PubMed Health⌕ Search
Home/Archive/PubMed

PubMed · 8372287

[Forgotten expertise about chiropractic].

M Geiser
View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Two forgotten experts on chiropractic are revived to expose the lack of scientific foundation of osteopathy, chiropractic and manual medicine. It is reemphasized that for the majority of patients with back complaints a precise and tangible pathologic finding explaining the pain can not be established. Likewise the correlation between radiologic, tomographic and patho-anatomic alterations with the patients complaints leaves much to be desired, particularly for the spinal column. Back ailments plagued humanity already in ancient times, their crippling effects seem, however, to be of iatrogenic origin originating in the 20th century. To explain the success stories of manual healers it is important to distinguish between medical science and the actions of the healer.

Explore related subjects

ChiropracticHumansIatrogenic DiseaseManipulation, OrthopedicOsteopathic MedicineSpinal DiseasesEnglish AbstractJournal Article

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

M Geiser. 1993-08-17. [Forgotten expertise about chiropractic].. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/8372287/

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

PubMed2007

An examination of musculoskeletal cognitive competency in chiropractic interns.

OBJECTIVE: This study investigates the cognitive competency of final-year chiropractic students in musculoskeletal medicine. METHODS: The face, content, and criterion validity of the Basic Clinical Examination (BCE) for musculoskeletal medicine were tested for use in chiropractic education. After validity testing, the BCE was administered in a cross-sectional design to all fourth year students (154) attending the Canadian Memorial Chiropractic College. RESULTS: Twenty percent (5 questions) of the BCE was deemed not relevant or outside of the scope of practice by criterion experts. One hundred twenty-three (80%) fourth year chiropractic interns participated in the cross-sectional study. Interns achieved a 51.2% passing rate (mean score, 73.2%; 95% confidence interval, 82%-71.8%) for the 25-item BCE, whereas the criterion experts achieved a 100% passing rate. For the modified 20-item BCE, the interns' mean score was 80.8%, whereas the criterion experts' mean score rose to 92.8%. CONCLUSIONS: Most final-year chiropractic interns at this college were [corrected] found to be competent in musculoskeletal medicine as assessed by the Basic Competency Examination. This is in contradiction to previous work with medical students, recent medical graduates, nonorthopedic staff physicians, osteopathic students, and physical therapy students. Chiropractic clinicians with postgraduate training showed considerably better results than chiropractic interns. Problems pertaining to the content validity (relevance and scope of practice for chiropractors) of the BCE need to be addressed.

Chiropractic↗