Dry needling for spine related disorders: a scoping review.

INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND: The depth and breadth of research on dry needling (DN) has not been evaluated specifically for symptomatic spine related disorders (SRD) from myofascial trigger points (TrP), disc, nerve and articular structures not due to serious pathologies. Current literature appears to support DN for treatment of TrP. Goals of this review include identifying research published on DN treatment for SRD, sites of treatment and outcomes studied. METHODS: A scoping review was conducted following Levac et al.'s five part methodological framework to determine the current state of the literature regarding DN for patients with SRD. RESULTS: Initial and secondary search strategies yielded 55 studies in the cervical (C) region (71.43%) and 22 in the thoracolumbar-pelvic (TLP) region (28.57%). Most were randomized controlled trials (60% in C, 45.45% in TLP) and clinical trials (18.18% in C, 22.78% in TLP). The most commonly treated condition was TrP for both the C and TLP regions. In the C region, DN was provided to 23 different muscles, with the trapezius as treatment site in 41.88% of studies. DN was applied to 31 different structures in the TLP region. In the C region, there was one treatment session in 23 studies (41.82%) and 2-6 treatments in 25 (45.45%%). For the TLP region, one DN treatment was provided in 8 of the 22 total studies (36.36%) and 2-6 in 9 (40.9%). The majority of experimental designs had DN as the sole intervention. For both C and TLP regions, visual analogue scale, pressure pain threshold and range of motion were the most common outcomes. CONCLUSION: For SRD, DN was primarily applied to myofascial structures for pain or TrP diagnoses. Many outcomes were improved regardless of diagnosis or treatment parameters. Most studies applied just one treatment which may not reflect common clinical practice. Further research is warranted to determine optimal treatment duration and frequency. Most studies looked at DN as the sole intervention. It is unclear whether DN alone or in addition to other treatment procedures would provide superior outcomes. Functional outcome tools best suited to tracking the outcomes of DN for SRD should be explored.

The prevalence of the term subluxation in chiropractic degree program curricula throughout the world.

Background: The subluxation construct generates debate within and outside the profession. The International Chiropractic Education Collaboration, comprised of 10 chiropractic programs outside of North America, stated they will only teach subluxation in a historical context. This research sought to determine how many chiropractic institutions worldwide still use the term in their curricula and to expand upon the previous work of Mirtz & and Perle. Methods: Forty-six chiropractic programs, 18 United States (US) and 28 non-US, were identified from the World Federation of Chiropractic Educational Institutions list. Websites were searched by multiple researchers for curricular information September 2016-September 2017. Some data were not available on line, so email requests were made for additional information. Two institutions provided additional information. The total number of mentions of subluxation in course titles, technique course (Tech) descriptions, principles and practice (PP) descriptions, and other course descriptions were reported separately for US and non-US institutions. Means for each category were calculated. The number of course titles and descriptions using subluxation was divided by the total number of courses for each institution and reported as percentages. Results: Means for use of subluxation by US institutions were: Total course titles = .44; Tech = 3.83; PP = 1.50; other = 1.16. For non-US institutions, means were: Total course titles = .07; Tech = .27; PP = .44; other = 0. The mean total number of mentions was 6.94 in US vs. 0.83 in non-US institutions. Similarly, the mean course descriptions was 6.50 in US vs. 0.72 in non-US institutions. Conclusions: The term subluxation was found in all but two US course catalogues. The use of subluxation in US courses rose from a mean of 5.53 in 2011 to 6.50 in 2017. US institutions use the term significantly more frequently than non-US. Possible reasons for this were discussed. Unscientific terms and concepts should have no place in modern education, except perhaps in historical context. Unless these outdated concepts are rejected, the chiropractic profession and individual chiropractors will likely continue to face difficulties integrating with established health care systems and attaining cultural authority as experts in conservative neuro-musculoskeletal health care.

A survey of chiropractic intern experiences learning and using an electronic health record system.

OBJECTIVE:: Previous research has discussed various challenges to introducing an electronic health record (EHR) to first-time health professional students. Chiropractic interns face similar challenges. Interns' perceptions about learning and using an EHR were assessed. METHODS:: An anonymous electronic survey was sent to interns of our outpatient chiropractic clinic requesting their relative agreement or disagreement to statements in nine domains. Since perceptions of EHR have been shown to change with increased time spent using an EHR, the survey also sought to compare more experienced users (8th semester) to novices (7th semester). Data were analyzed for relative agreement to statements related to learning the use of the EHR. Interns also provided other written comments. RESULTS:: There was a 51% overall response rate, evenly divided between 7th and 8th semester interns. Interns generally concurred that they were adept at using the current EHR and those with more experience responded they were more adept than those with less EHR familiarity. Interns strongly agreed that the EHR facilitated gathering information about patients through the ability to review previous clinical notes, tests, and medication lists. Experienced interns were more likely to enter data after the encounter was over and novice users more commonly entered data during the encounter. CONCLUSION:: This information regarding interns' EHR experiences may provide strategies that lead to improvements in intern EHR education. Having insight into learners' experiences can provide important input to the EHR features that should be considered carefully by institutions and individual purchasers alike.

Retropharyngeal Calcific Tendonitis in a Patient Seeking Chiropractic Care for Neck Pain: A Case Report.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this report is to describe the evaluation and treatment of a patient initially presenting for chiropractic care of neck pain (NP) who was subsequently diagnosed with retropharyngeal calcific tendonitis (RCT). CLINICAL FEATURES: A 53-year-old woman presented to a chiropractic office with severe idiopathic NP, loss of cervical mobility, and intermittent painful swallowing. She had a motor vehicle accident 6 months before with NP that resolved within a week without treatment. A brief examination and some manual palliative care were attempted by the chiropractor. Two days later, the patient developed severe NP and fever, sought emergency medical care on her own, and requested the chiropractor meet her at the hospital. The emergency physicians initially considered an infection, and antibiotics were provided along with oxycodone and naproxen sodium for pain. After advanced (computed tomography) imaging, RCT was diagnosed, and she was discharged the next day. INTERVENTIONS AND OUTCOME: After being diagnosed, the patient's primary care provider prescribed prednisone and physical therapy. After 3 weeks, the patient stated her pain continued and she went for chiropractic care and was treated for mechanical neck pain with manipulation, manual muscle treatment, postural training, and rehabilitative exercises. CONCLUSION: Practitioners should recognize the clinical presentation of RCT, order appropriate computed tomography imaging, and implement effective treatments. Although uncommon, RCT should be considered in patients with NP, limited mobility, and painful swallowing.

Laboratory pre-participation screening examination in a chiropractic college: development, implementation, and results.

INTRODUCTION: Chiropractic students often serve as subjects in laboratories where they and their classmates practice examinations, various soft tissue techniques, physiological therapeutic modalities, and active rehabilitation. There are contraindications and risks associated with these procedures. This article describes how a procedure was developed to identify potential health concerns and risks that students may face while serving as subjects or performing procedures in clinical skills laboratories. METHODS: Screening questions and examination procedures were developed through a consensus process. Findings from the screening process determine whether students may engage in full participation or limited participation (precautions) or are prohibited from receiving certain procedures (contraindications). Skills laboratory students and their instructors are informed of any identifiable precautions or contraindications to participation. RESULTS: Since its implementation, precautions regarding delivery of manual therapies were found in 4% of those examined and precautions regarding receiving manual therapies in 11.5%. Contraindications to receiving specified manual therapies were found in 8%, and 4% had contraindications to certain physiological therapeutic modalities. DISCUSSION: Further work is necessary to improve compliance with follow-up regarding diagnosis of conditions revealed or suspected. Future efforts should address how well students adhered to precautions and contraindications, the nature and frequency of injuries sustained within the laboratories, and what specific measures were taken by faculty to help students with special needs. CONCLUSION: This chiropractic college now has a method to describe potential risks, explain rules of laboratory participation, and obtain consent from each student.

Conflict of interest policies among institutions and organizations offering chiropractic continuing education.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study is to document and describe the policies governing conflict of interest (COI) among select organizations and institutions offering chiropractic continuing education. METHODS: Surveys were sent to the following: all North American chiropractic colleges; major national chiropractic organizations; and state chiropractic organizations in states with more than 3500 licensed Doctors of Chiropractic. Each organization or institution was surveyed regarding written and verbal COI policies. RESULTS: Half of the respondents in this survey indicated that they had written policies for management of COI, whereas half did not. None included most of the common elements typically outlined in continuing medical education COI policies. Content varied among the policies available for review. Relevant financial interest is the issue most often defined, and respondents generally prohibit presenters from selling products or services directly during presentations. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, these results suggest that processes for managing COI in chiropractic CE are less robust than those previously described for continuing medical education. This study provides preliminary insight into the status of COI management in chiropractic CE.

Chiropractic-primary care, neuromusculoskeletal care, or musculoskeletal care? Results of a survey of chiropractic college presidents, chiropractic organization leaders, and Connecticut-licensed doctors of chiropractic.

BACKGROUND: The Connecticut Chiropractic Association authorized an ad hoc committee to study Connecticut chiropractic scope of practice in January 1999. This committee was chaired by Richard Duenas, DC, and included 4 other Connecticut-licensed doctors of chiropractic who responded to an appeal to participate. OBJECTIVE: Committee members investigated the terms primary care, primary care provider (PCP) (clinician, physician), neuromusculoskeletal care, neuromusculoskeletal care provider (clinician, physician), musculoskeletal care, and musculoskeletal care provider (clinician, physician) to determine which, if any, apply to the practice of chiropractic. DATA SOURCES: A literature review was performed with in-depth analysis of the definitions of these terms and an interpretation of Connecticut Statutes for chiropractic, comparing the legal description of chiropractic practice to the term definitions. The literature review produced several detailed definitions of primary care and/or primary care provider (clinician, physician); however, no accurate description of neuromusculoskeletal (NMS) care or musculoskeletal care was found. RESULTS: Two opinion surveys were conducted: 1 survey included presidents of accredited chiropractic colleges, as well as leaders of chiropractic organizations throughout the world. The other survey was sent to doctors of chiropractic (DC) licensed in the State of Connecticut. Survey topics addressed definitions of primary care and PCP, the formulation of these terms, neuromusculoskeletal care and neuromusculoskeletal care provider, individual rights in selecting a PCP, and the types of practitioners considered PCPs. The consensus among chiropractic college presidents, organization leaders, and Connecticut-licensed doctors of chiropractic was that the doctor of chiropractic is qualified to provide primary care. Most considered any definition of primary care invalid if the chiropractic profession was not involved in its formulation. The overwhelming majority felt the patient should retain the ultimate choice in determining who should be their PCP. Mission statements of accredited chiropractic colleges were reviewed, paying particular attention to educational goals and professional qualifications of graduates. The committee found these institutions strive to train students in all aspects of primary care. CONCLUSIONS: Upon review of the literature and term definitions, interpretation of the statutes pertaining to chiropractic practice, results of both surveys, and review of the chiropractic college mission statements, the committee concluded that the Connecticut-licensed DC, by education, licensure, definition, and intraprofessional consensus, qualifies as a PCP.