A comparison of active and simulated chiropractic manipulation as adjunctive treatment for childhood asthma.

BACKGROUND: Chiropractic spinal manipulation has been reported to be of benefit in nonmusculoskeletal conditions, including asthma. METHODS: We conducted a randomized, controlled trial of chiropractic spinal manipulation for children with mild or moderate asthma. After a three-week base-line evaluation period, 91 children who had continuing symptoms of asthma despite usual medical therapy were randomly assigned to receive either active or simulated chiropractic manipulation for four months. None had previously received chiropractic care. Each subject was treated by 1 of 11 participating chiropractors, selected by the family according to location. The primary outcome measure was the change from base line in the peak expiratory flow, measured in the morning, before the use of a bronchodilator, at two and four months. Except for the treating chiropractor and one investigator (who was not involved in assessing outcomes), all participants remained fully blinded to treatment assignment throughout the study. RESULTS: Eighty children (38 in the active-treatment group and 42 in the simulated-treatment group) had outcome data that could be evaluated. There were small increases (7 to 12 liters per minute) in peak expiratory flow in the morning and the evening in both treatment groups, with no significant differences between the groups in the degree of change from base line (morning peak expiratory flow, P=0.49 at two months and P=0.82 at four months). Symptoms of asthma and use of 3-agonists decreased and the quality of life increased in both groups, with no significant differences between the groups. There were no significant changes in spirometric measurements or airway responsiveness. CONCLUSIONS: In children with mild or moderate asthma, the addition of chiropractic spinal manipulation to usual medical care provided no benefit.

A comparison of radiographic and electrogoniometric angles in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis.

STUDY DESIGN: This was a cross-sectional study of a consecutive group of adolescent patients presenting to a scoliosis clinic for routine assessment or monitoring of their scoliosis, excluding postsurgical patients. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: In vitro studies suggested electrogoniometry could be useful in the evaluation of scoliosis. No prior in vitro study had been performed. OBJECTIVES: To determine the reliability and validity of an electrogoniometric instrument, the Metrecom Skeletal Analysis System, in assessing adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. METHODS: Thirty-one patients were examined, radiographed, and scanned with the Metrecom Skeletal Analysis System twice by two different examiners. The magnitudes of the curves derived from the Metrecom Skeletal Analysis System scans were compared with each other and with the Cobb angles measured from standing radiographs. RESULTS: The intraclass correlation coefficient (a measure of agreement, ranging from 0 to 1, where 1 represents complete agreement) for the intraexaminer reliability of the Metrecom Skeletal Analysis System ranged from 0.71 to 0.83. The interexaminer reliability intraclass correlation coefficient of the Metrecom Skeletal Analysis System was 0.58, with a mean difference between examiners of 5.5 degrees (SD = 5 degrees), and limits of agreement (mean difference +/-2 SD) ranging from -4.5 degrees to 15.6 degrees. The Metrecom Skeletal Analysis System and the radiographically derived Cobb angle correlation was 0.64, but the mean difference between the methods was 3.7 degrees (SD = 11.1), with limits of agreement from 18.4 degrees to 25.9 degrees. CONCLUSION: The Metrecom Skeletal Analysis System does not provide sufficient clinical precision to substitute for the Cobb angle measured from spinal radiographic measurements in the management of adolescents with scoliosis.

Missed cervical spine fractures: the importance of reviewing radiographs in chiropractic practice.

OBJECTIVE: This report reviews the case of a missed cervical spine fracture in a patient presenting for chiropractic manipulative therapy. A review of the literature suggests that radiographic examinations performed in emergency care settings following cervical spine trauma are often incomplete for the purposes of screening for contraindications to manipulative therapy. Sensitivity of the standard radiographic cervical spine series for detecting fracture suggest an unacceptable high level of false negatives and chiropractors are cautioned to requisition and review all X-rays and ensure a complete radiographic series before initiating treatment. CLINICAL FEATURES: A 65-yr-old woman presented to a chiropractic office for examination and treatment of cervical spine injuries suffered in a deceleration type motor vehicle accident. Hospital X-rays were reported normal for fracture. Subsequent radiographs of the cervical spine demonstrated the presence of a posterior arch fracture of C2. INTERVENTION AND OUTCOME: The patient was referred for further imaging and was treated conservatively with bracing of the cervical spine. Follow-up 5 months later demonstrated substantial recovery with some residual stiffness and headache. CONCLUSION: Radiographs taken at emergency care settings are often incomplete for the purposes of screening for contraindications to manipulation. This case demonstrates that chiropractors should be extremely cautious in initiating manipulative therapy in those patients having sustained previous cervical spine trauma and who have had prior X-rays that have been reported normal.