A commentary on the use of mixed methods in chiropractic research: Part 2: findings and recommendations for improving future chiropractic mixed methods studies.

In part 1 of this commentary, we presented an overview of mixed methods research and the rationales for using this methodology with examples from the chiropractic literature. We also introduced readers to the three core mixed methods study designs, as well as the advantages and challenges of employing a mixed methods approach. In part 2 of this series, we provide a summary of the primary and secondary findings from our doctoral work involving mixed methods research and make recommendations for improving the reporting and conduct of future chiropractic mixed methods studies.

Commentaire sur l'utilisation de méthodes mixtes dans la recherche en chiropratique. Partie 2: résultats et recommandations pour améliorer les futures études sur les méthodes mixtes en chiropratique.Dans la première partie de cette étude, nous avons présenté un aperçu de la recherche par méthodes mixtes et les raisons d'utiliser cette méthodologie à l'aide d'exemples provenant des ouvrages sur la chiropratique. Nous avons également présenté aux lecteurs les trois principaux modèles d'étude des méthodes mixtes, ainsi que les avantages et les difficultés liés à l'utilisation de ces méthodes. Dans la deuxième partie de cette série, nous présentons un résumé des résultats primaires et secondaires de notre travail de doctorat concernant les méthodes mixtes de recherche et nous formulons des recommandations pour améliorer les rapports et la conduite des futures études sur les méthodes mixtes en chiropratique.

A commentary on the use of mixed methods in chiropractic research: Part 3: integration of qualitative research with randomized controlled trials.

This is the third of three papers in our series of articles on the use of mixed methods in chiropractic research. In this commentary, we discuss the mixed methods experimental (or intervention) design. This design is a complex mixed methods research design in which qualitative research is integrated with randomized controlled trials. We provide a brief overview of this study design as well as a case example from the literature to illustrate how this approach can be applied to research within the chiropractic profession.

Étude sur l'utilisation de méthodes mixtes dans la recherche en chiropratique. Partie 3: intégration de la recherche qualitative aux essais cliniques randomisés.Cet article est le troisième d'une série de trois articles sur l'utilisation de méthodes mixtes dans la recherche en chiropratique. Dans cet article, nous abordons le modèle expérimental (ou d'intervention) des méthodes mixtes. Il s'agit d'un modèle complexe de recherche par méthodes mixte dans lequel la recherche qualitative est intégrée à des essais cliniques randomisés. Nous présentons un aperçu de ce modèle d'étude ainsi qu'un exemple issu des ouvrages spécialisés afin d'illustrer la manière dont cette approche peut être appliquée à la recherche dans le domaine de la chiropratique.

A commentary on the use of mixed methods in chiropractic research: Part 1: overview of mixed methods research.

We recently each completed doctoral programs where the major focus of our work was in mixed methods research. In the first part of this three-part commentary, we present an overview of mixed methods research. In the second part, we present a summary of our primary and secondary research findings from our doctoral work involving mixed methods. In a third paper, we will discuss integrating qualitative research with randomized controlled trials and how this mixed methods study design can be applied to research within the chiropractic profession. Our aim with these papers is to increase awareness amongst the chiropractic community of the value (and challenges) of using this unique methodology. We also make recommendations for improving the quality of reporting and conduct of future chiropractic mixed methods studies. Further dissemination of this work will occur through online webinars and conference presentations.

Étude sur l'utilisation de méthodes mixtes dans la recherche en chiropratique. Partie 1: aperçu des méthodes mixtes de rechercheNous avons récemment terminé chacun un programme de doctorat dont l'objectif principal était les méthodes mixtes de recherche. Dans la première partie de cette étude en trois parties, nous présentons un aperçu sur les méthodes mixtes de recherche. Dans la deuxième partie, nous présentons un résumé des résultats de nos recherches primaires et secondaires dans le cadre de nos travaux de doctorat impliquant des méthodes mixtes. Dans un troisième article, nous discuterons de l'intégration de la recherche qualitative aux essais cliniques randomisés et de la manière dont ce modèle d'étude mixte peut être appliqué à la recherche au sein de la profession chiropratique.L'objectif de ces articles est de sensibiliser la communauté chiropratique à la valeur (et aux difficultés) de l'utilisation de cette méthodologie unique. Nous formulons également des recommandations pour améliorer la qualité des rapports et la conduite des futures études sur les méthodes mixtes en chiropratique. La diffusion de ce travail se fera par des webinaires en ligne et des présentations lors de conférences.

Quality of Reporting Using Good Reporting of A Mixed Methods Study Criteria in Chiropractic Mixed Methods Research: A Methodological Review.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this review was to examine the reporting in chiropractic mixed methods research using Good Reporting of A Mixed Methods Study (GRAMMS) criteria. METHODS: In this methodological review, we searched MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, and the Index to Chiropractic Literature from the inception of each database to December 31, 2020, for chiropractic studies reporting the use of both qualitative and quantitative methods or mixed qualitative methods. Pairs of reviewers independently screened titles, abstracts, and full-text studies, extracted data, and appraised reporting using the GRAMMS criteria and risk of bias with the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT). Generalized estimating equations were used to explore factors associated with reporting using GRAMMS criteria. RESULTS: Of 1040 citations, 55 studies were eligible for review. Thirty-seven of these 55 articles employed either a multistage or convergent mixed methods design, and, on average, 3 of 6 GRAMMS items were reported among included studies. We found a strong positive correlation in scores between the GRAMMS and MMAT instruments (r = 0.78; 95% CI, 0.66-0.87). In our adjusted analysis, publications in journals indexed in Web of Science (adjusted odds ratio = 2.71; 95% CI, 1.48-4.95) were associated with higher reporting using GRAMMS criteria. Three of the 55 studies fully adhered to all 6 GRAMMS criteria, 4 studies adhered to 5 criteria, 10 studies adhered to 4 criteria, and the remaining 38 adhered to 3 criteria or fewer. CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that reporting in chiropractic mixed methods research using GRAMMS criteria was poor, particularly among studies with a higher risk of bias.

Systematic Review to Inform a World Health Organization (WHO) Clinical Practice Guideline: Benefits and Harms of Transcutaneous Electrical Nerve Stimulation (TENS) for Chronic Primary Low Back Pain in Adults.

PURPOSE: To evaluate benefits and harms of transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) for chronic primary low back pain (CPLBP) in adults to inform a World Health Organization (WHO) standard clinical guideline. METHODS: We searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) from various electronic databases from July 1, 2007 to March 9, 2022. Eligible RCTs targeted TENS compared to placebo/sham, usual care, no intervention, or interventions with isolated TENS effects (i.e., combined TENS with treatment B versus treatment B alone) in adults with CPLBP. We extracted outcomes requested by the WHO Guideline Development Group, appraised the risk of bias, conducted meta-analyses where appropriate, and graded the certainty of evidence using GRADE. RESULTS: Seventeen RCTs (adults, n = 1027; adults ≥ 60 years, n = 28) out of 2010 records and 89 full text RCTs screened were included. The evidence suggested that TENS resulted in a marginal reduction in pain compared to sham (9 RCTs) in the immediate term (2 weeks) (mean difference (MD) = -0.90, 95% confidence interval -1.54 to -0.26), and a reduction in pain catastrophizing in the short term (3 months) with TENS versus no intervention or interventions with TENS specific effects (1 RCT) (MD = -11.20, 95% CI -17.88 to -3.52). For other outcomes, little or no difference was found between TENS and the comparison interventions. The certainty of the evidence for all outcomes was very low. CONCLUSIONS: Based on very low certainty evidence, TENS resulted in brief and marginal reductions in pain (not deemed clinically important) and a short-term reduction in pain catastrophizing in adults with CPLBP, while little to no differences were found for other outcomes.

Systematic Review to Inform a World Health Organization (WHO) Clinical Practice Guideline: Benefits and Harms of Needling Therapies for Chronic Primary Low Back Pain in Adults.

PURPOSE: Evaluate benefits and harms of needling therapies (NT) for chronic primary low back pain (CPLBP) in adults to inform a World Health Organization (WHO) standard clinical guideline. METHODS: Electronic databases were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing NT compared with placebo/sham, usual care, or no intervention (comparing interventions where the attributable effect could be isolated). We conducted meta-analyses where indicated and graded the certainty of evidence. RESULTS: We screened 1831 citations and 109 full text RCTs, yeilding 37 RCTs. The certainty of evidence was low or very low across all included outcomes. There was little or no difference between NT and comparisons across most outcomes; there may be some benefits for certain outcomes. Compared with sham, NT improved health-related quality of life (HRQoL) (physical) (2 RCTs; SMD = 0.20, 95%CI 0.07; 0.32) at 6 months. Compared with no intervention, NT reduced pain at 2 weeks (21 RCTs; MD = - 1.21, 95%CI - 1.50; - 0.92) and 3 months (9 RCTs; MD = - 1.56, 95%CI - 2.80; - 0.95); and reduced functional limitations at 2 weeks (19 RCTs; SMD = - 1.39, 95%CI - 2.00; - 0.77) and 3 months (8 RCTs; SMD = - 0.57, 95%CI - 0.92; - 0.22). In older adults, NT reduced functional limitations at 2 weeks (SMD = - 1.10, 95%CI - 1.71; - 0.48) and 3 months (SMD = - 1.04, 95%CI - 1.66; - 0.43). Compared with usual care, NT reduced pain (MD = - 1.35, 95%CI - 1.86; - 0.84) and functional limitations (MD = - 2.55, 95%CI - 3.70; - 1.40) at 3 months. CONCLUSION: Based on low to very low certainty evidence, adults with CPLBP experienced some benefits in pain, functioning, or HRQoL with NT; however, evidence showed little to no differences for other outcomes.

Systematic Review to Inform a World Health Organization (WHO) Clinical Practice Guideline: Benefits and Harms of Structured and Standardized Education or Advice for Chronic Primary low back pain in Adults.

PURPOSE: Evaluate benefits and harms of education/advice for chronic primary low back pain (CPLBP) in adults to inform a World Health Organization (WHO) standard clinical guideline. METHODS: Electronic databases were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing education/advice compared with placebo/sham, usual care, or no intervention (including comparison interventions where the attributable effect of education/advice could be isolated). We conducted meta-analyses and graded the certainty of evidence. RESULTS: We screened 2514 citations and 86 full text RCTs and included 15 RCTs. Most outcomes were assessed 3 to 6 months post-intervention. Compared with no intervention, education/advice improved pain (10 RCTs, MD = -1.1, 95% CI -1.63 to -0.56), function (10 RCTs, SMD = -0.51, 95% CI -0.89 to -0.12), physical health-related quality of life (HRQoL) (2 RCTs, MD = 24.27, 95% CI 12.93 to 35.61), fear avoidance (5 RCTs, SMD = -1.4, 95% CI -2.51 to -0.29), depression (1 RCT; MD = 2.10, 95% CI 1.05 to 3.15), and self-efficacy (1 RCT; MD = 4.4, 95% CI 2.77 to 6.03). Education/advice conferred less benefit than sham Kinesio taping for improving fear avoidance regarding physical activity (1 RCT, MD = 5.41, 95% CI 0.28 to 10.54). Compared with usual care, education/advice improved pain (1 RCT, MD = -2.10, 95% CI -3.13 to -1.07) and function (1 RCT, MD = -7.80, 95% CI -14.28 to -1.32). There was little or no difference between education/advice and comparisons for other outcomes. For all outcomes, the certainty of evidence was very low. CONCLUSION: Education/advice in adults with CPLBP was associated with improvements in pain, function, HRQoL, and psychological outcomes, but with very low certainty.

Investigating the research capacity and productivity of Canadian sports chiropractors.

Objectives: To investigate the research capacity and productivity of Canadian sports chiropractors. Methods: A cross-sectional survey (phase one) and scoping review (phase two) investigated the research capacity and productivity (from 2015-2020) of the Canadian sports chiropractic field. Results: Most respondents (72%) reported obtaining research training from fellowship and master's programs, with only 2 (1%) PhD qualifications identified. Approximately, 30% reported active involvement in research, with 28% being part-time clinician researchers. Access to human and technological research resources were limited. We identified 67 publications and 16 conference presentations within a five-year period, with clinical, population health, and basic science research as the areas most studied. Conclusion: The research effort of Canadian sports chiropractors is primarily conducted by clinicians involved in research on a part-time basis. Its research outputs predominantly reflect the research requirements of the RCCSS(C) Sports Sciences Residency Program, highlighting its contribution in developing capacity and producing research for the Canadian sports chiropractic field.

Objectifs: Étudier la capacité de recherche et la productivité des chiropraticiens du sport Canadiens. Méthodes: Une enquête transversale (première phase) et un examen de la portée (deuxième phase) ont permis d'étudier la capacité de recherche et la productivité (de 2015 à 2020) du domaine de la chiropratique sportive au Canada. Résultats: La plupart des répondants (72 %) ont déclaré avoir obtenu une formation en recherche dans le cadre de programmes de bourses et de maîtrises, et seulement 2 (1 %) ont indiqué avoir obtenu un doctorat. Environ 30 % des répondants ont déclaré participer activement à la recherche, 28 % d'entre eux étant des cliniciens-chercheurs à temps partiel. L'accès aux ressources humaines et technologiques de la recherche était limité. Nous avons recensé 67 publications et 16 présentations de conférences sur une période de cinq ans, les domaines les plus étudiés étant la recherche clinique, la recherche sur la santé des populations et la recherche en sciences fondamentales. Conclusion: L'effort de recherche des chiropraticiens du sport canadiens est principalement mené par des cliniciens impliqués dans la recherche à temps partiel. Leurs résultats de recherche reflètent surtout les exigences de recherche du programme de résidence en sciences du sport du Collège royal des sciences chiropratiques du sport du Canada (RCCSS(C)), soulignant leur contribution au développement des capacités et à la production de recherches pour le domaine de la chiropratique du sport au Canada.

Developing key performance indicators for the Canadian chiropractic profession: a modified Delphi study.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study is to develop a list of performance indicators to assess the status of the chiropractic profession in Canada. METHOD: We conducted a 4-round modified Delphi technique (March 2018-January 2020) to reach consensus among experts and stakeholders on key status indicators for the chiropractic profession using online questionnaires. During the first round, experts suggested indicators for preidentified themes. Through the following two rounds, the importance and feasibility of each indicator was rated on an 11-point Likert scale, and their related potential sources of data identified. In the final round, provincial stakeholders were recruited to rate the importance of the indicators within the 90th percentile and identified those most important to their organisation. RESULTS: The first round generated 307 preliminary indicators of which 42 were selected for the remaining rounds, and eleven were preferentially selected by most of the provincial stakeholders. Experts agreed the feasibility of all indicators was high, and that data could be collected through a combination of data obtained from professional liability insurance records and survey(s) of the general population, patients, and chiropractors. CONCLUSIONS: A set of performance indicators to assess the status of the Canadian chiropractic profession emerged from a scientific and stakeholder consensus.

Risk of bias in chiropractic mixed methods research: a secondary analysis of a meta-epidemiological review.

Objective: To examine the risk of bias in chiropractic mixed methods research. Methods: We performed a secondary analysis of a meta-epidemiological review of chiropractic mixed methods studies. We assessed risk of bias with the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT) and used generalized estimating equations to explore factors associated with risk of bias. Results: Among 55 eligible studies, a mean of 62% (6.8 [2.3]/11) of MMAT items were fulfilled. In our adjusted analysis, studies published since 2010 versus pre-2010 (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 2.26; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.39 to 3.68) and those published in journals with an impact factor versus no impact factor (aOR = 2.21; 95% CI, 1.33 to 3.68) were associated with lower risk of bias. Conclusion: Our findings suggest opportunities for improvement in the quality of conduct among published chiropractic mixed methods studies. Author compliance with the MMAT criteria may reduce methodological bias in future mixed methods research.

Objectif: examiner le risque de biais dans la recherche sur les méthodes mixtes chiropratiques. Méthodologie: nous avons effectué une analyse secondaire d'un examen méta-épidémiologique d'études de méthodes mixtes chiropratiques. Nous avons examiné le risque de biais avec The Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool, MMAT (l'outil d'évaluation des méthodes mixtes), et utilisé des équations d'estimation généralisées pour explorer les facteurs associés au risque de biais. Résultats: parmi 55 études admissibles, une moyenne de 62 % (6,8 [2,3]/11) des items du MMAT ont été remplis. Dans notre analyse ajustée, les études publiées depuis 2010 versus celles d'avant 2010 (rapport de cotes [aOR] ajusté = 2,26; intervalle de confiance [IC] à 95 %, 1,39 à 3,68), et celles publiées dans des revues avec un indice de citations versus aucun indice de citations (aOR = 2,21; IC à 95 %, 1,33 à 3,68) étaient associées à un risque de biais plus faible. Conclusion: nos résultats suggèrent des opportunités d'amélioration de la qualité de la conduite parmi les études publiées sur les méthodes mixtes chiropratiques. La conformité des auteurs aux critères MMAT peut réduire les biais méthodologiques dans les futures recherches sur les méthodes mixtes.

Healthcare students' attitudes towards patient centred care: a systematic review with meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Patient centred care is commonly recommended in clinical practice guidelines to improve patient outcomes and reduce healthcare costs. Identifying measurement tools used to assess healthcare students' attitudes towards patient centered care and determining their attitudes is the first step to ensuring patient centred care is provided in the future. The primary aim of this review was to describe the measurement tools used to assess healthcare students' attitudes towards patient centred care. The secondary aim was to quantify healthcare students' attitudes towards patient centred care. METHODS: An electronic database search was conducted in MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL from inception until March 1, 2021, with combined terms relating to 'patient centred care', 'attitudes', and 'healthcare students'. Studies that quantitatively assessed healthcare students' attitudes towards patient centred care were included. Measurement tools used in the included studies were qualitatively described. Meta-analysis was conducted to quantify healthcare students' attitudes towards patient centred care and assess the respective influence of gender, profession, and study geographical location on healthcare students' attitudes towards patient centred care. RESULTS: The electronic search identified 3948 total studies. One hundred twenty-nine full texts were screened, and 49 studies were included. There were 16 measurement tools used to assess healthcare students' attitudes towards patient centered care. Most studies (53%, n = 26) used the Patient-Practitioner Orientation Scale (PPOS) to assess patient centered care. Meta-analyses of 20 studies with 26 total groups resulted in a pooled mean PPOS score of 4.16 on a 0-6 scale (95% Confidence Interval [CI]: 3.95, 4.37), indicating low attitudes towards patient centered care. Additional analyses found that women have significantly higher attitudes towards patients centred care than men (pooled effect 0.14 [95% CI: 0.05, 0.23], n = 8 studies) and mean PPOS scores appear similar among sub-groups of only medical students (pooled mean 4.13, 95% CI: 3.85, 4.42, n = 13 studies) and only American healthcare students (pooled mean 4.49, 95% CI: 4.35, 4.64, n = 5 studies). CONCLUSIONS: Several different measurement tools have been used to assess healthcare students' attitudes towards patient centred care, but the most commonly used is the PPOS. Our results indicate that healthcare students have low attitudes towards patient centred care. Future studies should evaluate if attitudes towards patient centred care can be improved during healthcare education.

Non-operative treatment for lumbar spinal stenosis with neurogenic claudication: an updated systematic review.

OBJECTIVES: Neurogenic claudication due to lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) is a growing health problem in older adults. We updated our previous Cochrane review (2013) to determine the effectiveness of non-operative treatment of LSS with neurogenic claudication. DESIGN: A systematic review. DATA SOURCES: CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and Index to Chiropractic Literature databases were searched and updated up to 22 July 2020. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: We only included randomised controlled trials published in English where at least one arm provided data on non-operative treatment and included participants diagnosed with neurogenic claudication with imaging confirmed LSS. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Two independent reviewers extracted data and assessed risk of bias using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool 1. Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation was used for evidence synthesis. RESULTS: Of 15 200 citations screened, 156 were assessed and 23 new trials were identified. There is moderate-quality evidence from three trials that: Manual therapy and exercise provides superior and clinically important short-term improvement in symptoms and function compared with medical care or community-based group exercise; manual therapy, education and exercise delivered using a cognitive-behavioural approach demonstrates superior and clinically important improvements in walking distance in the immediate to long term compared with self-directed home exercises and glucocorticoid plus lidocaine injection is more effective than lidocaine alone in improving statistical, but not clinically important improvements in pain and function in the short term. The remaining 20 new trials demonstrated low-quality or very low-quality evidence for all comparisons and outcomes, like the findings of our original review. CONCLUSIONS: There is moderate-quality evidence that a multimodal approach which includes manual therapy and exercise, with or without education, is an effective treatment and that epidural steroids are not effective for the management of LSS with neurogenic claudication. All other non-operative interventions provided insufficient quality evidence to make conclusions on their effectiveness. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42020191860.

Best-Practice Recommendations for Chiropractic Care for Pregnant and Postpartum Patients: Results of a Consensus Process.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this project was to develop a best-practices document on chiropractic care for pregnant and postpartum patients with low back pain (LBP), pelvic girdle pain (PGP), or a combination. METHODS: A modified Delphi consensus process was conducted. A multidisciplinary steering committee of 11 health care professionals developed 71 seed statements based on their clinical experience and relevant literature. A total of 78 panelists from 7 countries were asked to rate the recommendations (70 chiropractors and representatives from 4 other health professions). Consensus was reached when at least 80% of the panelists deemed the statement to be appropriate along with a median response of at least 7 on a 9-point scale. RESULTS: Consensus was reached on 71 statements after 3 rounds of distribution. Statements included informed consent and risks, multidisciplinary care, key components regarding LBP during pregnancy, PGP during pregnancy and combined pain during pregnancy, as well as key components regarding postpartum LBP, PGP, and combined pain. Examination, diagnostic imaging, interventions, and lifestyle factors statements are included. CONCLUSION: An expert panel convened to develop the first best-practice consensus document on chiropractic care for pregnant and postpartum patients with LBP or PGP. The document consists of 71 statements on chiropractic care for pregnant and postpartum patients with LBP and PGP.

Gender diversity in chiropractic leadership: a cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this cross-sectional study was to compare the number of males and females in leadership positions, and whether there is a relationship between gender and degrees held in those positions, within chiropractic academic institutions, national regulatory bodies and the most widely representative national professional associations in the United States and Canada. METHODS: Publicly accessible websites from chiropractic institutions and organizations were used to collect data. Pearson χ2 tests of independence were conducted to determine the relationship between gender (male vs. female) and other variables, including position (principal vs secondary), and chiropractic and other advanced professional degrees. RESULTS: A total of 107 leaders were identified across institutions and organizations. Under one-third of leaders (30.8%) were identified as female. Males were more likely to be in principal leadership roles (86.2%) and more likely to be in a secondary leadership position (62.8%). CONCLUSION: Male leaders significantly outnumber female leaders in both principal and secondary leadership positions within American and Canadian chiropractic institutions. Strategies should be developed to include gender diversity within all chiropractic organizations.

CONTEXTE: Cette étude transversale visait à comparer le nombre d'hommes à celui de femmes occupant des postes de direction, et à savoir s'il existe un lien entre le sexe et les diplômes détenus par les titulaires de postes dans les établissements d'enseignement de la chiropratique, les organismes nationaux de réglementation et les associations professionnelles nationales les plus reconnues aux États-Unis et au Canada. MÉTHODOLOGIE: Des données ont été recueillies dans les sites Web accessibles au public des établissements chiropratiques. Des tests d'indépendance du shi-carré (χ2) ont été effectués pour établir le rapport hommesfemmes et le lien avec d'autres variables, notamment le rapport entre les postes de directeur principal et les postes de directeur adjoint, les diplômes en chiropratique et des diplômes d'études avancées. RÉSULTATS: On a recensé au total 107 directeurs de cliniques et d'organismes. Moins d'un tiers des titulaires de ces postes de direction (30,8 %) étaient des femmes. Les hommes étaient plus susceptibles d'occuper des postes de directeur principal (86,2 %) et des postes de directeur adjoint (62,8 %). CONCLUSION: Les hommes sont nettement plus nombreux que les femmes à occuper des postes de directeur principal ou de directeur adjoint dans les cliniques chiropratiques américaines et canadiennes. On devrait élaborer des stratégies visant à assurer la diversité des sexes dans toutes les cliniques chiropratiques.

Quality of reporting in chiropractic mixed methods research: a methodological review protocol.

BACKGROUND: Mixed methods designs are increasingly used in health care research to enrich findings. However, little is known about the frequency of use of this methodology in chiropractic research, or the quality of reporting among chiropractic studies using mixed methods. OBJECTIVE: To quantify the use and quality of mixed methods in chiropractic research, and explore the association of study characteristics (e.g., authorship, expertise, journal impact factor, country and year of publication) with reporting quality. METHODS: We will conduct a systematic search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, and the Index to Chiropractic Literature to identify all chiropractic mixed methods studies published from inception of each database to December 31, 2020. Articles reporting the use of both qualitative and quantitative methods, or mixed qualitative methods, will be included. Pairs of reviewers will perform article screening, data extraction, risk of bias with the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT), and appraisal of reporting quality using the Good Reporting of A Mixed Methods Study (GRAMMS) guideline. We will explore the correlation between GRAMMS and MMAT scores, and construct generalized estimating equations to explore factors associated with reporting quality. DISCUSSION: This will be the first methodological review to examine the reporting quality of published mixed methods studies involving chiropractic research. The results of our review will inform opportunities to improve reporting in chiropractic mixed methods studies. Our results will be disseminated in a peer-reviewed publication and presented publicly at conferences and as part of a doctoral thesis.

Adverse events from spinal manipulations in the pregnant and postpartum periods: a systematic review and update.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study is to update a previous critical review of adverse events in pregnant and postpartum populations. METHODS: The following databases were searched: PubMed, CINAHL, Index to Chiropractic Literature, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews/Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and MEDLINE. We included all study design types as it was determined a priori that there would not be enough high-quality research on spinal manipulative therapy (SMT) in these populations to make any determinations. The Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN) and CARE (CAse REport) checklists were used for quality rating. RESULTS: This update found one case study that demonstrated a serious adverse event in the cervical spine following SMT and a handful of minor and transient adverse events in the low back following SMT. CONCLUSIONS: There was limited evidence of adverse events following SMT in these populations. Although we are calling for improved reporting of such events in future studies, it may be that such injuries are rare.

CONTEXTE: La présente étude vise à mettre à jour les résultats d'un examen critique des effets défavorables des manipulations vertébrales chez la femme enceinte et la femme en postpartum. MÉTHODOLOGIE: On a interrogé les bases de données suivantes : PubMed, CINAHL, Index to Chiropractic Literature, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews/ Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials et MEDLINE. On a retenu toutes les études parce qu'il avait été établi antérieurement que le nombre de recherches de bonne qualité sur les manipulations vertébrales (MV) chez la femme enceinte et la femme en postpartum était insuffisant pour trancher toute question. On s'est servi des listes de vérification Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN) et CARE (CAse REport) pour évaluer la qualité des études. RÉSULTATS: Une étude de cas faisait état d'un grave effet indésirable à la colonne cervicale après des MV et d'une poignée d'effets indésirables mineurs et transitoires à la colonne lombaire. CONCLUSIONS: Il existe peu de preuves que les MV ont des effets indésirables chez les populations à l'étude. Il faudrait plus de données. Mais il est permis d'affirmer que ces effets indésirables sont rares.

Non-Surgical Interventions for Lumbar Spinal Stenosis Leading To Neurogenic Claudication: A Clinical Practice Guideline.

Lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) causing neurogenic claudication (NC) is increasingly common with an aging population and can be associated with significant symptoms and functional limitations. We developed this guideline to present the evidence and provide clinical recommendations on nonsurgical management of patients with LSS causing NC. Using the GRADE approach, a multidisciplinary guidelines panel based recommendations on evidence from a systematic review of randomized controlled trials and systematic reviews published through June 2019, or expert consensus. The literature monitored up to October 2020. Clinical outcomes evaluated included pain, disability, quality of life, and walking capacity. The target audience for this guideline includes all clinicians, and the target patient population includes adults with LSS (congenital and/or acquired, lateral recess or central canal, with or without low back pain, with or without spondylolisthesis) causing NC. The guidelines panel developed 6 recommendations based on randomized controlled trials and 5 others based on professional consensus, summarized in 3 overarching recommendations: (Grade: statements are all conditional/weak recommendations) Recommendation 1. For patients with LSS causing NC, clinicians and patients may initially select multimodal care nonpharmacological therapies with education, advice and lifestyle changes, behavioral change techniques in conjunction with home exercise, manual therapy, and/or rehabilitation (moderate-quality evidence), traditional acupuncture on a trial basis (very low-quality evidence), and postoperative rehabilitation (supervised program of exercises and/or educational materials encouraging activity) with cognitive-behavioral therapy 12 weeks postsurgery (low-quality evidence). Recommendation 2. In patients LSS causing NC, clinicians and patients may consider a trial of serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors or tricyclic antidepressants. (very low-quality evidence). Recommendation 3. For patients LSS causing NC, we recommend against the use of the following pharmacological therapies: nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, methylcobalamin, calcitonin, paracetamol, opioids, muscle relaxants, pregabalin (consensus-based), gabapentin (very low-quality), and epidural steroidal injections (high-quality evidence). PERSPECTIVE: This guideline, on the basis of a systematic review of the evidence on the nonsurgical management of lumbar spine stenosis, provides recommendations developed by a multidisciplinary expert panel. Safe and effective non-surgical management of lumbar spine stenosis should be on the basis of a plan of care tailored to the individual and the type of treatment involved, and multimodal care is recommended in most situations.

Chiropractic Care of Adults With Postpartum-Related Low Back, Pelvic Girdle, or Combination Pain: A Systematic Review.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to conduct a systematic review (SR) of the literature to assess the effectiveness of specific chiropractic care options commonly used for postpartum low back pain (LBP), pelvic girdle pain (PGP), or combination (LBP and PGP) pain. METHODS: A search strategy was developed. Interventions were those manual or other nonpharmacologic therapies commonly used by chiropractors (not requiring additional certifications). The outcomes were self-reported changes in pain or disability self-reported outcomes. We used the Scottish Intercollegiate Guideline Network checklists. Strength of the evidence (excluding cohort studies) was determined using an adapted version of the US Preventive Services Task Force criteria as described in the UK report. RESULTS: Of the 1611 published articles, 16 were included. These were 5 SRs, 10 randomized controlled trials (RCTs), and 1 cohort study. Postpartum LBP (1 RCT): moderate, favorable strength for spinal manipulation therapy/mobilization. Postpartum PGP (4 RCTs): moderate, unclear strength for exercise; and inconclusive, unclear strength for patient education. Postpartum LBP or PGP (3 SRs and 4 RCTs): inconclusive, unclear strength for exercise, self-management, and physiotherapy; while osteopathic manipulative therapy was inconclusive, favorable. CONCLUSION: No treatment option was identified as having sufficient evidence to make a clear recommendation. This SR identified a scarcity of literature regarding chiropractic care and back pain for postpartum women, as well as inconsistency among the terms LBP, PGP, and combination pain.

Chiropractic Care for Adults With Pregnancy-Related Low Back, Pelvic Girdle Pain, or Combination Pain: A Systematic Review.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to conduct a systematic review (SR) of the literature to assess the effectiveness of chiropractic care options commonly used for pregnancy-related low back pain (LBP), pelvic girdle pain (PGP), or combination pain for both experienced practitioners and students of chiropractic. METHODS: We included procedures that were commonly used by chiropractors and not requiring additional certifications. Outcomes were self-reported changes in pain or disability. We used the Scottish Intercollegiate Guideline Network checklists to assess outcomes. For strength of evidence, we used the adapted version of the US Preventive Services Task Force criteria as described in the UK report. RESULTS: Fifty articles were included from 18 SRs, 30 randomized controlled trials (RCTs), and 2 cohort studies. Pregnancy LBP (7 SRs and 12 RCTs): moderate, favorable evidence for electrotherapy and osteopathic manipulative therapy; inconclusive, favorable strength for chiropractic care, exercise, and support devices; and inconclusive, unclear strength for spinal manipulative therapy. Pregnancy PGP (4 SRs and 4 RCTs): inconclusive, favorable strength for exercise; and inconclusive, unclear evidence for patient education, information, and support devices. Pregnancy LBP or PGP (13 SRs and 12 RCTs): moderate, unclear evidence for complementary and alternative medicine; moderate, unclear evidence for exercise; inconclusive, favorable evidence for multimodal care, patient education, and physiotherapy; and inconclusive, unclear strength for spinal manipulative therapy, osteopathic manipulative therapy, and support devices. CONCLUSION: Although there is a lack of conclusive evidence, many of the interventions have moderate or unclear but favorable evidence.

Response of Practicing Chiropractors during the Early Phase of the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Descriptive Report.

OBJECTIVE: The coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has strained all levels of healthcare and it is not known how chiropractic practitioners have responded to this crisis. The purpose of this report is to describe responses by a sample of chiropractors during the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: We used a qualitative-constructivist design to understand chiropractic practice during the COVID-19 pandemic, as described by the participants. A sample of chiropractic practitioners (doctors of chiropractic, chiropractors) from various international locations were invited to participate. Each described the public health response to COVID-19 in their location and the actions that they took in their chiropractic practices from April 20 through May 4, 2020. A summary report was created from their responses and common themes were identified. RESULTS: Eighteen chiropractic practitioners representing 17 locations and 11 countries participated. A variety of practice environments were represented in this sample, including, solo practice, mobile practice, private hospital, US Veterans Administration health care, worksite health center, and group practice. They reported that they recognized and abided by changing governmental regulations. They observed their patients experience increased stress and mental health concerns resulting from the pandemic. They adopted innovative strategies, such as telehealth, to do outreach, communicate with, and provide care for patients. They abided by national and World Health Organization recommendations and they adopted creative strategies to maintain connectivity with patients through a people-centered, integrated, and collaborative approach. CONCLUSION: Although the chiropractors in this sample practiced in different cities and countries, their compliance with local regulations, concern for staff and patient safety, and people-centered responses were consistent. This sample covers all 7 World Federation of Chiropractic regions (ie, African, Asian, Eastern Mediterranean, European, Latin American, North American, and Pacific) and provides insights into measures taken by chiropractors during the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic. This information may assist the chiropractic profession as it prepares for different scenarios as new evidence about this disease evolves.