. The visual analog scale (VAS) and Neck Disability Index (NDI) were primary outcome measures; pressure pain threshold (PPT), range of motion (ROM), Short form-36 (SF-36), and Global Rating of Change (GROC) were secondary outcome measures.

RESULTS

All parameters improved in all groups (p < .05). Only the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) for NDI was achieved in Group 3. Group 3 had greater improvement in: VAS-rest (p = .004); NDI (p < .001); PPT-left (p = .012); and vitality (p = .002), as well as higher GROC compared to the other groups (p = .043). Group 3 was superior to Group 2 in terms of: ROM (Lateral flexion [LF]-right, p = .003/left, p = .003, rotation-right, p = .012/left, p = .010), PPT-right (p = .022); and emotional well-being (p = .003). Group 1 was superior to Group 2 in terms of ROM (LF-left, p = .043/rotation-left, p = .049). The between-group effect sizes were large (0.12-0.36).

CONCLUSION

The combined application of cervical thrust manipulation and exercise in MNP resulted in greater improvement in clinical parameters, especially function, and higher patient satisfaction in the short term compared to their application alone. Because of its positive effects, cervical thrust manipulation can be added to the exercise program according to the patient's needs and suitability for manipulation.

Development of a diagnostic support tool for predicting cervical arterial dissection in primary care

OBJECTIVES

Cervical arterial dissection (CAD) is an important cause of stroke in young people which may be missed because early features may mimic migraine or a musculoskeletal presentation. The study aimed to develop a diagnostic support tool for early identification of CAD.

DESIGN

Retrospective observational study.

SETTING

Tertiary hospital.

PARTICIPANTS

Radiologically confirmed CAD cases (n = 37), non-CAD stroke cases (n = 20), and healthy controls (n = 100).

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The presence of CAD is confirmed with imaging. Predictive variables included risk factors and clinical characteristics of CAD. Variables with a p-value <0.2 included in a multivariable model. Predictive utility of the model is assessed by calculating area underthe ROC curve (AUC).

RESULTS

The model including four variables: age 40-55 years (vs < 40), trauma, recent onset headache, and > 2 neurological features, demonstrated excellent discrimination: AUC of 0.953 (95% CI: 0.916, 0.987). A predictive scoring system (total score/7) identified an optimal threshold of ≥ 3 points, with a sensitivity of 87% and specificity of 79%.

CONCLUSIONS

The study identified a diagnostic support tool with four variables to predict increased risk of CAD. Validation in a clinical sample is needed to confirm variables and refine descriptors to enable clinicians to efficiently apply the tool.Optimum cutoff scores of ≥ 3/7 points will help identify those in whom CAD should be considered and further investigation instigated. The potential impact of the tool is to improve early recognition of CAD in those with acute headache or neck pain, thereby facilitating more timely medical intervention, preventing inappropriate treatment, and improving patient outcomes.Wordcount: 3195.

Defining the landscape of patient harm after osteopathic manipulative treatment: synthesis of an adverse event model

BACKGROUND

In the United States, osteopathic manipulative treatment (OMT), is a popular complementary physical health approach for the treatment of neuromusculoskeletal disorders. However, post-OMT adverse events (AEs) are poorly defined in terms of frequency, severity, and temporal evolution. To date, no benchmark for patient safety exists. To improve understanding in this field, we set out to model the landscape of patient harm after OMT.

METHODS

We conducted a comprehensive search of all available primary clinical research studies reporting on the occurrence of post-OMT AEs in nonpregnant, adult outpatients treated by an osteopathic physician in the United States. The methodology of eligible studies was then reviewed to select those containing the minimum required dataset to model the post-OMT AEs. The minimum required dataset consisted of four model parameters: 'post-OMT interval', 'OMT encounters with post-OMT interval assessment', 'AEs preceded by an OMT encounter', and 'AE severity.' We used the dataset extracted from selected studies to calculate a patient safety benchmark defined as the incidence rate of AEs per 100 post-OMT interval-days.

RESULTS

From 212 manuscripts that we identified, 118 primary clinical research studies were assessed for eligibility. A total of 23 studies met inclusion criteria for methodological review, of which 13 studies passed and were selected for modeling. Mild AEs were the most frequent, accounting for n = 161/165 (98%) of total AEs observed in the literature. The cumulative incidence of mild AEs was also significantly greater (P = 0.01) than both moderate and severe grades. The benchmark incidence rate was 1.0 AEs per 100 post-OMT interval-days.

CONCLUSIONS

The majority of post-OMT AEs observed in the primary clinical literature were of mild severity. Modeling of the combined dataset on post-OMT AEs allowed for the derivation of a patient safety benchmark that, to date, has not been established in the field of osteopathic manipulative medicine. Additional research is needed to improve model resolution during the post-OMT period. This work conceptualized a model for identifying and grading post-OMT AEs, which should facilitate future comparisons between institutions in order to continually improve patient safety standards in the field of osteopathic manipulative medicine.

Shunt fracture as a sequela of cervical spine manipulation: a case report

Shunt disconnection is an unreported complication of spinal mobilization and manipulation. We present the case of a young adult who underwent cystoperitoneal (CP) shunt placement for an arachnoid cyst at the age of 6 years. The shunt remained functional during a follow-up period of 11 years. The patient was admitted with headache and diplopia that started after cervical manipulation by a chiropractor. Radiography revealed fracture of the distal catheter and resultant enlargement of the temporosylvian cyst. The patient required replacement of the disconnected tubing caudal to the shunt valve. The distal catheter ruptured immediately below the outlet connector of the valve. The symptoms and signs resolved completely after insertion of a new distal tube into the peritoneum. This case report demonstrates that chiropractic manipulation of the neck may be a cause of tubing breakage in patients with CP shunts.

Vertebral arteries do not experience tensile force during manual cervical spine manipulation applied to human cadavers

BACKGROUND

The vertebral artery (VA) may be stretched and subsequently damaged during manual cervical spine manipulation. The objective of this study was to measure VA length changes that occur during cervical spine manipulation and to compare these to the VA failure length.

METHODS

Piezoelectric ultrasound crystals were implanted along the length of the VA (C1 to C7) and were used to measure length changes during cervical spine manipulation of seven un-embalmed, post-rigor human cadavers. Arteries were then excised, and elongation from arbitrary in-situ head/neck positions to first force (0.1 N) was measured. Following this, VA were stretched (8.33 mm/s) to mechanical failure. Failure was defined as the instance when VA elongation resulted in a decrease in force.

RESULTS

From arbitrary in-situ head/neck positions, the greatest average VA length change during spinal manipulation was [mean (range)] 5.1% (1.1 to 15.1%). From arbitrary in-situ head/neck positions, arteries were elongated on average 33.5% (4.6 to 84.6%) prior to first force occurrence and 51.3% (16.3 to 105.1%) to failure. Average failure forces were 3.4 N (1.4 to 9.7 N).

CONCLUSIONS

Measured in arbitrary in-situ head/neck positions, VA were slack. It appears that this slack must be taken up prior to VA experiencing tensile force. During cervical spine manipulations (using cervical spine extension and rotation), arterial length changes remained below that slack length, suggesting that VA elongated but were not stretched during the manipulation. However, in order to answer the question if cervical spine manipulation is safe from a mechanical perspective, the testing performed here needs to be repeated using a defined in-situ head/neck position and take into consideration other structures (e.g. carotid arteries).

Alzheimer Disease and Related Cognitive Impairment in Older Adults: A Narrative Review of Screening, Prevention, and Management for Manual Therapy Providers

Objective

The aim of this narrative review was to review literature relevant to manual therapists about cognitive impairment, together with screening, potential treatment, and prevention modalities.

Methods

A literature search of AMED (Allied and Complementary Medicine Database), CINAHL (Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature), PubMed, and MEDLINE was conducted with the search terms "cognitive decline," "cognitive impairment," "screening," and "prevention." We reviewed current screening practices, including functional exams, imaging, and laboratory testing. We reviewed current potential preventive measures and treatments being implemented in practice.

Results

We selected 49 resources for this narrative summary. The Montreal Cognitive Assessment and Mini-Mental State Exam are recommended screening tools. Imaging and laboratory testing are not recommended in screening for cognitive decline. Promotion of healthy, active living through physical and mental activities may assist with prevention of cognitive decline.

Conclusion

Cognitive decline affects a large proportion of the US population. Recognizing signs and symptoms of this condition starts with individuals, caretakers, family members, and health care providers. Health care providers should utilize the most appropriate screening tools to assess the presence of cognitive conditions.

Spinal manipulation and adverse event reporting in the pregnant patient limits estimation of relative risk: a narrative review

OBJECTIVE

To describe variability in spinal manipulation technique details and adverse event (AE) documentation of spinal manipulation during pregnancy.

METHODS

Five databases were searched for peer-reviewed investigations of spinal manipulation during pregnancy. Criteria for inclusion was as follows: high velocity, low amplitude thrust manipulation performed, subjects pregnant during manipulation, and English language. Studies were excluded when participants were not currently pregnant, and when the manipulation performed was not high-velocity, low-amplitude thrust. Data extraction included study design, number of participants, gestational age, spinal region, number of manipulations, manipulation technique details, profession of manipulator, AE reporting (Yes vs. No), type, and number of AE.

RESULTS

Out of 18 studies included in the review, only three provide details of the spinal manipulation technique. The reported variables include patient position, practitioner position, and direction of thrust. Fourteen studies documented AE; however, only seven provide AE details.

DISCUSSION

Reporting of spinal manipulation techniques and AE during pregnancy were inconsistent. Replication of methods in future investigations is limited without more detailed documentation of manipulation techniques performed. Furthermore, determining the relative risk and safety of spinal manipulation during pregnancy is not possible without more detailed reporting of AE. Due to these inconsistencies, a checklist is proposed for standardized reporting of spinal manipulation techniques and AE. With more consistent reporting of these parameters, results of future investigations may allow for more definitive and generalizable safety recommendations on spinal manipulation during pregnancy.

Reporting of adverse events associated with spinal manipulation in randomised clinical trials: an updated systematic review

OBJECTIVES

To describe if there has been a change in the reporting of adverse events associated with spinal manipulation in randomised clinical trials (RCTs) since 2016.

DESIGN

A systematic literature review.

DATA SOURCES

Databases were searched from March 2016 to May 2022: MEDLINE (Ovid), Embase, CINAHL, ICL, PEDro and Cochrane Library. The following search terms and their derivatives were adapted for each platform: spinal manipulation; chiropractic; osteopathy; physiotherapy; naprapathy; medical manipulation and clinical trial.

METHODS

Domains of interest (pertaining to adverse events) included: completeness and location of reporting; nomenclature and description; spinal location and practitioner delivering manipulation; methodological quality of the studies and details of the publishing journal. Frequencies and proportions of studies reporting on each of these domains were calculated. Univariable and multivariable logistic regression models were fitted to examine the effect of potential predictors on the likelihood of studies reporting on adverse events.

RESULTS

There were 5399 records identified by the electronic searches, of which 154 (2.9%) were included in the analysis. Of these, 94 (61.0%) reported on adverse events with only 23.4% providing an explicit description of what constituted an adverse event. Reporting of adverse events in the abstract has increased (n=29, 30.9%) while reporting in the results section has decreased (n=83, 88.3%) over the past 6 years. Spinal manipulation was delivered to 7518 participants in the included studies. No serious adverse events were reported in any of these studies.

CONCLUSIONS

While the current level of reporting of adverse events associated with spinal manipulation in RCTs has increased since our 2016 publication on the same topic, the level remains low and inconsistent with established standards. As such, it is imperative for authors, journal editors and administrators of clinical trial registries to ensure there is more balanced reporting of both benefits and harms in RCTs involving spinal manipulation.

Effects of cervical rotatory manipulation on the cervical spinal cord complex with ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament in the vertebral canal: A finite element study

Background: There are few studies focusing on biomechanism of spinal cord injury according to the ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament (OPLL) during cervical rotatory manipulation (CRM). This study aimed to explore the biomechanical effects of CRM on the spinal cord, dura matter and nerve roots with OPLL in the cervical vertebral canal. Methods: Three validated FE models of the craniocervical spine and spinal cord complex were constructed by adding mild, moderate, and severe OPLL to the healthy FE model, respectively. We simulated the static compression of the spinal cord by OPLL and the dynamic compression during CRM in the flexion position. The stress distribution of the spinal cord complex was investigated. Results: The cervical spinal cord experienced higher von Mises stress under static compression by the severe OPLL. A higher von Mises stress was observed on the spinal cord in the moderate and severe OPLL models during CRM. The dura matter and nerve roots had a higher von Mises stress in all three models during CRM. Conclusion: The results show a high risk in performing CRM in the flexion position on patients with OPLL, in that different occupying ratios in the vertebral canal due to OPLL could significantly increase the stress on the spinal cord complex.

Use of Thrust Cervical Spinal Manipulative Therapy for Complicated Neck Pain: A Cross-Sectional Survey of Asia-Pacific Chiropractors

Background Chiropractors often use manual thrust cervical spinal manipulative therapy (thrust-cSMT) to treat musculoskeletal neck conditions. We hypothesized <50% of surveyed Asia-Pacific chiropractors would report using thrust-cSMT given potential contraindications, and secondarily explored predictors of thrust-cSMT use. Materials and methods We designed, validated, achieved sufficient reliability, and disseminated a survey to explore thrust-cSMT use. The survey queried chiropractors' characteristics (e.g., years in practice, education level, time with patients, importance of subluxation), and use of thrust-cSMT for uncomplicated neck pain and vignettes describing vertebral artery disorders, Arnold-Chiari malformation, and anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF). We performed logistic regression for each vignette with thrust-cSMT as the dependent variable and chiropractor characteristics as covariates. Results There were 241 respondents, having 12.8±10.9 years in practice, representing >15 countries. Less than 50% of chiropractors reported the use of thrust-cSMT for each vignette, including vertebral artery insufficiency (14%) and stenosis (17%), Arnold-Chiari type I (18%) and type II (5%), C5/6 ACDF (39%) and C3-6 ACDF (27%). Regressions identified significant predictors of increased or decreased use of thrust-cSMT including time spent with new patients, focus on subluxation, degree, group practice environment, use of thrust-cSMT on a healthy patient, and hours reading scientific literature (P<.05 for each). Conclusions This study was the first to chiropractors' use of thrust-cSMT for complicated neck pain and found that most Asia-Pacific chiropractors reported avoiding this treatment in the presence of a potential treatment contraindication. The use of thrust-cSMT in complicated neck pain may be related to practice characteristics. However, further research is needed to identify specific reasons why chiropractors use or avoid thrust-cSMT.

Recognition and conservative management for a spectrum of sport-related scapholunate interosseous ligament injuries: a case series

This case series presents four cases of scapholunate interosseous ligament (SLIL) injury. We discuss the process of early recognition and highlight difficulties encountered in current diagnostic and conservative management strategies. The cases profile interdisciplinary management of four scapholunate (SL) injuries that have different clinical presentations and injury mechanisms. Three sport-related SL injuries were managed conservatively by a sport specialist chiropractor and one sport-related case was self-managed. Management strategies included early wrist immobilization, soft tissue manual therapy, low-level laser therapy, proprioceptive and strengthening exercises, and early orthopedic referral. This case series highlights: (1) the spectrum of SL injuries (2) the importance of early specialty referral, (3) the paucity of literature with respect to conservative management of these injuries and (4) the role of manual therapy and rehabilitation professionals as part of the healthcare team in detecting and helping manage these wrist injuries.

Knowledge, beliefs, and attitudes of spinal manipulation: a cross-sectional survey of Italian physiotherapists

Background and Objective

High-velocity low-amplitude thrust spinal manipulation (SM) is a recommended and commonly used manual therapy intervention in physiotherapy. Beliefs surrounding the safety and effectiveness of SM have challenged its use, and even advocated for its abandonment. Our study aimed to investigate the knowledge and beliefs surrounding SM by Italian physiotherapists compared with similar practitioners in other countries.

Methods

An online survey with 41 questions was adapted from previous surveys and was distributed via a mailing list of the Italian Physiotherapists Association (March 22–26, 2020). The questionnaire was divided into 4 sections to capture information on participant demographics, utilization, potential barriers, and knowledge about SM. Questions were differentiated between spinal regions. Attitudes towards different spinal regions, attributes associated with beliefs, and the influence of previous educational background were each evaluated.

Results

Of the 7398 registered physiotherapists, 575 (7.8%) completed the survey and were included for analysis. The majority of respondents perceived SM as safe and effective when applied to the thoracic (74.1%) and lumbar (72.2%) spines; whereas, a smaller proportion viewed SM to the upper cervical spine (56.8%) as safe and effective. Respondents reported they were less likely to provide and feel comfortable with upper cervical SM (respectively, 27.5% and 48.5%) compared to the thoracic (respectively, 52.2% and 74.8%) and lumbar spines (respectively, 46.3% and 74.3%). Most physiotherapists (70.4%) agreed they would perform additional screening prior to upper cervical SM compared to other spinal regions. Respondents who were aware of clinical prediction rules were more likely to report being comfortable with SM (OR 2.38–3.69) and to perceive it as safe (OR 1.75–3.12). Finally, physiotherapists without musculoskeletal specialization, especially those with a traditional manual therapy background, were more likely to perform additional screening prior to SM, use SM less frequently, report being less comfortable performing SM, and report upper cervical SM as less safe (p < 0.001).

Discussion

The beliefs and attitudes of physiotherapists surrounding the use of SM are significantly different when comparing the upper cervical spine to other spinal regions. An educational background in traditional manual therapy significantly influences beliefs and attitudes. We propose an updated framework on evidence-based SM.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12998-022-00449-x.

Definition and classification for adverse events following spinal and peripheral joint manipulation and mobilization: A scoping review

Introduction

Spinal and peripheral joint manipulation and mobilization are interventions used by many healthcare providers to manage musculoskeletal conditions. Although there are many reports of adverse events (or undesirable outcomes) following such interventions, there is no common definition for an adverse event or clarity on any severity classification. This impedes advances of patient safety initiatives and practice. This scoping review mapped the evidence of adverse event definitions and classification systems following spinal and peripheral joint manipulation and mobilization for musculoskeletal conditions in adults.

Methods

An electronic search of the following databases was performed from inception to February 2021: MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, Scopus, AMED, ICL, PEDro, Cochrane Library, Open Grey and Open Theses and Dissertations. Studies including adults (18 to 65 years old) with a musculoskeletal condition receiving spinal or peripheral joint manipulation or mobilization and providing an adverse event definition and/or classification were included. All study designs of peer-reviewed publications were considered. Data from included studies were charted using a standardized data extraction form and synthesised using narrative analysis.

Results

From 8248 identified studies, 98 were included in the final synthesis. A direct definition for an adverse event and/or classification system was provided in 69 studies, while 29 provided an indirect definition and/or classification system. The most common descriptors to define an adverse event were causality, symptom severity, onset and duration. Twenty-three studies that provided a classification system described only the end anchors (e.g., mild/minor and/or serious) of the classification while 26 described multiple categories (e.g., moderate, severe).

Conclusion

A vast array of terms, definition and classification systems were identified. There is no one common definition or classification for adverse events following spinal and peripheral joint manipulation and mobilization. Findings support the urgent need for consensus on the terms, definition and classification system for adverse events related to these interventions.

Kinematics of the head and associated vertebral artery length changes during high-velocity, low-amplitude cervical spine manipulation

Background

Cervical spine manipulation (CSM) is a frequently used treatment for neck pain. Despite its demonstrated efficacy, concerns regarding the potential of stretch damage to vertebral arteries (VA) during CSM remain. The purpose of this study was to quantify the angular displacements of the head relative to the sternum and the associated VA length changes during the thrust phase of CSM.

Methods

Rotation and lateral flexion CSM procedures were delivered bilaterally from C1 to C7 to three male cadaveric donors (Jan 2016–Dec 2019). For each CSM the force–time profile was recorded using a thin, flexible pressure pad (100–200 Hz), to determine the timing of the thrust. Three dimensional displacements of the head relative to the sternum were recorded using an eight-camera motion analysis system (120–240 Hz) and angular displacements of the head relative to the sternum were computed in Matlab. Positive kinematic values indicate flexion, left lateral flexion, and left rotation. Ipsilateral refers to the same side as the clinician's contact and contralateral, the opposite. Length changes of the VA were recorded using eight piezoelectric ultrasound crystals (260–557 Hz), inserted along the entire vessel. VA length changes were calculated as D = (L₁− L₀)/L₀, where L₀ = length of the whole VA (sum of segmental lengths) or the V3 segment at CSM thrust onset; L₁ = whole VA or V3 length at peak force during the CSM thrust.

Results

Irrespective of the type of CSM, the side or level of CSM application, angular displacements of the head and associated VA length changes during the thrust phase of CSM were small. VA length changes during the thrust phase were largest with ipsilateral rotation CSM (producing contralateral head rotation): [mean ± SD (range)] whole artery [1.3 ± 1.0 (− 0.4 to 3.3%)]; and V3 segment [2.6 ± 3.6 (− 0.4 to 11.6%)].

Conclusions

Mean head angular displacements and VA length changes were small during CSM thrusts. Of the four different CSM measured, mean VA length changes were largest during rotation procedures. This suggests that if clinicians wish to limit VA length changes during the thrust phase of CSM, consideration should be given to the type of CSM used.

Cervical Spine Manipulations: Role of Diagnostic Procedures, Effectiveness, and Safety from a Rehabilitation and Forensic Medicine Perspective: A Systematic Review

Background: Cervical spine manipulations (CSM) have been performed for centuries and are a widely practiced intervention to manage cervical spine musculoskeletal disorders. We aimed to perform an overview of the literature concerning the effects and the adverse events of CSM in the Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine (PRM) field with a forensic medicine perspective. Methods: A search in the scientific literature (PubMed, Google Scholar, PEDro and Cochrane) was carried out from inception until October 2020. Results: Fourteen articles were included in this narrative summary. The possible development of side effects requires a careful mandatory balance of benefits and risks even when there is an indication for this approach. Moreover, a qualified professional is essential to perform CSM–a non-invasive therapeutic procedure that can be potentially harmful. Conclusions: In conclusion, it is essential to perform the diagnosis, to treat, and to manage complications within the PRM field, both for the reduction of malpractice claims and, most importantly, for the safety of the patient.

Effects of cervical rotatory manipulation on the cervical spinal cord: a finite element study

BACKGROUND

Little information is available concerning the biomechanism involved in the spinal cord injury after cervical rotatory manipulation (CRM). The primary purpose of this study was to explore the biomechanical and kinematic effects of CRM on a healthy spinal cord.

METHODS

A finite element (FE) model of the basilaris cranii, C1-C7 vertebral bodies, nerve root complex and vertebral canal contents was constructed and validated against in vivo and in vitro published data. The FE model simulated CRM in the flexion, extension and neutral positions. The stress distribution, forma and relative position of the spinal cord were observed.

RESULTS

Lower von Mises stress was observed on the spinal cord after CRM in the flexion position. The spinal cord in CRM in the flexion and neutral positions had a lower sagittal diameter and cross-sectional area. In addition, the spinal cord was anteriorly positioned after CRM in the flexion position, while the spinal cord was posteriorly positioned after CRM in the extension and neutral positions.

CONCLUSION

CRM in the flexion position is less likely to injure the spinal cord, but caution is warranted when posterior vertebral osteophytes or disc herniations exist.

Cervical disc degeneration: important considerations for the manual therapist

Cervical disc degeneration (CDD) is a progressive, age-related occurrence that is frequently associated with neck pain and radiculopathy. Consistent with the majority of published clinical practice guidelines (CPG) for neck pain, the 2017 American Physical Therapy Association Neck Pain CPG recommends cervical manipulation as an intervention to address acute, subacute, and chronic symptoms in the 'Neck Pain With Mobility Deficits' category as well for individuals with 'Chronic Neck Pain With Radiating Pain'. While CPGs are evidence-informed statements intended to help optimize care while considering the relative risks and benefits, these guidelines generally do not discuss the mechanical consequences of underlying cervical pathology nor do they recommend specific manipulation techniques, with selection left to the practitioner's discretion. From a biomechanical perspective, disc degeneration represents the loss of structural integrity/failure of the intervertebral disc. The sequelae of CDD include posterior neck pain, segmental hypermobility/instability, radicular symptoms, myelopathic disturbance, and potential vascular compromise. In this narrative review, we consider the mechanical, neurological, and vascular consequences of CDD, including information on the anatomy of the cervical disc and the mechanics of discogenic instability, the anatomic and mechanical basis of radiculitis, radiculopathy, changes to the intervertebral foramen, the importance of Modic changes, and the effect of spondylotic hypertrophy on the central spinal canal, spinal cord, and vertebral artery. The pathoanatomical and biomechanical consequences of CDD are discussed, along with suggestions which may enhance patient safety.

Measuring the Appropriateness of Spinal Manipulation for Chronic Low Back and Chronic Neck Pain in Chiropractic Patients

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.

Clinical Scenarios for Which Cervical Mobilization and Manipulation Are Considered by an Expert Panel to Be Appropriate (and Inappropriate) for Patients With Chronic Neck Pain

OBJECTIVES

Cervical mobilization and manipulation are 2 therapies commonly used for chronic neck pain (CNP). However, safety, especially of cervical manipulation, is controversial. This study identifies the clinical scenarios for which an expert panel rated cervical mobilization and manipulation as appropriate and inappropriate.

METHODS

An expert panel, following a well-validated modified-Delphi approach, used an evidence synthesis and clinical acumen to develop and then rate the appropriateness of cervical mobilization and manipulation for each of an exhaustive list of clinical scenarios for CNP. Key patient characteristics were identified using decision tree analysis (DTA).

RESULTS

Three hundred seventy-two clinical scenarios were defined and rated by an 11-member expert panel as to the appropriateness of cervical mobilization and manipulation. Across clinical scenarios more were rated inappropriate than appropriate for both therapies, and more scenarios were rated inappropriate for manipulation than mobilization. However, the number of patients presenting with each scenario is not yet known. Nevertheless, DTA indicates that all clinical scenarios that included red flags (eg, fever, cancer, inflammatory arthritides, or vasculitides), and some others involving major neurological findings, especially if previous manual therapy was unfavorable, were rated as inappropriate for both cervical mobilization and manipulation. DTA also identified the absence of cervical disk herniation, stenosis, or foraminal osteophytosis on additional testing as the most important patient characteristic in predicting ratings of appropriate.

CONCLUSIONS

Clinical guidelines for CNP should include information on the clinical scenarios for which cervical mobilization and manipulation were found inappropriate, including those with red flags, and others involving major neurological findings if previous manual therapy was unfavorable.

Short-term effect of adding graston technique to exercise program in treatment of patients with cervicogenic headache: a single-blinded, randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Physical Therapists may use the Graston technique to relieve soft-tissue restrictions and pain in the upper cervical region. However, no studies have tested the efficacy of the Graston technique in patients with cervicogenic headache.

AIM

To investigate the effect of adding the Graston technique to an exercise program on pain intensity, neck disability, cervical range of motion, headache frequency and duration, and medication intake in subjects with cervicogenic headache.

DESIGN

A single-blinded(assessor), randomized controlled trial.

SETTING

Outpatient rehabilitation clinic.

POPULATION

Sixty patients,35 to 50 years old, with cervicogenic headache have participated in the study. Patients were recruited from the outpatient clinics of Tala general hospital in Menoufia governorate.

METHODS

Patients were assigned randomly into two groups. Patients in the study group received the Graston technique in addition to an exercise program, while patients in the control group received the exercise program only. All patients received 3 sessions a week for 4 weeks. The primary outcome measure was the visual analogue scale(VAS), while the secondary outcome measures were neck disability index (NDI), cervical range of motion(CROM), headache frequency and duration, and medication intake. All outcomes were measured at baseline, after 2 weeks as well as after 4 weeks of intervention.

RESULTS

After 2 weeks of the treatment, statistically significant differences were found in all the measured outcomes (p< 0.05) in favor of the Graston group except for neck extension(p=0.08). After 4 weeks of the intervention, statistically significant differences were found in all the measured outcomes (p< 0.05) in favor of the Graston group.

CONCLUSIONS

Short-term effect of using the Graston technique in combination with an exercise program can reduce pain, decrease headache frequency and duration, and medication intake more than the exercise program alone in the medium-term. However, although the study results for NDI and neck ROM were statistically significant, it is neither clinically relevant change nor clearly outside the range of measurement error.

Hypermobile Ehlers-Danlos syndromes: Complex phenotypes, challenging diagnoses, and poorly understood causes

The Ehlers-Danlos syndromes (EDS) are a group of heritable, connective tissue disorders characterized by joint hypermobility, skin hyperextensibility, and tissue fragility. There is phenotypic and genetic variation among the 13 subtypes. The initial genetic findings on EDS were related to alterations in fibrillar collagen, but the elucidation of the molecular basis of many of the subtypes revealed several genes not involved in collagen biosynthesis or structure. However, the genetic basis of the hypermobile type of EDS (hEDS) is still unknown. hEDS is the most common type of EDS and involves generalized joint hypermobility, musculoskeletal manifestations, and mild skin involvement along with the presence of several comorbid conditions. Variability in the spectrum and severity of symptoms and progression of patient phenotype likely depend on age, gender, lifestyle, and expression domains of the EDS genes during development and postnatal life. In this review, we summarize the current molecular, genetic, epidemiologic, and pathogenetic findings related to EDS with a focus on the hypermobile type.

Teaching and use of cervical high-velocity, low-amplitude manipulation at colleges of osteopathic medicine

Context

Despite the documented effectiveness of high-velocity, low-amplitude (HVLA) treatment of the cervical spine, concerns about patient safety potentially limit didactic instruction and use in clinical practice. Understanding how cervical HVLA is taught and employed is of interest to osteopathic educators and clinicians.

Objectives

To characterize the perspectives of osteopathic manipulative medicine/osteopathic principles and practices (OMM/OPP) departments within colleges of osteopathic medicine (COMs) in the US regarding patterns of teaching and practice of HVLA treatment of the cervical spine.

Methods

A questionnaire was distributed on April 11, 2019 in paper format to OMM/OPP department chairs or designated faculty member attendees at the Educational Council on Osteopathic Principles biannual meeting. If the department chair was not available, the survey was provided to the faculty member designated to represent the Chair of the institution at ECOP. All respondents in this category returned the survey in paper before they left the meeting. The OMM/OPP department chairs who did not attend or send representatives to the ECOP meeting were sent the survey by email on April 11, 2019 and given three opportunities over 6 weeks at 2-week intervals to reply to this voluntary online survey. The survey was given or sent to a total of 51 OMM/OPP department chairs or representatives. Six questions elicited demographic information pertaining to status, age, gender, ethnicity, board-certified specialty, and COM affiliation. Nine questions examined perspectives related to the instruction of cervical HVLA manipulation and treatment.

Results

Of the 51 OMM/OPP department chairs surveyed, 38 (74.5%) responded, 32 to the paper survey at the ECOP meeting and six to the digital survey. Respondents were primarily dual Board-certified in Family Medicine and Neuromuscular Medicine (55.3%). At over 90% (35) of the COMs for which department chairs responded to the survey, cervical HVLA instruction occurs in the curriculum primarily during program years 1 and 2. Instruction in cervical HVLA to the 2nd through 7th cervical vertebral levels occurred in 97% (37), while 11% (4) of the COMs excluded the occipital-atlanto (OA) and atlanto-axial (AA) joints. A high percentage (81.6%; 31) of the OMM/OPP department chairs or representatives reported employing cervical HVLA techniques within their practice. Among the respondents, 40.5% (15) reported that 0-25% of their school's medical school class could perform cervical HVLA competently upon graduation, whereas 27% (10) said that 51-75% of their class could perform cervical HVLA.

Conclusions

A majority of COMs provide education in their curricula related to cervical HVLA primarily in the first 2 years of medical education. However, instruction often excludes cervical HVLA to the upper regions of the cervical spine. At COMs where HVLA to the cervical spine is not taught, that decision is because the techniques are thought to be too difficult and the attendant medicolegal risk perceived to be too high. OMM/OPP department chairs expressed confidence in only a small proportion of their graduates having the ability to competently apply HVLA to the cervical spine immediately after completing their predoctoral medical training.

Thoracic adverse events following spinal manipulative therapy: a systematic review and narrative synthesis

Objectives: Spinal manipulative therapy (SMT) is widely used by manual therapists to manage spinal complaints. Notwithstanding the perceived relative safety of SMT, instances of severe thoracic adverse events (AE) have been documented. An evidence synthesis is required to understand the nature, severity and characteristics of thoracic AE following all SMT. The primary objective of this study was to report thoracic AE following SMT and secondly to report patient characteristics to inform further research for safe practice. Methods: A systematic review and data synthesis were conducted according to a registered protocol (PROSPERO CRD42019123140). A sensitive topic-based search strategy for key databases, gray literature and registers used study population terms and keywords, to search to 12/6/19. Two reviewers were involved at each stage. Using the Oxford Center for Evidence-based Medicine (CEBM) the level evidence was evaluated with grade presented for each AE. Results were reported in the context of overall quality. Results: From 1013 studies identified from searches, 19 studies (15 single case studies and 4 case series) reporting 21 unique thoracic AE involving the spinal cord tissues [nonvascular (n = 7), vascular (n = 6)], pneumothorax or hemothorax (n = 3), fracture (n = 3), esophageal rupture (n = 1), rupture of thoracic aorta (n = 1), partial pancreatic transection (n = 1). Reported outcomes included fully recovery (n = 8), permanent neurological deficit (n = 5), and death (n = 4). Conclusion: Although causality cannot be confirmed, serious thoracic AE to include permanent neurological deficit and death have been reported following SMT. Findings highlight the importance of clinical reasoning, including pre-thrust examination, as part of best and safe practice for SMT.

Thoracic thrust joint manipulation: An international survey of current practice and knowledge in IFOMPT member countries

BACKGROUND

The perceived relative safety of thoracic thrust joint manipulation (TTJM) has contributed to a growth in evidence supporting use in practice. Yet adverse events (AE) have been documented following TTJM. Knowledge of current practice is therefore required to support further research.

PURPOSE

To investigate TTJM knowledge and pre-TTJM examination across IFOMPT Member Organisations (MO) and Registered Interest Groups (RIG).

METHODS

An e-survey was designed based on existing evidence and piloted. Eligibility criteria: physiotherapists from member countries of the International Federation of Orthopaedic Manipulative Physical Therapists (IFOMPT) who use TTJM. Recruitment was through IFOMPT networks (May 2018-March 2019). Data analyses included descriptive analyses and content analysis for free text data.

RESULTS

Respondents (n = 363) from 20 countries. Pre-TTJM examination included patient history (22%, n = 81) and physical examination (69%, n = 248). Across presentations (>80% threshold of agreement) contraindications included osteomyelitis, fracture and metastatic disease. Spinal deformity, respiratory disease, serious joint disease and hypermobility achieved >60% agreement as precautions. Consent was obtained by 93% respondents (n = 250). Preferred technique was PA/AP thrust (61%, n = 144). Perception of primary effect was neurophysiological (52%, n = 134), biomechanical (42%, n = 109) and placebo (3%, n = 8). From those who reported AE (n = 100), these included fractures (36%, n = 42) and cord signs/symptoms (6%, n = 7).

CONCLUSION

Pre-TTJM examination is common, although bias towards physical examination. Differential testing for upper versus lower thoracic spine is limited. Inconsistencies across knowledge of contraindications and precautions, and beliefs for biomechanical effect were found. Findings highlight the importance of high levels of clinical reasoning during patient history for TTJM.

Clinical Reasoning Behind Non-Pharmacological Interventions for the Management of Headaches: A Narrative Literature Review

Headache is the clinical syndrome most commonly observed by neurologists in daily practice. Pharmacological and non-pharmacological treatments are commonly used for the management of headaches; however, the clinical reasoning behind these interventions is not properly applied. We conducted a narrative literature review using as data sources for academic PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, AMED, CINAHL, EBSCO, PEDro, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Cochrane Collaboration Trials Register, and SCOPUS. This narrative literature review mainly considered systematic reviews, meta-analyses, randomised clinical trials, and expert opinions published after the year 2000 discussing clinical reasoning for application of non-pharmacological interventions in individuals with tension-type, migraine, and cervicogenic headaches. After the data extraction, we organized the literature thematically as follows: (1) mapping of theoretical aspects of non-pharmacological interventions; (2) summarizing most updated literature about effectiveness of non-pharmacological interventions grouped by targeted tissue and headache; (3) identifying research gaps in the existing literature and proposing hypotheses for better understanding of current clinical reasoning. We found that there are many non-pharmacological treatment strategies used for headaches, including beyond the tissue-based impairment treatments (bottom-up) and strategies targeting the central nervous system (top down). Bottom-up strategies include joint-biased, soft-tissue biased, or needling interventions, whereas top-down strategies include exercise and cognitive interventions. Evidence shows that the effectiveness of these interventions depends on the application of proper clinical reasoning, since not all strategies are effective for all headaches. For instance, evidence of non-pharmacological interventions is more controversial for migraines than for tension-type or cervicogenic headaches, since migraine pathogenesis involves activation of sub-cortical structures and the trigemino- vascular system, whereas pathogenesis of tension-type or cervicogenic headaches is most associated to musculoskeletal impairments of the cervical spine. We conclude that current literature suggests that not all non-pharmacological interventions are effective for all headaches, and that multimodal, not isolated, approaches seem to be more effective for patients with headaches. Most published studies have reported small clinical effects in the short term. This narrative literature review provides some hypotheses for discrepancies in the available literature and future research. Clinical reasoning should be applied to better understand the effects of non-pharmacological interventions.

Comparing the range of musculoskeletal therapies applied by physical therapists with postgraduate qualifications in manual therapy in patients with non-specific neck pain with international guidelines and recommendations: An observational study

The aim of this study is to compare Dutch usual care musculoskeletal therapy in patients with non-specific neck pain with recommendations from international clinical practice guidelines. Physical therapy is diverse, as it may consist of exercise, massage, advice, and other modalities. Physical therapists with post graduate qualifications in manual therapy (MT) may additionally apply spinal thrust manipulation or non-thrust mobilization techniques to treat neck pain. It is important that, in the absence of a Dutch clinical guideline for the treatment of patients with neck pain, musculoskeletal therapists use the available recommendations from international clinical practice guidelines when treating patients with neck pain. One updated clinical practice guideline was identified (Blanpied, 2017), a report from the Task Force on Neck Pain (Guzman et al., 2008) and the IFOMPT International Framework for Examination of the Cervical Region for potential of Cervical Arterial Dysfunction prior to Orthopaedic Manual Therapy Intervention (Rushton et al., 2014). At baseline 1193 patients are included and data with regard to pain, disability, fear avoidance, expectations and applied treatment modalities are gathered. Outcome is measured using the Global Perceived Effect questionnaire. Results show that patients with acute neck pain are treated significantly more often with manipulation compared to patients with sub-acute or chronic neck pain (p < .000) and younger patients are treated with manipulation more often than older patients (p < .000). In the presence of comorbidity, the preference of spinal manipulation seems to diminish, in favour of mobilization and exercise. Almost every patient receives multimodal therapy (94.3%) and spinal manipulation and mobilization are rarely used as a stand-alone treatment (4.5% and 0.8%). Dutch musculoskeletal therapists choose treatment strategies that correspond with recommendations from international guidelines.

Factors associated with cervical arterial dysfunction: a survey of physical therapist educators in the United States

Objectives: The purpose of this study was to identify the key constructs associated with symptom description and behavior, natural history of complaints, and previous medical history of cervical arterial dysfunction (CAD) according to a panel of physical therapist (PT) educators. Methods: An electronic survey was conducted of licensed PT educators currently involved in musculoskeletal physical therapy education within a credentialed program. Survey prompts queried educators to list the subjective and objective items associated with CAD, in open-text format. Responses were coded to identify unique themes (constructs). Principal axis factor analysis with Varimax rotation was performed to identify underlying constructs associated with CAD according to the panel of educators. Results: Seventy-two educators completed the survey (24.2% response rate) resulting in 50 identified unique items through thematic coding. Factor analysis (Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin measure of sampling adequacy = .679, Bartlett's test of sphericity (x ²(351) = 1129.06. p < .001), resulted in a four-factor solution: '5Ds and 3 Ns,' 'Other Neurological Findings,' 'Signs & Symptoms in Rotation and/or Extension,' and 'General Health.' Discussion: According to the PT educators in this study, the factors associated with CAD appear to reflect the IFOMPT guidelines. The responses and subsequent factor analysis demonstrate the lack of any one clinical finding for the identification of CAD in a patient with neck pain. Level of Evidence: V.

Effects of Cervical Rotatory Manipulation (CRM) on Carotid Atherosclerosis Plaque in Vulnerability: A Histological and Immunohistochemical Study Using Animal Model

Background

The safety of cervical rotatory manipulation (CRM) is still controversial, especially in patients with carotid artery atherosclerosis (CAS). The study aimed to investigate the effects of CRM on carotid plaques in vulnerability.

Methods

50 rabbits were randomly divided into four groups: model rabbits with CRM [CAS-CRM (n=15)]; model rabbits without CRM [CAS (n=15)]; normal rabbits with CRM [Normal-CRM (n=10)]; and Blank-control group (n=10). CAS disease models were induced by carotid artery balloon injury combined with a high-fat diet for 12 weeks. Then, CRM technique was performed in CAS-CRM and Normal-CRM groups for 3 weeks. In the end, determination of serum level of hs-CRP and Lp-PLA2, histological analysis under HE and Masson trichromic staining, and immunohistochemical analysis with CD34 and CD68 antibody were completed in order.

Results

Carotid stenosis rates on successful model rabbits ranged from 70% to 98%. The CAS-CRM group had an increased level of hs-CRP (P<0.05), in comparison with the CAS group, whereas effects were not significant between the Normal-CRM group and Blank-control group. In comparison with the CAS group, the positive expression of CD34 and CD68 in the CAS-CRM group increased significantly (P<0.05).

Conclusion

CRM therapy may increase the vulnerability of carotid plaque in rabbits with severe CAS.

Thoracic spine manipulation for the management of mechanical neck pain: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Objective

To investigate the role of thoracic spine manipulation (TSM) on pain and disability in the management of mechanical neck pain (MNP).

Data sources

Electronic databases PubMed, CINAHL, Pedro, Embase, AMED, the Cochrane Library, and clinicaltrials.gov were searched in January 2018.

Study selection

Eligible studies were completed RCTs, written in English, had at least 2 groups with one group receiving TSM, had at least one measure of pain or disability, and included patients with MNP of any duration. The search identified 1717 potential articles, with 14 studies meeting inclusion criteria.

Study appraisal and synthesis methods

Methodological quality was evaluated independently by two authors using the guidelines published by the Cochrane Collaboration. Pooled analyses were analyzed using a random-effects model with inverse variance methods to calculate mean differences (MD) and 95% confidence intervals for pain (VAS 0-100mm, NPRS 0-10pts; 0 = no pain) and disability (NDI and NPQ 0–100%; 0 = no disability).

Results

Across the included studies, there was increased risk of bias for inadequate provider and participant blinding. The GRADE approach demonstrated an overall level of evidence ranging from very low to moderate. Meta-analysis that compared TSM to thoracic or cervical mobilization revealed a significant effect favoring the TSM group for pain (MD -13.63; 95% CI: -21.79, -5.46) and disability (MD -9.93; 95% CI: -14.38, -5.48). Meta-analysis that compared TSM to standard care revealed a significant effect favoring the TSM group for pain (MD -13.21; 95% CI: -21.87, -4.55) and disability (MD -11.36; 95% CI: -18.93, -3.78) at short-term follow-up, and a significant effect for disability (MD -4.75; 95% CI: -6.54, -2.95) at long-term follow-up. Meta-analysis that compared TSM to cervical spine manipulation revealed a non-significant effect (MD 3.43; 95% CI: -7.26, 14.11) for pain without a distinction between immediate and short-term follow-up.

Limitations

The greatest limitation in this systematic review was the heterogeneity among the studies making it difficult to assess the true clinical benefit, as well as the overall level of quality of evidence.

Conclusions

TSM has been shown to be more beneficial than thoracic mobilization, cervical mobilization, and standard care in the short-term, but no better than cervical manipulation or placebo thoracic spine manipulation to improve pain and disability.

Trial registration

PROSPERO CRD42017068287

Australian musculoskeletal physiotherapist's perceptions, attitudes and opinions towards pre-manipulative screening of the cervical spine prior to manual therapy: Report from the focus groups

BACKGROUND

The Australian Physiotherapy Association 2006 VBI Guidelines are used by many of the member organisations of IFOMPT. These Guidelines are due for revision incorporating recent research findings, international guides, and member's recommendations.

PURPOSE

To identify and consider Australian musculoskeletal physiotherapists' recommendations to inform revision of the 2006 VBI Guidelines.

METHODS

Focus groups were conducted in the five larger Australian state capitals by an independent qualitative researcher and a subject expert. Qualitative data were collected from 41 musculoskeletal physiotherapists who were purposefully recruited for their broad range of experience and qualifications. The five stage Framework Analysis approach was used to analyse and interpret data.

RESULTS

Participants recommended that the revised Guidelines have a new title reflecting a broader risk assessment and management approach, encompassing both musculoskeletal and relevant cardio-vascular risks and informed by contemporary research evidence and clinical experience. Participants requested a positively worded stepwise guide to clinical reasoning for all cervical spine manual treatment scenarios including the process of gaining and recording consent. Participants advised on individual components of the Guidelines needing to be revised or removed. The revised Guidelines, once approved, need to be disseminated in written and electronic formats to all clinicians. Training and education are required to ensure appropriate uptake within and beyond the profession.

CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS

To ensure their clinical acceptance and utility, the Revised Guidelines need to reflect the current use and recommendations of musculoskeletal physiotherapists. Sound knowledge translation processes are then needed to ensure that the Guidelines are incorporated into practice.

The Influence of Treatment Expectations on Clinical Outcomes and Cortisol Levels in Patients With Chronic Neck Pain: An Experimental Study

BACKGROUND

The role of contextual factors like pre-existing treatment expectations has been established. However, the effect of verbally delivered treatment expectations in patient-therapist communication has not been considered, nor has the role of cortisol changes within the placebo/nocebo response in people with chronic neck pain.

OBJECTIVE

To examine the effect of verbally delivered treatment expectations on clinical outcomes in physical therapy practice and to determine if changes in cortisol levels are associated with changes in neck pain and disability.

METHODS

Eighty-three patients with chronic neck pain were randomly allocated to 3 different verbally delivered expectations (positive, negative, neutral) during physical therapy interventions.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

salivary cortisol, pain and disability, and cervical range of motion.

RESULTS

Pain significantly improved in the positive (P < 0.001) and neutral (P < 0.001) expectations groups. For salivary cortisol levels, a significant increase was observed in response to treatment in the neutral (P = 0.045) and negative (P < 0.001) expectations groups. No significant correlations were found between changes in salivary cortisol levels and the change in pain in the neutral and negative expectations groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Physical therapists treating people with chronic neck pain should be attentive when communicating the expected treatment effects to their patients. Whereas verbally delivered positive or neutral expectations may be beneficial for pain-related measures, giving negative expectations may result in a lack of a treatment response on pain. Cortisol levels increased in response to verbally delivered neutral and negative expectations, in the absence of a nocebo effect. This questions the presumed role of cortisol in the nocebo effect.

Knowledge and pre-thoracic spinal thrust manipulation examination: a survey of current practice in the UK

OBJECTIVES

The perceived relative safety of thoracic thrust joint manipulation (TTJM) has contributed to evidence supporting its use. Yet, TTJM is not without risk, where transient side effects (SE) and severe adverse events (AE) have been documented. With evidence supporting the importance of prethrust examination in reducing AE in other spinal regions this study investigated TTJM knowledge and pre-TTJM examination. Method: An e-survey, informed by existing evidence and expertise was designed and piloted. Eligibility criteria: UK-trained physiotherapists who use TTJM. Recruitment via professional networks and social media from December 2016 to February 2017. Data analysis included descriptive analyses (means, standard deviation and frequencies/central tendencies), and content analysis (themes and frequencies) for free text data. Results: From 306 responses, the sample comprised 146 (53%) males, mean (SD) age 36.37(8.68) years, with 12.88(8.67) years in practice, 11.07(8.14) years specialization, working in National Health Service/private practice (81%) and performing 0-5 TTJM/week (86%).

EXAMINATION

40% (n = 83) utilized pre-TTJM examination with 45% (n = 139) adapting the examination for different regions. Technique selection and effect: preferred technique was prone rotational TTJM (67%). Perception of the primary underlying effect was neurophysiological (54%), biomechanical (45%) or placebo (1%). Knowledge: Levels of agreement were found for contraindications (85%), precautions (75%), and red flags (86%) with more variability for risks including AE and SE (61%).

DISCUSSION

UK physiotherapists demonstrated good knowledge and agreement of contraindications, precautions, and red flags to TTJM. With <50% respondents utilizing pre-TTJM examination, variable knowledge of TTJM risks, and therapeutic effects of TTJM further research is required.

Experiences of pregnant women receiving osteopathic care

The state of women's health during pregnancy and in the post-natal period can have profound and long-term effects on their own health and that of their children. Women are increasingly seeking complementary and alternative therapies during pregnancy. The aim of this study was to explore the experiences of women who received osteopathic treatment during pregnancy.

METHOD

This phenomenological study used semi-structured interviews with pregnant patients who were undergoing osteopathic care in northern NSW and south-east Queensland, Australia. Data were analysed thematically.

RESULTS

Osteopathic care provided symptom relief, particularly for low back and pelvic pain. Participants wanted a natural childbirth with minimal medical intervention if possible. Osteopathic care was perceived as helping prepare women's bodies for birth and in so doing helped alleviate anxieties associated with childbirth and with entering the mainstream medical system.

CONCLUSIONS

Pregnant women receiving osteopathic care reported experiencing physical and mental health benefits both during pregnancy and in the post-natal period.

An Analysis of Adverse Events in the Rehabilitation Department: Using the Veterans Affairs Root Cause Analysis System

BACKGROUND

Root cause analyses (RCA) are often completed in health care settings to determine causes of adverse events (AEs). RCAs result in action plans designed to mitigate future patient harm. National reviews of RCA reports have assessed the safety of numerous health care settings and suggested opportunities for improvement. However, few studies have assessed the safety of receiving care from physical therapists, occupational therapists, or speech and language pathology pathologists.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to determine the types of AEs, root causes, and action plans for risk mitigation that exist within the disciplines of rehabilitation medicine.

DESIGN

This study is a retrospective, cross-sectional review.

METHODS

A national search of the Veterans Health Administration RCA database was conducted to identify reports describing AEs associated with physical therapy, occupational therapy, or speech and language pathology services between 2009 and May 2016. Twenty-five reports met the inclusion requirements. The reports were classified by the event type, root cause, action plans, and strength of action plans.

RESULTS

Delays in care (32.0%) and falls (28.0%) were the most common type of AE. Three AEs resulted in death. RCA teams identified deficits regarding policy and procedures as the most common root cause. Eighty-eight percent of RCA reports included strong or intermediate action plans to mitigate risk. Strong action plans included standardizing emergency terminology and implementing a dedicated line to call for an emergency response.

LIMITATIONS

These data are self-reported and only AEs that are scored as a safety assessment code 3 in the system receive a full RCA, so there are likely AEs that were not captured in this study. In addition, the RCA reports are deidentified and so do not include all patient characteristics. As the Veterans Health Administration system services mostly men, the data might not generalize to non-Veterans Health Administration systems with a different patient mix.

CONCLUSIONS

Care provided by rehabilitation professionals is generally safe, but AEs do occur. Based on this RCA review, the safety of rehabilitation services can be improved by implementing strong practices to mitigate risk to patients. Checklists should be considered to aid timely decision making when initiating an emergency response.

Pragmatically Applied Cervical and Thoracic Nonthrust Manipulation Versus Thrust Manipulation for Patients With Mechanical Neck Pain: A Multicenter Randomized Clinical Trial

Study Design Randomized clinical trial. Background The comparative effectiveness between nonthrust manipulation (NTM) and thrust manipulation (TM) for mechanical neck pain has been investigated, with inconsistent results. Objective To compare the clinical effectiveness of concordant cervical and thoracic NTM and TM for patients with mechanical neck pain. Methods The Neck Disability Index (NDI) was the primary outcome. Secondary outcomes included the Patient-Specific Functional Scale (PSFS), numeric pain-rating scale (NPRS), deep cervical flexion endurance (DCF), global rating of change (GROC), number of visits, and duration of care. The covariate was clinical equipoise for intervention. Outcomes were collected at baseline, visit 2, and discharge. Patients were randomly assigned to receive either NTM or TM directed at the cervical and thoracic spines. Techniques and dosages were selected pragmatically and applied to the most symptomatic level. Two-way mixed-model analyses of covariance were used to assess clinical outcomes at 3 time points. Analyses of covariance were used to assess between-group differences for the GROC, number of visits, and duration of care at discharge. Results One hundred three patients were included in the analyses (NTM, n = 55 and TM, n = 48). The between-group analyses revealed no differences in outcomes on the NDI (P = .67), PSFS (P = .26), NPRS (P = .25), DCF (P = .98), GROC (P = .77), number of visits (P = .21), and duration of care (P = .61) for patients with mechanical neck pain who received either NTM or TM. Conclusion NTM and TM produce equivalent outcomes for patients with mechanical neck pain. The trial was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02619500). Level of Evidence Therapy, level 1b. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2018;48(3):137-145. Epub 6 Feb 2018. doi:10.2519/jospt.2018.7738.

Considerations to improve the safety of cervical spine manual therapy

Manipulation and mobilisation of the cervical spine are well established interventions in the management of patients with headache and/or neck pain. However, their benefits are accompanied by potential, yet rare risks in terms of serious adverse events, including neurovascular insult to the brain. A recent international framework for risk assessment and management offers directions in the mitigation of this risk by facilitating sound clinical reasoning. The aim of this article is to critically reflect on and summarize the current knowledge about cervical spine manual therapy and to provide guidance for clinical reasoning for cervical spine manual therapy.

What are the risks of manual treatment of the spine? A scoping review for clinicians

Background

Communicating to patients the risks of manual treatment to the spine is an important, but challenging element of informed consent. This scoping review aimed to characterise and summarise the available literature on risks and to describe implications for clinical practice and research.

Method

A methodological framework for scoping reviews was followed. Systematic searches were conducted during June 2017. The quantity, nature and sources of literature were described. Findings of included studies were narratively summarised, highlighting key clinical points.

Results

Two hundred and fifty articles were included. Cases of serious adverse events were reported. Observational studies, randomised studies and systematic reviews were also identified, reporting both benign and serious adverse events.Benign adverse events were reported to occur commonly in adults and children. Predictive factors for risk are unclear, but for neck pain patients might include higher levels of neck disability or cervical manipulation. In neck pain patients benign adverse events may result in poorer short term, but not long term outcomes.Serious adverse event incidence estimates ranged from 1 per 2 million manipulations to 13 per 10,000 patients. Cases are reported in adults and children, including spinal or neurological problems as well as cervical arterial strokes. Case-control studies indicate some association, in the under 45 years age group, between manual interventions and cervical arterial stroke, however it is unclear whether this is causal. Elderly patients have no greater risk of traumatic injury compared with visiting a medical practitioner for neuro-musculoskeletal problems, however some underlying conditions may increase risk.

Conclusion

Existing literature indicates that benign adverse events following manual treatments to the spine are common, while serious adverse events are rare. The incidence and causal relationships with serious adverse events are challenging to establish, with gaps in the literature and inherent methodological limitations of studies. Clinicians should ensure that patients are informed of risks during the consent process. Since serious adverse events could result from pre-existing pathologies, assessment for signs or symptoms of these is important. Clinicians may also contribute to furthering understanding by utilising patient safety incident reporting and learning systems where adverse events have occurred.

The application of a pre-positioned upper cervical traction mobilization to patients with painful active cervical rotation impairment: A case series

BACKGROUND

Cervical mobilization and manipulation have been shown to improve cervical range of motion and pain. Cervical rotatory thrust manipulation has been associated with adverse patient reaction and damage to the V3 segment of the vertebral artery (VA).

OBJECTIVE

To document and describe the effects of an upper cervical (UC) traction based mobilization on participants with restricted and painful cervical rotation and to document if the mobilization changed blood flow velocity through the vertebral artery.

METHODS

This case series examined the effects of a traction based spinal mobilization on two different groups of participants. Group I included 93 participants with restricted bilateral cervical rotation that was also painful at end range. Group II included 30 different participants whose VA blood flow velocity was examined during the same mobilization. Pre- and post-mobilization active cervical rotation, pain intensity levels, and VA blood flow velocity during mobilization was documented.

RESULTS

Paired T-tests were used to determine statistical significance for changes in cervical rotation, and VA blood flow velocity during mobilization. Ninety-three participants in group I demonstrated an average increase of 16 degrees of cervical rotation. No participant demonstrated an increase in pain, and no participant in group II (N= 30) demonstrated a change in VA blood flow velocity.

CONCLUSIONS

The application this UC traction based mobilization improved active cervical rotation, end range rotation pain response, did not cause pain during its application and did not alter blood flow through the VA during application.

Adverse events following cervical manipulative therapy: consensus on classification among Dutch medical specialists, manual therapists, and patients

Objectives

To obtain consensus-based agreement on a classification system of adverse events (AE) following cervical spinal manipulation. The classification system should be comprised of clear definitions, include patients' and clinicians' perspectives, and have an acceptable number of categories.

Methods

Design: A three-round Delphi study. Participants: Thirty Dutch participants (medical specialists, manual therapists, and patients) participated in an online survey. Procedure: Participants inventoried AE and were asked about their preferences for either a three- or a four-category classification system. The identified AE were classified by two analysts following the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF), and the International Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems (ICD-10). Participants were asked to classify the severity for all AE in relation to the time duration.

Results

Consensus occurred in a three-category classification system. There was strong consensus for 16 AE in all severities (no, minor, and major AE) and all three time durations [hours, days, weeks]. The 16 AE included anxiety, flushing, skin rash, fainting, dizziness, coma, altered sensation, muscle tenderness, pain, increased pain during movement, radiating pain, dislocation, fracture, transient ischemic attack, stroke, and death. Mild to strong consensus was reached for 13 AE.

Discussion

A consensus-based classification system of AE is established which includes patients' and clinicians' perspectives and has three categories. The classification comprises a precise description of potential AE in accordance with internationally accepted classifications. After international validation, clinicians and researchers may use this AE classification system to report AE in clinical practice and research.

Beliefs in the population about cracking sounds produced during spinal manipulation

OBJECTIVES

To examine beliefs about cracking sounds heard during high-velocity low-amplitude (HVLA) thrust spinal manipulation in individuals with and without personal experience of this technique.

METHODS

We included 100 individuals. Among them, 60 had no history of spinal manipulation, including 40 who were asymptomatic with or without a past history of spinal pain and 20 who had nonspecific spinal pain. The remaining 40 patients had a history of spinal manipulation; among them, 20 were asymptomatic and 20 had spinal pain. Participants attended a one-on-one interview during which they completed a questionnaire about their history of spinal manipulation and their beliefs regarding sounds heard during spinal manipulation.

RESULTS

Mean age was 43.5±15.4years. The sounds were ascribed to vertebral repositioning by 49% of participants and to friction between two vertebras by 23% of participants; only 9% of participants correctly ascribed the sound to the formation of a gas bubble in the joint. The sound was mistakenly considered to indicate successful spinal manipulation by 40% of participants. No differences in beliefs were found between the groups with and without a history of spinal manipulation.

CONCLUSIONS

Certain beliefs have documented adverse effects. This study showed a high prevalence of unfounded beliefs regarding spinal manipulation. These beliefs deserve greater attention from healthcare providers, particularly those who practice spinal manipulation.

Adverse events associated with the use of cervical spine manipulation or mobilization and patient characteristics: A systematic review

Cervical spinal manipulation (CSM) and cervical mobilization are frequently used in patients with neck pain and headache. Pre-manipulative cervical instability and arterial integrity tests appear to be unreliable in identifying patients at risk for adverse events. It would be valuable if patients at risk could be identified by specific characteristics during the preliminary screening. Objective was to identify characteristics of 1) patients, 2) practitioners, 3) treatment process and 4) adverse events (AE) occurring after CSM or cervical mobilization. A systematic search was performed in PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, Web-of-science, AMED, and ICL (Index Chiropractic Literature) up to December 2014. Of the initial 1043 studies, 144 studies were included, containing 227 cases. 117 cases described male patients with a mean age of 45 (SD 12) and a mean age of 39 (SD 11) for females. Most patients were treated by chiropractors (66%). Manipulation was reported in 95% of the cases, and neck pain was the most frequent indication. Cervical arterial dissection (CAD) was reported in 57% (P = 0.21) of the cases and 45.8% had immediate onset symptoms. The overall distribution of gender for CAD is 55% (n = 71) for female and therefore opposite of the total AE. Patient characteristics were described poorly. No clear patient profile, related to the risk of AE after CSM, could be extracted. However, women seem more at risk for CAD. There seems to be under-reporting of cases. Further research should focus on a more uniform and complete registration of AE using standardized terminology.

A critical review of manual therapy use for headache disorders: prevalence, profiles, motivations, communication and self-reported effectiveness

Background

Despite the expansion of conventional medical treatments for headache, many sufferers of common recurrent headache disorders seek help outside of medical settings. The aim of this paper is to evaluate research studies on the prevalence of patient use of manual therapies for the treatment of headache and the key factors associated with this patient population.

Methods

This critical review of the peer-reviewed literature identified 35 papers reporting findings from new empirical research regarding the prevalence, profiles, motivations, communication and self-reported effectiveness of manual therapy use amongst those with headache disorders.

Results

While available data was limited and studies had considerable methodological limitations, the use of manual therapy appears to be the most common non-medical treatment utilized for the management of common recurrent headaches. The most common reason for choosing this type of treatment was seeking pain relief. While a high percentage of these patients likely continue with concurrent medical care, around half may not be disclosing the use of this treatment to their medical doctor.

Conclusions

There is a need for more rigorous public health and health services research in order to assess the role, safety, utilization and financial costs associated with manual therapy treatment for headache. Primary healthcare providers should be mindful of the use of this highly popular approach to headache management in order to help facilitate safe, effective and coordinated care.

The risk associated with spinal manipulation: an overview of reviews

BACKGROUND

Spinal manipulative therapy (SMT) is a widely used manual treatment, but many reviews exist with conflicting conclusions about the safety of SMT. We performed an overview of reviews to elucidate and quantify the risk of serious adverse events (SAEs) associated with SMT.

METHODS

We searched five electronic databases from inception to December 8, 2015. We included reviews on any type of studies, patients, and SMT technique. Our primary outcome was SAEs. Quality of the included reviews was assessed using a measurement tool to assess systematic reviews (AMSTAR). Since there were insufficient data for calculating incidence rates of SAEs, we used an alternative approach; the conclusions regarding safety of SMT were extracted for each review, and the communicated opinion were judged by two reviewers independently as safe, harmful, or neutral/unclear. Risk ratios (RRs) of a review communicating that SMT is safe and meeting the requirements for each AMSTAR item, were calculated.

RESULTS

We identified 283 eligible reviews, but only 118 provided data for synthesis. The most frequently described adverse events (AEs) were stroke, headache, and vertebral artery dissection. Fifty-four reviews (46%) expressed that SMT is safe, 15 (13%) expressed that SMT is harmful, and 49 reviews (42%) were neutral or unclear. Thirteen reviews reported incidence estimates for SAEs, roughly ranging from 1 in 20,000 to 1 in 250,000,000 manipulations. Low methodological quality was present, with a median of 4 of 11 AMSTAR items met (interquartile range, 3 to 6). Reviews meeting the requirements for each of the AMSTAR items (i.e. good internal validity) had a higher chance of expressing that SMT is safe.

CONCLUSIONS

It is currently not possible to provide an overall conclusion about the safety of SMT; however, the types of SAEs reported can indeed be significant, sustaining that some risk is present. High quality research and consistent reporting of AEs and SAEs are needed.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42015030068 .

Upper Trunk Brachial Plexus Palsy Following Chiropractic Manipulation

Introduction

Upper trunk brachial plexus palsy can result from high-energy trauma and has never been reported following spinal manipulation.

Background

The case is presented of a patient who developed an acute brachial plexus upper trunk palsy following spinal manipulative therapy.

Discussion

Discussion is made on the incidence of complications following manipulation and recommendations to prospectively capture all serious complications.

Concluding remarks

Risks exist with spinal manipulative therapy. Neurological injury can occur. Risk assessment and re-examination should occur at every visit. Large rigorous prospective studies are required to identify the true incidence of serious complications resulting from manipulative therapy and the benefit:risk ratio.

Does case misclassification threaten the validity of studies investigating the relationship between neck manipulation and vertebral artery dissection stroke? Yes

Background

For patients and health care providers who are considering spinal manipulative therapy of the neck, it is crucial to establish if it is a trigger for cervical artery dissection and/or stroke, and if it is, the magnitude of the risk.

Discussion

We discuss the biological plausibility of how neck manipulation could cause cervical artery dissection. We also discuss how case misclassification threatens the validity of influential published studies that have investigated the relationship between neck manipulation and dissection. Our position is supported by the fact that the largest epidemiologic studies of neck manipulation safety with respect to neurological outcomes have relied on International Classification of Diseases-9 codes for case identification. However, the application of these codes in prior studies failed to identify dissections (rather than strokes in general) and so conclusions from those studies are invalid.

Conclusion

There are several methodological challenges to understanding the association between neck manipulation and vertebral artery dissection. Addressing these issues is critical because even a modest association between neck manipulation and cervical artery dissection could translate into a significant number of avoidable dissections given the widespread use of neck manipulation by providers from various backgrounds. We believe that valid case classification, accurate measurement of manipulative procedures, and addressing reverse causation bias should be top priorities for future research.