Erratum to: Quality of reporting of randomised controlled trials in chiropractic using the CONSORT checklist.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1186/s12998-016-0099-6.].

Quality of reporting of randomised controlled trials in chiropractic using the CONSORT checklist.

BACKGROUND: Reviews indicate that the quality of reporting of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in the medical literature is less than optimal, poor to moderate, and require improving. However, the reporting quality of chiropractic RCTs is unknown. As a result, the aim of this study was to assess the reporting quality of chiropractic RCTs and identify factors associated with better reporting quality. We hypothesized that quality of reporting of RCTs was influenced by industry funding, positive findings, larger sample sizes, latter year of publication and publication in non-chiropractic journals. METHODS: RCTs published between 2005 and 2014 were sourced from clinical trial registers, PubMed and the Cochrane Reviews. RCTs were included if they involved high-velocity, low-amplitude (HVLA) spinal and/or extremity manipulation and were conducted by a chiropractor or within a chiropractic department. Data extraction, and reviews were conducted by all authors independently. Disagreements were resolved by consensus. OUTCOMES: a 39-point overall quality of reporting score checklist was developed based on the CONSORT 2010 and CONSORT for Non-Pharmacological Treatments statements. Four key methodological items, based on allocation concealment, blinding of participants and assessors, and use of intention-to-treat analysis (ITT) were also investigated. RESULTS: Thirty-five RCTs were included. The overall quality of reporting score ranged between 10 and 33 (median score 26.0; IQR = 8.00). Allocation concealment, blinding of participants and assessors and ITT analysis were reported in 31 (87 %), 16 (46 %), 25 (71 %) and 21 (60 %) of the 35 RCTs respectively. Items most underreported were from the CONSORT for Non-Pharmacological Treatments statement. Multivariate regression analysis, revealed that year of publication (t32 = 5.17, p = 0.000, 95 % CI: 0.76, 1.76), and sample size (t32 = 3.01, p = 0.005, 95 % CI: 1.36, 7.02), were the only two factors associated with reporting quality. CONCLUSION: The overall quality of reporting RCTs in chiropractic ranged from poor to excellent, improving between 2005 and 2014. This study suggests that quality of reporting, was influenced by year of publication and sample size but not journal type, funding source or outcome positivity. Reporting of some key methodological items and uptake of items from the CONSORT Extension for Non-Pharmacological Treatments items was suboptimal. Future recommendations were made.

Manipulative and multimodal therapy for upper extremity and temporomandibular disorders: a systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to complete a systematic review of manual and manipulative therapy (MMT) for common upper extremity pain and disorders including the temporomandibular joint (TMJ). METHODS: A literature search was conducted using the Cumulative Index of Nursing Allied Health Literature, PubMed, Manual, Alternative, and Natural Therapy Index System (MANTIS), Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro), Index to Chiropractic Literature, Google Scholar, and hand search inclusive of literature from January 1983 to March 5, 2012. Search limits included the English language and human studies along with MeSH terms such as manipulation, chiropractic, osteopathic, orthopedic, and physical therapies. Inclusion criteria required an extremity peripheral diagnosis (for upper extremity problems including the elbow, wrist, hand, finger and the (upper quadrant) temporomandibular joint) and MMT with or without multimodal therapy. Studies were assessed using the PEDro scale in conjunction with modified guidelines and systems. After synthesis and considered judgment scoring was complete, evidence grades of "A, B, C and I" were applied. RESULTS: Out of 764 citations reviewed, 129 studies were deemed possibly to probably useful and/or relevant to develop expert consensus. Out of 81 randomized controlled or clinical trials, 35 were included. Five controlled or clinical trials were located and 4 were included. Fifty case series, reports and/or single-group pre-test post-test prospective case series were located with 32 included. There is Fair (B) level of evidence for MMT to specific joints and the full kinetic chain combined generally with exercise and/or multimodal therapy for lateral epicondylopathy, carpal tunnel syndrome, and temporomandibular joint disorders, in the short term. CONCLUSION: The information from this study will help guide practitioners in the use of MMT, soft tissue technique, exercise, and/or multimodal therapy for the treatment of a variety of upper extremity complaints in the context of the hierarchy of published and available evidence.

Manipulative therapy for lower extremity conditions: update of a literature review.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study is to update a systematic review on manipulative therapy (MT) for lower extremity conditions. METHODS: A review of literature was conducted using MEDLINE, MANTIS, Science Direct, Index to Chiropractic Literature, and PEDro from March 2008 to May 2011. Inclusion criteria required peripheral diagnosis and MT with or without adjunctive care. Clinical trials were assessed for quality using a modified Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN) ranking system. RESULTS: In addition to the citations used in a 2009 systematic review, an additional 399 new citations were accessed: 175 citations in Medline, 30 citations in MANTIS, 98 through Science Direct, 54 from Index to Chiropractic Literature, and 42 from the PEDro database. Forty-eight clinical trials were assessed for quality. CONCLUSIONS: Regarding MT for common lower extremity disorders, there is a level of B (fair evidence) for short-term and C (limited evidence) for long-term treatment of hip osteoarthritis. There is a level of B for short-term and C for long-term treatment of knee osteoarthritis, patellofemoral pain syndrome, and ankle inversion sprain. There is a level of B for short-term treatment of plantar fasciitis but C for short-term treatment of metatarsalgia and hallux limitus/rigidus and for loss of foot and/or ankle proprioception and balance. Finally, there is a level of I (insufficient evidence) for treatment of hallux abducto valgus. Further research is needed on MT as a treatment of lower extremity conditions, specifically larger trials with improved methodology.

A systematic review of manipulative therapy for the treatment of shoulder pain.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this systematic review is to discuss the evidence for manipulative methods of management of shoulder pain and chiropractic management techniques used within the literature. METHODS: A literature search of MEDLINE, CINAHL, MANTIS, the Cochrane Musculoskeletal Group trials register and the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register was conducted. Search terms included chiropractic or manipulative therapy and shoulder pain, impingement, rotator cuff, shoulder instability, shoulder joint, treatment or rehabilitation exercises. Publications were included if they contained shoulder pain or contained a specific clinical diagnosis of a shoulder pain syndrome in the title; a detailed description of the treatment intervention which was typical of the profession; treatment performed by a registered practitioner and outcome measures were included in the studies. Exclusion criteria included the diagnosis of adhesive capsultis or referred/pathological pain. The articles were reviewed and clinical trials ranked on the Physiotherapy Evidence Database scale. RESULTS: From a total of 913 retrieved publications, 22 case reports, 4 case series and 4 randomized, controlled trials met the inclusion and exclusion criteria for this review. CONCLUSIONS: The literature contains 2 articles of reasonably sound methodology. The evidence for chiropractic management of shoulder pain is limited to low level evidence in the form of case reports and case series and 1 small controlled trial. There is a need for more well-designed, trials investigating multi-modal chiropractic management for shoulder pain.

An epidemiologic survey of shoulder pain in chiropractic practice in australia.

OBJECTIVE: This survey investigated the demographic characteristics of the responding practitioners, the prevalence of shoulder pain symptoms seen in weekly chiropractic practice, the sources of shoulder pain, the chiropractor-diagnosed prevalence of shoulder clinical syndromes, and the management strategies for Australian chiropractors. METHODS: A survey was created by the authors consisting of questions seeking demographic information from the respondents, shoulder syndrome, and shoulder management information. The survey was mailed to every chiropractic practitioner based in the Australian state of New South Wales (general population 6.8 million in 2005). Contact details were derived from Yellow Pages online listings. RESULTS: One thousand thirty-seven surveys were mailed to New South Wales-based chiropractors, with 192 (21%) returning a completed survey. The prevalence of shoulder pain symptoms as reported by the practitioners was 12% of the total weekly patients, with the major cause of symptoms related to overuse (32%). The most prevalent working diagnosis of shoulder pain was shoulder impingement syndrome (13%), followed by impingement syndrome with rotator cuff tendinosis (17%), impingement syndrome without rotator cuff tendinosis (14%), and chiropractic shoulder subluxation (12%). Shoulder pain is managed with a combination of manipulation, mainly diversified technique (81%), peripheral joint manipulation (82%), and various soft tissue strategies used by 92% of practitioners. Rehabilitation strategies were also used by 89% of practitioners with a main emphasis placed on rotator cuff strengthening. CONCLUSION: The results suggest a moderate prevalence of shoulder pain in clinical practice with the most prevalent structure involved being the rotator cuff tendon. Most practitioners use a multimodal therapeutic treatment approach in managing disorders of the shoulder.

Australian chiropractic sports medicine: half way there or living on a prayer?

Sports chiropractic within Australia has a chequered historical background of unorthodox individualistic displays of egocentric treatment approaches that emphasise specific technique preference and individual prowess rather than standardised evidence based management. This situation has changed in recent years with the acceptance of many within sports chiropractic to operate under an evidence informed banner and to embrace a research culture. Despite recent developments within the sports chiropractic movement, the profession is still plagued by a minority of practitioners continuing to espouse certain marginal and outlandish technique systems that beleaguer the mainstream core of sports chiropractic as a cohesive and homogeneous group. Modern chiropractic management is frequently multimodal in nature and incorporates components of passive and active care. Such management typically incorporates spinal and peripheral manipulation, mobilisation, soft tissue techniques, rehabilitation and therapeutic exercises. Externally, sports chiropractic has faced hurdles too, with a lack of recognition and acceptance by organized and orthodox sports medical groups. Whilst some arguments against the inclusion of chiropractic may be legitimate due to its historical baggage, much of the argument appears to be anti-competitive, insecure and driven by a closed-shop mentality.sequently, chiropractic as a profession still remains a pariah to the organised sports medicine world. Add to this an uncertain continuing education system, a lack of protection for the title 'sports chiropractor', a lack of a recognized specialist status and a lack of support from traditional chiropractic, the challenges for the growth and acceptance of the sports chiropractor are considerable. This article outlines the historical and current challenges, both internal and external, faced by sports chiropractic within Australia and proposes positive changes that will assist in recognition and inclusion of sports chiropractic in both chiropractic and multi-disciplinary sports medicine alike.

A multi-modal treatment approach for the shoulder: a 4 patient case series.

BACKGROUND: This paper describes the clinical management of four cases of shoulder impingement syndrome using a conservative multimodal treatment approach. CLINICAL FEATURES: Four patients presented to a chiropractic clinic with chronic shoulder pain, tenderness in the shoulder region and a limited range of motion with pain and catching. After physical and orthopaedic examination a clinical diagnosis of shoulder impingement syndrome was reached. The four patients were admitted to a multi-modal treatment protocol including soft tissue therapy (ischaemic pressure and cross-friction massage), 7 minutes of phonophoresis (driving of medication into tissue with ultrasound) with 1% cortisone cream, diversified spinal and peripheral joint manipulation and rotator cuff and shoulder girdle muscle exercises. The outcome measures for the study were subjective/objective visual analogue pain scales (VAS), range of motion (goniometer) and return to normal daily, work and sporting activities. All four subjects at the end of the treatment protocol were symptom free with all outcome measures being normal. At 1 month follow up all patients continued to be symptom free with full range of motion and complete return to normal daily activities. CONCLUSION: This case series demonstrates the potential benefit of a multimodal chiropractic protocol in resolving symptoms associated with a suspected clinical diagnosis of shoulder impingement syndrome.

Rotator cuff impingement.

OBJECTIVE: To present a case of shoulder impingement syndrome managed with a conservative multimodal treatment approach. CLINICAL FEATURES: A patient had anterior shoulder pain and a diffuse ache in the right upper arm, with tenderness in the shoulder region on palpation. Shoulder range of motion was limited with pain and catching, coupled with limited and painful cervical motion. After physical and orthopedic examination, a clinical diagnosis of shoulder impingement syndrome was made. INTERVENTIONS AND OUTCOME: The patient underwent a multimodal treatment protocol including soft tissue therapy, phonophoresis, diversified manipulation; and rotator cuff and shoulder girdle muscle exercises. Outcomes included pain measurement; range of motion of the shoulder, and return to normal daily, work, and sporting activities. At the end of the treatment protocol the patient was symptom free with all outcome measures normal. The patient was followed up at 4 and 12 weeks and continued to be symptom free with full range of motion and complete return to normal daily and pre-treatment activities. CONCLUSION: This case report shows the potential benefit of a multimodal chiropractic protocol in resolving symptoms associated with shoulder impingement syndrome.