Chiropractic care: a flawed risk-benefit analysis?
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Back Pain↗
Biomedical subjects
Eric L Hurwitz
Publications and source records attributed to Eric L Hurwitz.
A randomized trial of medical care with and without physical therapy and chiropractic care with and without physical modalities for patients with low back pain: 6-month follow-up outcomes from the UCLA low back pain study.
STUDY DESIGN: A randomized clinical trial. OBJECTIVES: To compare the effectiveness of medical and chiropractic care for low back pain patients in managed care; to assess the effectiveness of physical therapy among medical patients; and to assess the effectiveness of physical modalities among chiropractic patients. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Despite the burden that low back pain places on patients, providers, and society, the relative effectiveness of common treatment strategies offered in managed care is unknown. METHODS: Low back pain patients presenting to a large managed care facility from October 30, 1995, through November 9, 1998, were randomly assigned in a balanced design to medical care with and without physical therapy and to chiropractic care with and without physical modalities. The primary outcome variables are average and most severe low back pain intensity in the past week, assessed with 0 to 10 numerical rating scales, and low back-related disability, assessed with the 24-item Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire. RESULTS: Of 1,469 eligible patients, 681 were enrolled; 95.7% were followed through 6 months. The mean changes in low back pain intensity and disability of participants in the medical and chiropractic care-only groups were similar at each follow-up assessment (adjusted mean differences at 6 months for most severe pain, 0.27, 95% confidence interval, -0.32-0.86; average pain, 0.22, -0.25-0.69; and disability, 0.75, -0.29-1.79). Physical therapy yielded somewhat better 6-month disability outcomes than did medical care alone (1.26, 0.20-2.32). CONCLUSIONS: After 6 months of follow-up, chiropractic care and medical care for low back pain were comparable in their effectiveness. Physical therapy may be marginally more effective than medical care alone for reducing disability in some patients, but the possible benefit is small.
Analgesics↗
Patients using chiropractors in North America: who are they, and why are they in chiropractic care?
SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA AND OBJECTIVES: Alternative health care was used by an estimated 42% of the U.S. population in 1997, and chiropractors accounted for 31% of the total estimated number of visits. Despite this high level of use, there is little empirical information about who uses chiropractic care or why. METHODS: The authors surveyed randomly sampled chiropractors (n = 131) at six study sites and systematically sampled chiropractic patients seeking care from participating chiropractors on 1 day (n = 1275). Surveys collected data about the patient's reason for seeking chiropractic care, health status, health attitude and beliefs, and satisfaction. In addition to descriptive statistics, the authors compared data between patients and chiropractors, and between patients and previously published data on health status from other populations, corrected for the clustering of patients within chiropractors. RESULTS: More than 70% of patients specified back and neck problems as their health problem for which they sought chiropractic care. Chiropractic patients had significantly worse health status on all SF-36 scales than an age- and gender-matched general population sample. Compared with medical back pain patients, chiropractic back pain patients had significantly worse mental health (6-8 point decrement). Roland-Morris scores for chiropractic back pain patients were similar to values reported for medical back pain patients. The health attitudes and beliefs of chiropractors and their patients were similar. Patients were very satisfied with their care. CONCLUSION: These data support the theory that patients seek chiropractic care almost exclusively for musculoskeletal symptoms and that chiropractors and their patients share a similar belief system.
Adult↗
Predictors and outcomes of scleroderma renal crisis: the high-dose versus low-dose D-penicillamine in early diffuse systemic sclerosis trial.
OBJECTIVE: The reported frequency of scleroderma M01-R renal crisis (SRC) in diffuse systemic sclerosis (SSc; scleroderma) is 15-20%. Early use of angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors has markedly improved outcome. The present analysis reexamines the prognostic factors for and outcome of SRC in a prospective cohort of patients with early diffuse SSc. METHODS: We retrospectively evaluated the cohort of SSc patients who participated in the High-Dose Versus Low-Dose D-Penicillamine in Early Diffuse SSc trial. Patients with diffuse cutaneous scleroderma were enrolled if their disease duration was <18 months. Because the trial failed to show a difference between treatment groups, the data were pooled. RESULTS: One hundred thirty-four SSc patients entered the observation period a mean +/- SD of 0.8 +/- 0.3 years after onset of SSc. SRC occurred in 18 patients a mean +/- SD of 0.9 +/- 1.1 years after entry. During a mean +/- SD 4.0 +/- 1.1 years of followup after entry, 9 of the 18 patients died (mean +/- SD 0.6 +/- 0.9 years after SRC onset). Baseline characteristics that predicted SRC included a modified Rodnan skin thickness score of >or=20 (P < 0.01), enlarged cardiac silhouette on radiograph (P = 0.04), large joint contractures (wrist, elbow, knee) (P = 0.008), and prednisone use at entry (P = 0.01). Baseline characteristics that did not predict SRC included age, sex, race, Health Assessment Questionnaire score, fist closure, handspread, lung involvement, muscle weakness, erythrocyte sedimentation rate, and platelet count. In 5 of 10 subjects for whom at least 2 sequential skin scores were available, skin scores increased significantly (P = 0.012) in the 6 months before onset of SRC. CONCLUSION: SRC occurred in 13% of patients soon (mean 11 months) after entry into the cohort. Predictors of SRC identified in this study included higher than average skin score, prednisone use at study entry, large joint contractures, and heart enlargement. Our data suggest, however, that low-dose prednisone alone was not associated with the onset of SRC, except in the appropriate clinical setting. Although ACE inhibitors and dialysis are now readily available, SRC continues to be associated with poor survival (in this study, 50% of patients with SRC died).
Adult↗
Second Prize: The effectiveness of physical modalities among patients with low back pain randomized to chiropractic care: findings from the UCLA low back pain study.
BACKGROUND: Although chiropractors often use physical modalities with spinal manipulation, evidence that modalities yield additional benefits over spinal manipulation alone is lacking. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of the study was to estimate the net effect of physical modalities on low back pain (LBP) outcomes among chiropractic patients in a managed-care setting. METHODS: Fifty percent of the 681 patients participating in a clinical trial of LBP treatment strategies were randomized to chiropractic care with physical modalities (n = 172) or without physical modalities (n = 169). Subjects were followed for 6 months with assessments at 2, 4, and 6 weeks and at 6 months. The primary outcome variables were average and most severe LBP intensity in the past week, assessed with numerical rating scales (0-10), and low back-related disability, assessed with the 24-item Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire. RESULTS: Almost 60% of the subjects had baseline LBP episodes of more than 3 months' duration. The 6-month follow-up was 96%. The adjusted mean differences between groups in improvements in average and most severe pain and disability were clinically insignificant at all follow-up assessments. Clinically relevant improvements in average pain and disability were more likely in the modalities group at 2 and 6 weeks, but this apparent advantage disappeared at 6 months. Perceived treatment effectiveness was greater in the modalities group. CONCLUSIONS: Physical modalities used by chiropractors in this managed-care organization did not appear to be effective in the treatment of patients with LBP, although a small short-term benefit for some patients cannot be ruled out.
Adult↗
Comparing the satisfaction of low back pain patients randomized to receive medical or chiropractic care: results from the UCLA low-back pain study.
OBJECTIVES: This study examined the difference in satisfaction between patients assigned to chiropractic vs medical care for treatment of low back pain in a managed care organization. METHODS: Satisfaction scores (on a 10-50 scale) after 4 weeks of follow-up were compared among 672 patients randomized to receive medical or chiropractic care. RESULTS: The mean satisfaction score for chiropractic patients was greater than the score for medical patients (crude difference = 5.5; 95% confidence interval = 4.5, 6.5). Self-care advice and explanation of treatment predicted satisfaction and reduced the estimated difference between chiropractic and medical patients' satisfaction. CONCLUSIONS: Communication of advice and information to patients with low back pain increases their satisfaction with providers and accounts for much of the difference between chiropractic and medical patients' satisfaction.
Adolescent↗
A randomized trial of chiropractic manipulation and mobilization for patients with neck pain: clinical outcomes from the UCLA neck-pain study.
OBJECTIVES: This study compared the relative effectiveness of cervical spine manipulation and mobilization for neck pain. METHODS: Neck-pain patients were randomized to the following conditions: manipulation with or without heat, manipulation with or without electrical muscle stimulation, mobilization with or without heat, and mobilization with or without electrical muscle stimulation. RESULTS: Of 960 eligible patients, 336 enrolled in the study. Mean reductions in pain and disability were similar in the manipulation and mobilization groups through 6 months. CONCLUSIONS: Cervical spine manipulation and mobilization yield comparable clinical outcomes.
Adult↗
Manipulation in the presence of cervical spinal cord compression: a case series.
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study is to present information from a series of patients with imaging findings of encroachment on the cervical spinal cord who were treated with chiropractic cervical manipulation. CASE SERIES: There were 27 patients (18 females, 9 males; age range, 23-65, mean age, 44.3 years) with neck and/or arm pain with findings of cervical spinal cord encroachment on magnetic resonance imaging. None of these patients had severe or acute myelopathy or advanced signal changes in the spinal cord indicative of myelomalacia. These patients were treated with a variety of approaches that included some form of cervical manipulation. The mean number of treatments that included manipulation was 12 (range, 2-32). Nineteen patients were treated with high-velocity, low-amplitude "thrust" manipulation, 9 patients were treated with low-velocity muscle energy technique, and 1 patient was treated with both methods. The mean patient-rated subjective improvement at the last follow-up reexamination was 70.0% (range, 10%-100%). From baseline to the last follow-up examination, the mean improvements in outcome measures were as follows: Bournemouth Neck Disability Questionnaire, 23.7 points (31%); Neck Disability Index, 6.4 points; and Numerical Pain Rating Scale, 3.9 points. In 3 patients, there was increased pain after manipulation that lasted from 1 to 4 days. There were no major complications, and in no patient did any increased pain after treatment last more than 4 days. No new neurologic symptoms or signs were seen in any of these patients. CONCLUSION: The finding of cervical spinal cord encroachment on magnetic resonance imaging, in and of itself, should not necessarily be considered an absolute contraindication to manipulation. However, because radicular and myelopathic complications to cervical manipulation have been reported in the literature, great care should be taken in all cases, particularly those in which anatomic conditions such as cord encroachment are present.
Adult↗
The impact of treatment confidence on pain and related disability among patients with low-back pain: results from the University of California, Los Angeles, low-back pain study.
BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Although many researchers and practitioners believe that patients' positive expectations of their treatment favorably influence clinical outcomes, there is little scientific evidence to support this belief. PURPOSE: To describe the level of patients' initial confidence in the success of their assigned treatment, by treatment group and other factors; and to estimate the effects of treatment confidence on subsequent changes in low-back pain and related disability. STUDY DESIGN AND PATIENT SAMPLE: Randomized clinical trial involving 681 patients treated for low-back pain in a managed-care facility in Southern California. OUTCOME MEASURES: Treatment confidence; and changes in three clinical measures of low-back pain: average pain, most severe pain and back-pain-related disability. METHODS: Patients were randomly assigned to one of four treatment groups: medical care with and without physical therapy, and chiropractic care with and without physical modalities. Information was collected by questionnaires at baseline, 2 weeks, 6 weeks and 6 months. Treatment confidence was measured just after randomization on a scale of 0 to 10. RESULTS: Treatment confidence was lowest, on average, for patients assigned to medical care only and highest for patients assigned to medical care plus physical therapy. Other predictors of high treatment confidence were having acute pain and being older, female and nonwhite. Although treatment confidence was only weakly associated with subsequent changes in low-back pain or disability in the total sample, high treatment confidence was associated with greater improvement among patients assigned to medical care plus physical therapy. CONCLUSIONS: Initial confidence in treatment for low-back pain varies by type of care and other factors. Higher confidence may have some beneficial effect on the course of low-back pain in certain patients, but this effect may depend on the type of interaction between client and provider.
Adult↗