|
Although
empirical evidence suggests that chiropractic
is a safe and effective means of natural healing,
a growing body of scientific data supports the
effectiveness of chiropractic. The studies listed
below are a tiny fraction of the studies published
on the efficacy of chiropractic.
The
Rand Study -- The Rand Corporation,
one of the most prestigious centers for research
in public policy and health, released a study
in 1991 which found that spinal manipulation is
appropriate for specific kinds of low back pain.1
The
Koes Clinical Trial -- A 1992 Dutch
project compared manipulative therapy (chiropractic)
and physiotherapy for the treatment of persistent
back and neck complaints. After 12 months, the
manipulative therapy group showed greater improvement
in the primary complaint as well as in physical
function, with fewer visits.2
The
AHCPR Guideline -- In 1994, the Agency for
Health Care Policy and Research (AHCPR), now the
Agency on Health Research and Quality (AHRQ),
an arm of the U.S. Department of Health and Human
Services, released a clinical practice guideline
for the treatment of acute low back problems.
The guidelines recommend the use of spinal manipulation
as an effective method of symptom control. The
researches developing the guideline found that
"manipulation...is safe and effective for
patients in the first month of acute low back
symptoms without radiculopathy [disease of the
spinal nerve roots]".3
The
Manga Study -- This study researched both
the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the
chiropractic management of low-back pain. Dr.
Pran Manga, the study's author, found "on
the evidence, particularly the most scientifically
valid clinical studies, spinal manipulation applied
by chiropractors is shown to be more effective
than alternative treatment for LBP [Low-Back Pain].
Many medical therapies are of questionable validity
or are clearly inadequate."4
The
Duke Study -- Based on a literature review
of several headache treatment options, a panel
of 19 multidisciplinary experts concluded that
spinal manipulation resulted in almost immediate
improvement for cervicogenic headaches and had
significantly fewer side effects and longer-lasting
relief of tension-type headache than commonly-prescribed
medication. Researchers concluded the following:
"Manipulation appeared to result in immediate
improvement in headache severity when used to
treat episodes of cervicogenic headache when compared
with and attention-placebo control. Furthermore,
when compared to soft-tissue therapies (massage),
a course of manipulation treatments resulted in
sustained improvement in headache frequency and
severity."5
The
Boline Study -- This randomized controlled
trial compared six weeks of spinal manipulative
treatment of tension-type headache by chiropractors
to six weeks of medical treatment with amitriptyline,
a medication often prescribed for the treatment
of severe tension headache pain. Researchers found
that chiropractic patients experienced fewer side-effects
(4.3%) than the amitriptyline group (82.1%) and
while both were effective during the treatment
phase of the study, only the chiropractic patients
continued to report fewer headaches when treatment
ended.6
The
Nelson Migraine Study -- This study compared
chiropractic spinal manipulation to amitriptyline
( a medication often prescribed for the treatment
of headache) for the treatment of migraine headache.
The researcher found that "Spinal manipulation
seemed to be as effective as a well-established
and efficacious treatment (amitriptyline). and
on the basis of a benign side effects profile,
it should be considered a treatment option for
patients with frequent migraine headaches."
The researchers also found that in weeks immediately
following treatment, patients who had received
spinal manipulation had a 42% reduction in headache
frequency, compared to only 24% of those who took
amitriptyline.7
The
Colic Study -- When researchers compared spinal
manipulation for the treatment of infantile colic
to dimethicone ( a medication for colic), they
came to a simple conclusion: "Spinal manipulation
is effective in relieving infantile colic."8
References:
- Shekelie PG, Adams, A, et al. The Appropriateness
of Spinal Manipulation for Low-Back Pain: Indications
and Ratings by a Multidisciplinary Expert Panel
RAND Corporation, Santa Monica, California,
1991.
- Koes BW, Bouter LM, et al. British Medical
Journal March 7, 1992. Vol. 304, No 6827, pp.
601-605
- Bigos S. Bowyer O, et al. Acute Low Back Problems
in Adults. Clinical Practice Guideline, Number
14, Rockville, Maryland: U.S. Department of
Health and Human Services, Public Health Service,
Agency for Health Care Policy and Research,
AHCPR Pub. No 95-0642: December 1994.
- Manga P. Angus D. et al. The Effectiveness
and Cost-Effectiveness of Chiropractic Management
of Low-Back Pain. The Ontario Ministry of Health,
Ottawa, Ontario, Canada, August 1993.
- McCrory DC. et al. Evidence Report: Behavioral
and Physical Treatments for Tension-type and
Cervicogenic Headache. Duke University Evidence-Based
Practice Center, Durham, North Carolina, January
2001.
- Boline PD, Kassak K. et al. Journal of Manipulative
and Physiological Therapeutics. March/April
1995. Vol. 18, No. 3, pp. 148-154.
- Nelson CF, et al. Journal of Manipulative
and Physiological Therapeutics. October 1998,
Vol. 21. No. 8, pp. 511-519.
- Wilberg JMM, et al. Journal of Manipulative
and Physiological Therapeutics. October 1999,
Vol. 22 No. 8, pp. 517-522
|