PubMed Health⌕ Search

PubMed · 9805958

[Osteopathy and chiropractic].

Abstract

Osteopathy and chiropractic represent two challenging domains with a specific degree of multiplicity and complexity. This makes a complete appraisal difficult and impossible to appreciate in one single analysis. These disciplines exist since more than one century. An hermeneutic approach permits to understand their genesis but indicates also the nonsense of trying to transfer and apply earliest principles nowadays. It seems that most, but not all, practicing clinicians take into account recent developments in physiology, biomechanics and pathophysiology. Clinical studies and especially their meta-analyses on base of precise criteria permit to clarify the indications, therapeutic efficiency as well as socio-economic advantages. The meta-analyses point also at the poor quality of most clinical studies even if in the last years an improvement can be noted. Fundamental studies exist in both domains revealing interesting information that have permitted to reject several preconceived ideas and to clarifs others. Research topics as the morphology of the intervertebral disk before and after application of a manipulative technique are discussed. Results of experimental determination of global and segmental amplitudes in the cervical and in the lumbar spine during a manipulation in healthy subjects are reported. Finally the necessity but also the difficulties inherent to research studies in osteopathy and in chiropractic will be discussed.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

P Klein. 1998. [Osteopathy and chiropractic].. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/9805958/

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

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

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↗