Norman J. Stomski

Serious Adverse Events and Spinal Manipulative Therapy of the Low Back Region: A Systematic Review of Cases.

OBJECTIVE The purpose of this study was to systematically search the literature for studies reporting serious adverse events following lumbopelvic spinal manipulative therapy (SMT) and to describe the case details. METHODS A systematic search was conducted in PubMed including MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, and The Cochrane Library up to January 12, 2012, by an experienced reference librarian. Study selection was performed by 2 independent reviewers using predefined criteria. We included cases involving individuals 18 years or older who experienced a serious adverse event following SMT applied to the lumbar spine or pelvis by any type of provider (eg, chiropractic, medical, physical therapy, osteopathic, layperson). A serious adverse event was defined as an untoward occurrence that results in death or is life threatening, requires hospital admission, or results in significant or permanent disability. We included studies published in English, German, Dutch, and Swedish. RESULTS A total of 2046 studies were screened, and 41 studies reporting on 77 cases were included. Important case details were frequently unreported, such as descriptions of SMT technique, the pre-SMT presentation of the patient, the specific details of the adverse event, time from SMT to the adverse event, factors contributing to the adverse event, and clinical outcome. Adverse events consisted of cauda equina syndrome (29 cases, 38% of total); lumbar disk herniation (23 cases, 30%); fracture (7 cases, 9%); hematoma or hemorrhagic cyst (6 cases, 8%); or other serious adverse events (12 cases, 16%) such as neurologic or vascular compromise, soft tissue trauma, muscle abscess formation, disrupted fracture healing, and esophageal rupture. CONCLUSIONS This systematic review describes case details from published articles that describe serious adverse events that have been reported to occur following SMT of the lumbopelvic region. The anecdotal nature of these cases does not allow for causal inferences between SMT and the events identified in this review. Recommendations regarding future case reporting and research aimed at furthering the understanding of the safety profile of SMT are discussed.

Outcomes of Usual Chiropractic. The OUCH Randomized Controlled Trial of Adverse Events

Study Design. Blinded parallel-group randomized controlled trial. Objective. Establish the frequency and severity of adverse effects from short-term usual chiropractic treatment of the spine when compared with a sham treatment group. Summary of Background Data. Previous studies have demonstrated that adverse events occur during chiropractic treatment. However, as a result of design limitations in previous studies, particularly the lack of sham-controlled randomized trials, understanding of these adverse events and their relation with chiropractic treatment is suboptimal. Methods. We conducted a trial to examine the occurrence of adverse events resulting from chiropractic treatment. It was conducted across 12 chiropractic clinics in Perth, Western Australia. The participants comprised 183 adults, aged 20 to 85 years, with spinal pain. Ninety-two participants received individualized care consistent with the chiropractors’ usual treatment approach; 91 participants received a sham intervention. Each participant received 2 treatments. Results. Completed adverse questionnaires were returned by 94.5% of the participants after appointment 1 and 91.3% after appointment 2. Thirty-three percent of the sham group and 42% of the usual care group reported at least 1 adverse event. Common adverse events were increased pain (sham 29%; usual care 36%), muscle stiffness (sham 29%; usual care 37%), and headache (sham 17%; usual care 9%). The relative risk (RR) was not significant for adverse event occurrence (RR = 1.24; 95% CI: 0.85–1.81), occurrence of severe adverse events (RR = 1.9; 95% CI: 0.98–3.99), adverse event onset (RR = 0.16; 95% CI: 0.02–1.34), or adverse event duration (RR = 1.13; 95% CI: 0.59–2.18). No serious adverse events were reported. Conclusion. A substantial proportion of adverse events after chiropractic treatment may result from natural history variation and nonspecific effects. Level of Evidence: 2

A survey of Australian chiropractors' attitudes and beliefs about evidence-based practice and their use of research literature and clinical practice guidelines.

BackgroundResearch into chiropractors’ use of evidence in clinical practice appears limited to a single small qualitative study. The paucity of research in this area suggests that it is timely to undertake a more extensive study to build a more detailed understanding of the factors that influence chiropractors’ adoption of evidence-based practice (EBP) principles. This study aimed to identify Australian chiropractors’ attitudes and beliefs towards EBP in clinical practice, and also examine their use of research literature and clinical practice guidelines.MethodsWe used an online questionnaire about attitudes, beliefs and behaviours towards the use of EBP in clinical practice that had been developed to survey physiotherapists and modified it to ensure that it was relevant to chiropractic practice. We endeavoured to survey all registered Australian chiropractors (n = 4378) via email invitation distributed by Australian chiropractic professional organisations and the Chiropractic Board of Australia. Logistic regression analyses were conducted to examine univariate associations between responses to items measuring attitudes and beliefs with items measuring: age; years since registration; attention to literature; and use of clinical practice guidelines.ResultsQuestionnaires were returned by 584 respondents (response rate approximately 13%). The respondents’ perceptions of EBP were generally positive: most agreed that the application of EBP is necessary (77.9%), literature and research findings are useful (80.2%), EBP helps them make decisions about patient care (66.5%), and expressed an interest in learning or improving EBP skills (74.9%). Almost half of the respondents (45.1%) read between two to five articles a month. Close to half of the respondents (44.7%) used literature in the process of clinical decision making two to five times each month. About half of the respondents (52.4%) agreed that they used clinical practice guidelines, and around half (54.4%) agreed that they were able to incorporate patient preferences with clinical practice guidelines. The most common factor associated with increased research uptake was the perception that EBP helps make decisions about patient care.ConclusionsMost Australian chiropractors hold positive attitudes towards EBP, thought EBP was useful, and were interested in improving EBP skills. However, despite the favourable inclination towards EBP, many Australian chiropractors did not use clinical practice guidelines. Our findings should be interpreted cautiously due to the low response rate.

Australian mental health staff response to antipsychotic medication side effects - the perceptions of consumers

Despite the impact of side effects on adherence to medication regimes, few previous studies have examined the personal concerns of those prescribed antipsychotic medications. This study explores consumer perceptions of the support they receive from mental health staff for antipsychotic medication side effects. Semi-structured interviews were used to elicit the perceptions of 10 mental health consumers in a community care setting in Australia. Content analysis was used to examine the transcripts, and the audio-recordings were replayed to identify important contextual cues. The analysis identified several main themes, including: the relationship between participants and clinicians; information about side effects; and the value of the case-management system. Most participants reported that health professionals appeared disinterested in the antipsychotic medication side effects they experienced and did not understand the detrimental impact of side effects on their lives. The participants were also not equipped with sufficient information about the care they received, the prescribed medications, and possible side effects. Most participants felt excluded from decisions about the care they received, which caused significant distress. Structures and strategies therefore should be developed to ensure that the views of mental consumers are taken into consideration in a more fulsome manner in delivering mental health care in the community.

Antipsychotic medication side effect assessment tools: A systematic review

Objective: The aim of this systematic review was to critically appraise the psychometric properties of antipsychotic medication side effect assessment tools. Methods: Systematic searches were undertaken in PubMed, CINAHL and CENTRAL from inception to October 2014. Studies were included if they detailed the evaluation of psychometric properties of antipsychotic medication side effect assessment tools in mental health populations. Studies were excluded if they examined the use of antipsychotic medication side effect assessment tools in non-mental health populations, including people suffering from dementia, Parkinsonism and Alzheimer’s. Narrative reviews and studies published in any language other than English were also excluded. Results: Content validity was appropriately established for only one of the tools, reliability was inappropriately evaluated for all but one tool, and the assessment of responsiveness was not acceptable for any tool. Conclusion: Further psychometric studies are warranted to consolidate the psychometric properties of the included antipsychotic medication side effect assessment tools before any of these tools can be confidently recommended for either research or clinical purposes.

Embracing participation in mental health research: conducting authentic interviews

Purpose – Successful interviews are underpinned by several important processes that researchers must take account of. These include: understanding the meaning of participation in research, acquiring informed consent, establishing rapport, managing boundaries between research and helping, and embracing consumer participation in research. These processes have been addressed individually in articles, but have not been collectively appraised yet they are all critical determinants of successful interviewing. The purpose of this paper is to bridge the gap in the literature by synthesizing the available information that shapes the practice of interviewing people with mental health problems in a research project. Design/methodology/approach – This paper involves a review of the literature. Findings – Numerous interactional processes need to be addressed to facilitate the full engagement of both researchers and informants in research interviews. Engaging authentically in research interviews is challenging at many ...

Short-term usual chiropractic care for spinal pain: a randomized controlled trial.

Study Design. Parallel-group randomized controlled trial. Objective. Establish the short-term effectiveness of chiropractic therapy for spinal pain compared with a sham intervention and explore the predictors of chiropractic treatment satisfaction. Summary of Background Data. Chiropractic treatment is widely used for spinal pain. However, a lack of sound evidence precludes conclusions about the effectiveness of chiropractic for spinal pain. Methods. Participants were adults experiencing spinal pain, randomized to receive 2 treatments of chiropractic or sham therapy. Participants and outcome assessors were blinded to group allocation. Primary outcomes at 2 weeks were pain intensity (0–10 scale) and function (0–40 Functional Rating Index). Secondary outcomes were global change, minimum acceptable outcome, and treatment satisfaction. Treatment effects were estimated with linear mixed models for the primary outcomes. We used logistic regression to identify differences in the secondary outcomes and explore for predictors of treatment satisfaction. Results. One hundred eighty three participants (chiropractic, n = 92; sham, n = 91) were recruited and included in the analyses. Participants receiving chiropractic therapy reported greater improvements in pain (mean difference, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.5 [0.1–0.9]), physical function (mean difference [95% CI] = 2.1 [0.3–4.0]), and were more likely to experience global improvement (48% vs. 24%, P = 0.01) and treatment satisfaction (78% vs. 56%, P < 0.01). There was no between-group difference in achieving a minimally acceptable outcome (34% sham vs. 29% chiropractic, P = 0.42). Awareness of treatment assignment and achieving minimally important improvement in pain intensity were associated with chiropractic treatment satisfaction. Conclusion. Short-term chiropractic treatment was superior to sham; however, treatment effects were not clinically important. Awareness of treatment assignment and clinically important reductions in pain were associated with chiropractic treatment satisfaction. Level of Evidence: 2

Prevalence of low back pain in adolescents with idiopathic scoliosis: a systematic review

BackgroundAdolescent idiopathic scoliosis is the most common spinal deformity occurring in adolescents and its established prevalence varies from 2 to 3%. Adolescent idiopathic scoliosis has been identified as a potential risk factor for the development of low back pain in adolescents. The purpose of this study was to systematically review studies of the prevalence of low back pain in adolescents with idiopathic scoliosis in order to establish the quality of the evidence and determine whether the prevalence estimates could be statistically pooled.MethodsSystematic electronic searches were undertaken in PubMed, CINAHL, and CENTRAL without any restrictions. Studies were eligible for inclusion if they reported the prevalence of low back pain in adolescents with idiopathic scoliosis. Studies were excluded if they detailed the prevalence of pain in post-surgical subjects or were published in languages other than English or French. Data were reported qualitatively, since there was insufficient evidence for statistical pooling.ResultsThe electronic search strategies yielded 1811 unique studies. Only two studies fulfilled the eligibility criteria. The prevalence of low back pain in adolescents with idiopathic scoliosis ranged from 34.7 to 42.0%. However, these prevalence estimates should be viewed cautiously as the included studies were at high risk of bias.ConclusionThe results of this systematic review indicate that adolescents with idiopathic scoliosis frequently experience low back pain. However, there was insufficient evidence to confidently estimate low back pain prevalence in adolescents with idiopathic scoliosis and further studies are needed in this area.

Interrater Reliability of Motion Palpation in the Thoracic Spine.

Introduction. Manual therapists commonly use assessments of intervertebral motion to determine the need for spinal manipulation, but the reliability of these procedures demonstrates conflicting results. The objectives of this study were to investigate the interrater reliability of thoracic spine motion palpation for perceived joint restriction and pain. Methods. Twenty-five participants between the ages of 18 and 70, with or without mid-back pain, were enrolled. Two raters motion palpated marked T5–T12 levels using two methods (standardised and pragmatic) and noted any restricted or painful segments. We calculated agreement between two raters by generating raw agreement percentages and Kappa coefficients with 95% confidence intervals. Results. There was poor to low level of agreement between the raters for both joint stiffness and pain localization using both pragmatic and standardized approaches. The results did not improve significantly when we conducted a post hoc analysis where three spinal levels were collapsed as one and right and left sides were also combined. Conclusions. The results for interrater reliability were poor for motion restriction and pain. These findings may have unfavourable implications for all manual therapists who use motion palpation to select patients appropriate for spinal manipulation.

The association between pain diagram area, fear-avoidance beliefs, and pain catastrophising

BackgroundThe development of clinical practice guidelines for managing spinal pain have been informed by a biopsychosocial framework which acknowledges that pain arises from a combination of psychosocial and biomechanical factors. There is an extensive body of evidence that has associated various psychosocial factors with an increased risk of experiencing persistent pain. Clinicians require instruments that are brief, easy to administer and score, and capable of validly identifying psychosocial factors. The pain diagram is potentially such an instrument. The aim of our study was to examine the association between pain diagram area and psychosocial factors.Methods183 adults, aged 20–85, with spinal pain were recruited. We administered a demographic checklist; pain diagram; 11-point Numerical Rating Scale assessing pain intensity; Pain Catastrophising Scale (PCS); MOS 36 Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36); and the Fear Avoidance Beliefs Questionnaire (FABQ). Open source software, GIMP, was used to calculate the total pixilation area on each pain diagram. Linear regression was used to examine the relationship between pain diagram area and the following variables: age; gender; pain intensity; PCS total score; FABQ-Work scale score; FABQ-Activity scale score; and SF-36 Mental Health scale score.ResultsThere were no significant associations between pain diagram area and any of the clinical variables.ConclusionOur findings showed that that pain diagram area was not a valid measure to identify psychosocial factors. Several limitations constrained our results and further studies are warranted to establish if pain diagram area can be used assess psychosocial factors.