1
|
Kerry R, Young KJ, Evans DW, Lee E, Georgopoulos V, Meakins A, McCarthy C, Cook C, Ridehalgh C, Vogel S, Banton A, Bergström C, Mazzieri AM, Mourad F, Hutting N. A modern way to teach and practice manual therapy. Chiropr Man Therap 2024; 32:17. [PMID: 38773515 PMCID: PMC11110311 DOI: 10.1186/s12998-024-00537-0] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/18/2023] [Accepted: 04/17/2024] [Indexed: 05/23/2024] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Musculoskeletal conditions are the leading contributor to global disability and health burden. Manual therapy (MT) interventions are commonly recommended in clinical guidelines and used in the management of musculoskeletal conditions. Traditional systems of manual therapy (TMT), including physiotherapy, osteopathy, chiropractic, and soft tissue therapy have been built on principles such as clinician-centred assessment, patho-anatomical reasoning, and technique specificity. These historical principles are not supported by current evidence. However, data from clinical trials support the clinical and cost effectiveness of manual therapy as an intervention for musculoskeletal conditions, when used as part of a package of care. PURPOSE The purpose of this paper is to propose a modern evidence-guided framework for the teaching and practice of MT which avoids reference to and reliance on the outdated principles of TMT. This framework is based on three fundamental humanistic dimensions common in all aspects of healthcare: safety, comfort, and efficiency. These practical elements are contextualised by positive communication, a collaborative context, and person-centred care. The framework facilitates best-practice, reasoning, and communication and is exemplified here with two case studies. METHODS A literature review stimulated by a new method of teaching manual therapy, reflecting contemporary evidence, being trialled at a United Kingdom education institute. A group of experienced, internationally-based academics, clinicians, and researchers from across the spectrum of manual therapy was convened. Perspectives were elicited through reviews of contemporary literature and discussions in an iterative process. Public presentations were made to multidisciplinary groups and feedback was incorporated. Consensus was achieved through repeated discussion of relevant elements. CONCLUSIONS Manual therapy interventions should include both passive and active, person-empowering interventions such as exercise, education, and lifestyle adaptations. These should be delivered in a contextualised healing environment with a well-developed person-practitioner therapeutic alliance. Teaching manual therapy should follow this model.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Roger Kerry
- School of Health Sciences, Queens Medical Centre, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, NG7 2HA, UK
| | - Kenneth J Young
- Allied Health Research Unit, University of Central Lancashire, Preston, PR1 2HE, UK.
| | - David W Evans
- Centre of Precision Rehabilitation for Spinal Pain, School of Sport, Exercise and Rehabilitation Sciences, University of Birmingham, Edgbaston, Birmingham, B15 2TT, UK
| | - Edward Lee
- School of Health Sciences, Queens Medical Centre, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, NG7 2HA, UK
- Nottingham CityCare Partnership, Bennerley Rd, Nottingham, NG6 8WR, UK
| | - Vasileios Georgopoulos
- School of Health Sciences, Queens Medical Centre, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, NG7 2HA, UK
- School of Medicine, University of Nottingham, Queens Medical Centre, Nottingham, NG7 2HA, UK
| | - Adam Meakins
- Department of Orthopaedics, West Herts Hospitals Trust, Watford, WD18 0HB, UK
| | - Chris McCarthy
- School of Physiotherapy, Manchester Metropolitan University, Manchester, M15 6GX, UK
| | - Chad Cook
- Department of Orthopaedics, Duke University, 200 Morris Street, Durham, NC, 27701, USA
| | - Colette Ridehalgh
- School of Sport and Health Sciences, University of Brighton, Darley Rd, Eastbourne, BN20 7UR, UK
- Clinical Neuroscience, Trafford Building, Brighton and Sussex Medical School, University of Sussex, Brighton, BN1 9PX, UK
| | - Steven Vogel
- University College of Osteopathy, 275 Borough High St, London, SE1 1JE, UK
| | - Amanda Banton
- University College of Osteopathy, 275 Borough High St, London, SE1 1JE, UK
| | - Cecilia Bergström
- Department of Clinical Sciences, Obstetrics and Gynecology, Umeå University, S-90187, Umeå, Sweden
| | | | - Firas Mourad
- Department of health, LUNEX, Differdange, 4671, Luxembourg
- Luxembourg Health & Sport Sciences Research Institute A.s.b.l., 50, Avenue du Parc des Sports, Differdange, 4671, Luxembourg
| | - Nathan Hutting
- Department of Occupation and Health, School of Organization and Development, HAN University of Applied Sciences, Nijmegen, the Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Coleman BC, Rubinstein SM, Salsbury SA, Swain M, Brown R, Pohlman KA. The World Federation of Chiropractic Global Patient Safety Task Force: a call to action. Chiropr Man Therap 2024; 32:15. [PMID: 38741191 DOI: 10.1186/s12998-024-00536-1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/17/2024] [Accepted: 03/26/2024] [Indexed: 05/16/2024] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND The Global Patient Safety Action Plan, an initiative of the World Health Organization (WHO), draws attention to patient safety as being an issue of utmost importance in healthcare. In response, the World Federation of Chiropractic (WFC) has established a Global Patient Safety Task Force to advance a patient safety culture across all facets of the chiropractic profession. This commentary aims to introduce principles and call upon the chiropractic profession to actively engage with the Global Patient Safety Action Plan beginning immediately and over the coming decade. MAIN TEXT This commentary addresses why the chiropractic profession should pay attention to the WHO Global Patient Safety Action Plan, and what actions the chiropractic profession should take to advance these objectives. Each strategic objective identified by WHO serves as a focal point for reflection and action. Objective 1 emphasizes the need to view each clinical interaction as a chance to improve patient safety through learning. Objective 2 urges the implementation of frameworks that dismantle systemic obstacles, minimizing human errors and strengthening patient safety procedures. Objective 3 supports the optimization of clinical process safety. Objective 4 recognizes the need for patient and family engagement. Objective 5 describes the need for integrated patient safety competencies in training programs. Objective 6 explains the need for foundational data infrastructure, ecosystem, and culture. Objective 7 emphasizes that patient safety is optimized when healthcare professionals cultivate synergy and partnerships. CONCLUSIONS The WFC Global Patient Safety Task Force provides a structured framework for aligning essential considerations for patient safety in chiropractic care with WHO strategic objectives. Embracing the prescribed action steps offers a roadmap for the chiropractic profession to nurture an inclusive and dedicated culture, placing patient safety at its core. This commentary advocates for a concerted effort within the chiropractic community to commit to and implement these principles for the collective advancement of patient safety.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Brian C Coleman
- Department of Emergency Medicine, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, CT, USA
- Department of Biostatistics (Health Informatics), Yale School of Public Health, New Haven, CT, USA
- Pain Research, Informatics, Multimorbidities, and Education (PRIME) Center, VA Connecticut Healthcare System, West Haven, CT, USA
| | - Sidney M Rubinstein
- Department of Health Sciences, Faculty of Science, Amsterdam Movement Sciences Research Institute, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Stacie A Salsbury
- Palmer Center for Chiropractic Research, Palmer College of Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, USA
| | - Michael Swain
- Department of Chiropractic, Macquarie University, Sydney, Australia
| | | | - Katherine A Pohlman
- Research Center, Parker University, 2540 Walnut Hill Lane, 75229, Dallas, TX, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Gorrell LM, Brown BT, Engel R, Lystad RP. Reporting of adverse events associated with spinal manipulation in randomised clinical trials: an updated systematic review. BMJ Open 2023; 13:e067526. [PMID: 37142321 PMCID: PMC10163511 DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2022-067526] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/17/2022] [Accepted: 04/12/2023] [Indexed: 05/06/2023] Open
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Lindsay M Gorrell
- Integrative Spinal Research Group, Department of Chiropractic Medicine, University Hospital Balgrist and University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
| | - Benjamin T Brown
- Department of Chiropractic, Faculty of Medicine, Health and Human Sciences, Macquarie University, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Roger Engel
- Department of Chiropractic, Faculty of Medicine, Health and Human Sciences, Macquarie University, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Reidar P Lystad
- Australian Institute of Health Innovation, Faculty of Medicine, Health and Human Sciences, Macquarie University, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Funabashi M, Gorrell LM, Pohlman KA, Bergna A, Heneghan NR. Definition and classification for adverse events following spinal and peripheral joint manipulation and mobilization: A scoping review. PLoS One 2022; 17:e0270671. [PMID: 35839253 PMCID: PMC9286262 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0270671] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/06/2021] [Accepted: 06/14/2022] [Indexed: 11/19/2022] Open
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Martha Funabashi
- Division of Research and Innovation, Canadian Memorial Chiropractic College, Toronto, ON, Canada
- Department of Chiropractic, Université du Québec à Trois-Rivières, Trois-Rivières, QC, Canada
| | - Lindsay M. Gorrell
- Department of Chiropractic Medicine, Integrative Spinal Research Group, University of Zürich and University Hospital Balgrist, Zürich, Switzerland
| | | | - Andrea Bergna
- Research Department, SOMA Istituto Osteopatia Milano, Milan, Italy
- AISO-Associazione Italiana Scuole di Osteopatia, Pescara, Italy
| | - Nicola R. Heneghan
- School of Sport, Exercise & Rehabilitation Sciences, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Funabashi M, Pohlman KA, Gorrell LM, Salsbury SA, Bergna A, Heneghan NR. Expert consensus on a standardised definition and severity classification for adverse events associated with spinal and peripheral joint manipulation and mobilisation: protocol for an international e-Delphi study. BMJ Open 2021; 11:e050219. [PMID: 34764170 PMCID: PMC8587360 DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2021-050219] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/21/2022] Open
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Spinal and peripheral joint manipulation (SMT) and mobilisation (MOB) are widely used and recommended in the best practice guidelines for managing musculoskeletal conditions. Although adverse events (AEs) have been reported following these interventions, a clear definition and classification system for AEs remains unsettled. With many professionals using SMT and MOB, establishing consensus on a definition and classification system is needed to assist with the assimilation of AEs data across professions and to inform research priorities to optimise safety in clinical practice. METHODS AND ANALYSIS This international multidisciplinary electronic Delphi study protocol is informed by a scoping review and in accordance with the 'Guidance on Conduction and Reporting Delphi Studies'. With oversight from an expert steering committee, the study comprises three rounds using online questionnaires. Experts in manual therapy and patient safety meeting strict eligibility criteria from the following fields will be invited to participate: clinical, medical and legal practice, health records, regulatory bodies, researchers and patients. Round 1 will include open-ended questions on participants' working definition and/or understanding of AEs following SMT and MOB and their severity classification. In round 2, participants will rate their level of agreement with statements generated from round 1 and our scoping review. In round 3, participants will rerate their agreement with statements achieving consensus in round 2. Statements reaching consensus must meet the a priori criteria, as determined by descriptive analysis. Inferential statistics will be used to evaluate agreement between participants and stability of responses between rounds. Statements achieving consensus in round 3 will provide an expert-derived definition and classification system for AEs following SMT and MOB. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION This study was approved by the Canadian Memorial Chiropractic College Research Ethics Board and deemed exempt by Parker University's Institutional Review Board. Results will be disseminated through scientific, professional and educational reports, publications and presentations.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Martha Funabashi
- Division of Research and Innovation, Canadian Memorial Chiropractic College, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
- Department of Chiropractic, University of Quebec in Trois Rivieres, Trois-Rivieres, Quebec, Canada
| | | | - Lindsay M Gorrell
- Integrative Spinal Research Group, Department of Chiropractic Medicine, Balgrist University Hospital, Zurich, ZH, Switzerland
| | - Stacie A Salsbury
- Palmer Center for Chiropractic Research, Palmer College of Chiropractic, Davenport, Iowa, USA
| | - Andrea Bergna
- Research Department, SOMA Istituto Osteopatia Milano, Milan, Italy
| | - Nicola R Heneghan
- School of Sport, Exercise and Rehabilitation Sciences, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK
| |
Collapse
|