Journal of Manipulative and Physiological Therapeutics最新文献

{"title":"Analysis of Spin in the Reporting of Studies on Electroanalgesia for Musculoskeletal Pain","authors":"Amanda K.S. Batista,&nbsp;Francilene L. Matias MS,&nbsp;Cristina K.T.T. Mendes PhD,&nbsp;José J.A. Ferreira PhD,&nbsp;Palloma R. Andrade PhD,&nbsp;Valéria M.A. de Oliveira PhD","doi":"10.1016/j.jmpt.2023.04.006","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.jmpt.2023.04.006","url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objective</h3><p><span>The purpose of this study was to analyze the quality of reporting and presence of spin in abstracts of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) on the use of </span>electroanalgesia<span> for musculoskeletal pain.</span></p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>The Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro) was searched from 2010 to June 2021. Inclusion criteria were RCTs using electroanalgesia in individuals with musculoskeletal pain, written in any language, comparing 2 or more groups, and with pain as 1 of the outcomes. Two blinded, independent, and calibrated evaluators (Gwet's AC1 agreement analysis) performed eligibility and data extraction. General characteristics, report of outcomes, quality of reporting (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials for Abstracts [CONSORT-A]), and spin analysis (7-item spin checklist and spin analysis per section) were extracted from abstracts.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Of 989 studies selected, 173 abstracts were analyzed after screening and eligibility criteria. Mean risk of bias on the PEDro scale was 6.02 ± 1.6 points. Most abstracts did not report significant differences for primary (51.4%) and secondary (63%) outcomes. Mean quality of reporting was 5.10 ± 2.4 points in the CONSORT-A, and spin was 2.97 ± 1.7. Abstracts had at least 1 type of spin (93%), and the conclusion presented the greatest number of spin types. More than 50% of abstracts recommended an intervention without significant differences between groups.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>This study found that the majority of RCT abstracts on electroanalgesia for musculoskeletal conditions in our sample had a moderate to high risk of bias, incomplete or missing information, and some type of spin. We recommend that health care providers who use electroanalgesia and the scientific community be aware of spin in published studies.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":16132,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Manipulative and Physiological Therapeutics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.3,"publicationDate":"2022-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"9788684","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Factors Associated With Pain Medication Use and the Relationship to Chiropractic Treatment Outcomes for Patients With Low Back and Neck Pain: A Cross-Sectional Study","authors":"Corinne R. Minder MChiroMed ,&nbsp;Christoph Gorbach DC, MD ,&nbsp;Cynthia K. Peterson RN, DC, MMedEd","doi":"10.1016/j.jmpt.2023.03.002","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.jmpt.2023.03.002","url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objective</h3><p>The study objectives were to identify baseline factors associated with pain medication use and determine any differences in chiropractic treatment outcomes in patients with low back pain (LBP) and neck pain (NP) depending on their use of pain medication.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>This cross-sectional, prospective outcomes study included 1077 adults with acute or chronic LBP and 845 adults with acute or chronic NP recruited from Swiss chiropractors in their offices within 4 years. Demographic data and the responses to the Patient's Global Impression of Change scale collected at 1 week, 1 month, 3 months, 6 months, and 1 year were analyzed with the χ² test. Baseline pain and disability levels were measured using the numeric rating scale (NRS), Oswestry questionnaire for LBP, and Bournemouth questionnaire for patients with NP and analyzed with the Mann-Whitney <em>U</em> test between the 2 groups. To detect significant predictors of medication use at baseline, logistic regression analysis was performed.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Patients with acute LBP and NP were more likely than those with chronic pain to take pain medication (<em>P</em> &lt; .001 LBP; <em>P</em> = .003 NP). Medication use was more likely with patients with radiculopathy (<em>P</em> &lt; .001 LBP; <em>P</em> = .05 NP) who were smokers (<em>P</em> = .008 LBP; <em>P</em> = .024 NP) and those reporting below-average general health (<em>P</em> &lt; .001 LBP and NP). Pain medication users had higher baseline pain (<em>P</em> &lt; .001 LBP and NP) and disability (<em>P</em> &lt; .001 LBP and NP) scores.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>Patients with LBP and NP had significantly higher pain and disability levels at baseline, tended to have radiculopathy and poor health, were smokers, and presented during the acute phase. However, for this sample of patients, there were no differences in subjective improvement between users and non-users of pain medication for any data collection time point, which has management implications.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":16132,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Manipulative and Physiological Therapeutics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.3,"publicationDate":"2022-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0161475423000106/pdfft?md5=45b1baaf5ec582b56b6265890b23f4d6&pid=1-s2.0-S0161475423000106-main.pdf","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"9788683","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"TOC","authors":"","doi":"10.1016/S0161-4754(23)00034-9","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1016/S0161-4754(23)00034-9","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":16132,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Manipulative and Physiological Therapeutics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.3,"publicationDate":"2022-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0161475423000349/pdfft?md5=29b3877b9980f2dec799aadd777a5be8&pid=1-s2.0-S0161475423000349-main.pdf","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"136489704","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Best Practices for Chiropractic Management of Adult Patients With Mechanical Low Back Pain: A Clinical Practice Guideline for Chiropractors in the United States","authors":"Wayne M. Whalen DC ,&nbsp;Cheryl Hawk DC, PhD ,&nbsp;Ronald J. Farabaugh DC ,&nbsp;Clinton J. Daniels DC, MS ,&nbsp;David N. Taylor DC ,&nbsp;Kristian R. Anderson DC, MS ,&nbsp;Louis S. Crivelli DC, MS ,&nbsp;Derek R. Anderson PhD ,&nbsp;Lisa M. Thomson DC ,&nbsp;Richard L. Sarnat MD","doi":"10.1016/j.jmpt.2023.04.010","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.jmpt.2023.04.010","url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objective</h3><p>The purpose of this paper was to update the previously published 2016 best-practice recommendations for chiropractic management of adults with mechanical low back pain (LBP) in the United States.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>Two experienced health librarians conducted the literature searches for clinical practice guidelines and other relevant literature, and the investigators performed quality assessment of included studies. PubMed was searched from March 2015 to September 2021. A steering committee of 10 experts in chiropractic research, education, and practice used the most current relevant guidelines and publications to update care recommendations. A panel of 69 experts used a modified Delphi process to rate the recommendations.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>The literature search yielded 14 clinical practice guidelines, 10 systematic reviews, and 5 randomized controlled trials (all high quality). Sixty-nine members of the panel rated 38 recommendations. All but 1 statement achieved consensus in the first round, and the final statement reached consensus in the second round. Recommendations covered the clinical encounter from history, physical examination, and diagnostic considerations through informed consent, co-management, and treatment considerations for patients with mechanical LBP.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>This paper updates a previously published best-practice document for chiropractic management of adults with mechanical LBP.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":16132,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Manipulative and Physiological Therapeutics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.3,"publicationDate":"2022-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0161475423000167/pdfft?md5=84637cc8a238989fd64cb0d5d7ea28c1&pid=1-s2.0-S0161475423000167-main.pdf","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"9952268","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Information for Readers","authors":"","doi":"10.1016/S0161-4754(23)00004-0","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1016/S0161-4754(23)00004-0","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":16132,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Manipulative and Physiological Therapeutics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.3,"publicationDate":"2022-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"137137534","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Inside front cover Editorial board","authors":"","doi":"10.1016/S0161-4754(23)00002-7","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1016/S0161-4754(23)00002-7","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":16132,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Manipulative and Physiological Therapeutics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.3,"publicationDate":"2022-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0161475423000027/pdfft?md5=0f387b5d4969c1bf23d109cf32ff43ac&pid=1-s2.0-S0161475423000027-main.pdf","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"137137558","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Immediate Effects of Adding Dry Needling to Thoracic Manipulation and Exercise in Cervical Range of Motion for Adults With Neck Pain: A Randomized Clinical Trial","authors":"Brian A. Young PT, DSc ,&nbsp;David M. Boland PT, PhD ,&nbsp;Abby Manzo DPT ,&nbsp;Haley Yaw DPT ,&nbsp;Brian Carlson DPT ,&nbsp;Spencer Carrier DPT ,&nbsp;Kameryn Corcoran DPT ,&nbsp;Megan Dial DPT ,&nbsp;Robert B. Briggs PT, PhD ,&nbsp;Bradley Tragord PT, DSc ,&nbsp;Shane L. Koppenhaver PT, PhD","doi":"10.1016/j.jmpt.2022.10.002","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.jmpt.2022.10.002","url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objective</h3><p>The purpose of this study was to determine the immediate effects of adding dry needling<span> (DN) to thoracic spine manipulation and neck-specific exercise in individuals with neck pain.</span></p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p><span><span>Forty-two participants with neck pain were randomized to either the true (n = 21) or sham (n = 21) DN groups, receiving treatment on the initial visit and 2 to 3 days later. Outcomes were assessed on day 1, both at baseline and immediately after the initial treatment, at the second treatment 2 to 3 days later, and at the final visit 5 to 7 days after visit 2. Primary outcomes were </span>Neck Disability Index<span> (NDI) (0-50) and current pain via numeric pain rating scale (0-10). Secondary outcomes were cervical range of motion, </span></span>pain pressure threshold, and global rating of change.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p><span><span>Repeated measures analysis of covariance with baseline value as covariate revealed no significant difference in NDI scores at either follow-up time point with adjusted mean differences (95% confidence interval) of -0.11 (-2.70 to 2.48) and 0.31 (-1.96 to 2.57). There were no between-group differences in pain at any time point via Independent-Samples </span>Median Test (</span><em>P</em> value range of .54-1.0). Secondary outcome measures were similarly not statistically different between groups except for immediate improvements in rotation to the side opposite of pain, which favored DN, with an adjusted mean difference (95% confidence interval) of 7.85 (3.54-12.15) degrees.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>The addition of DN to thoracic spinal manipulation and neck-specific exercise did not affect improvements in NDI score or numeric pain rating scale but showed an increase in cervical range of motion.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":16132,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Manipulative and Physiological Therapeutics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.3,"publicationDate":"2022-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"9599145","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Best-Practice Recommendations for Chiropractic Care for Pregnant and Postpartum Patients: Results of a Consensus Process","authors":"Carol Ann Weis MSc, DC ,&nbsp;Katherine Pohlman DC, PhD ,&nbsp;Jon Barrett MBBch, MD ,&nbsp;Susan Clinton PT ,&nbsp;Sophia da Silva-Oolup DC ,&nbsp;Crystal Draper DC ,&nbsp;Joyce Lee DC ,&nbsp;Rupali Kumar MD ,&nbsp;Maeve O'Beirne MD, PhD ,&nbsp;Kent Stuber DC, MSc ,&nbsp;Cheryl Hawk DC, PhD","doi":"10.1016/j.jmpt.2021.03.002","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.jmpt.2021.03.002","url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objective</h3><p>The purpose of this project was to develop a best-practices document on chiropractic<span> care for pregnant and postpartum patients with low back pain (LBP), pelvic girdle pain (PGP), or a combination.</span></p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p><span>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 </span>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.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>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.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>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.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":16132,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Manipulative and Physiological Therapeutics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.3,"publicationDate":"2022-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"9612206","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Variability of Intradiscal Pressure During Cervical Spine Posterior-Anterior Mobilization: A Cadaveric Investigation","authors":"Carla M. James PT, ScD ,&nbsp;Jean-Michel Brismée PT, ScD ,&nbsp;Marc-Olivier St-Pierre PhD ,&nbsp;Martin Descarreaux DC, PhD ,&nbsp;Troy L. Hooper PT, LAT, ATC, PhD ,&nbsp;François Nougarou PhD ,&nbsp;Emile Marineau Bélanger DC ,&nbsp;Stéphane Sobczak PT, PhD","doi":"10.1016/j.jmpt.2022.10.003","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.jmpt.2022.10.003","url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objectives</h3><p>The purpose of this study was to investigate in cadaveric specimens the reliability of measuring cervical intradiscal pressure (CIDP) and if posterior-anterior (PA) mobilizations targeting the cervical spine were associated with CIDP changes.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p><span>Cervical PA mobilizations were performed on the spinous processes<span> of 7 (3 men, 4 women) cadaveric specimens using a servo-controlled linear actuator to provide 25N and 45N forces. CIDP measurements were performed at C4-5, C5-6, C6-7, and C7-T1 intervertebral discs (IVDs) using a </span></span>fiberoptic<span> catheter system that recorded CIDP for each IVD cervical segment. To assess CIDP measurement reliability, the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC [3,k]) was calculated. Repeated measures Friedman analysis of variance assessed effect of cervical mobilizations on CIDP for before, during, and immediately after mobilization at 25N and 45N forces for each cervical IVD segment.</span></p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>All CIDP measurements demonstrated excellent reliability (ICC &gt;0.98). During the 25N mobilizations, the median CIDP varied from -0.12 to 0.91 (interquartile range, 5.22-5.36), while for 45N mobilizations the median ranged from -0.94 to 1.21 (interquartile range, -7.74 to 43.49). These changes were not statistically significant (<em>P</em> &gt; .40) during 25N and 45N PA mobilizations, with the exception of C5-6 CIDP at 25N and 45N (<em>P</em> = .05 and .018, respectively).</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>There was high CIDP variability between cadavers during and after mobilization. Mobilizations of 1 cervical vertebra resulted in both CIDP increase or decrease at adjacent and remote cervical IVD segments that were not consistent. Cervical PA mobilizations produced variable CIDP changes at adjacent and remote cervical segments in cadavers.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":16132,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Manipulative and Physiological Therapeutics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.3,"publicationDate":"2022-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"9244109","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Angular Kinematics of Chiropractic Supine Cervical Spine Manipulation: Rotational Measures and Comparisons to Doctor and Recipient Perceptions","authors":"Brent S. Russell MS, DC ,&nbsp;Mackenzie Keller DC ,&nbsp;Shari E. Wynd MASC, DC, PHD ,&nbsp;Ronald S. Hosek PhD, DC, MPH ,&nbsp;Edward F. Owens Jr MS, DC ,&nbsp;Kathryn T. Hoiriis DC","doi":"10.1016/j.jmpt.2022.12.002","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.jmpt.2022.12.002","url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objectives</h3><p>The primary purposes of this study were to measure axial rotation during supine cervical spinal manipulative therapy (cSMT) and to record recipients’ and doctors’ perceptions of rotational magnitudes.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>Experienced doctors of chiropractic (DCs) provided supine cSMT and acted as recipients of cSMT. Participants who received SMT wore inertial measurement units attached to the forehead and sternum for motion capture. Afterward, recipients and DCs completed questionnaires asking about their perceptions of motion. Data were analyzed for magnitudes of axial rotation at peak thrust and correlations with patient and doctor perceptions. Secondary analyses included angular velocity, angular acceleration, and other kinematic variables.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>We recorded 23 SMT events with 14 DCs. Rotation at thrust peaks averaged 32.4° (17.4°). Doctors’ and recipients’ perceptions of rotation were higher than measured values 45% and 50% of the time, respectively. Maximum angular velocity and acceleration averaged 221.9°/s (124.9) and 4786.5°/s² (2456.6), respectively. We found no correlation between perceptions and velocity or acceleration; doctors’ perceptions had an inverse correlation with measurements.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>On average, we found rotation during supine cSMT to be 32°. Both DCs and SMT recipients overestimated rotation compared with actual measurements. These factors should be considered in discussions of rotation and SMT.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":16132,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Manipulative and Physiological Therapeutics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.3,"publicationDate":"2022-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0161475422001592/pdfft?md5=503949aaf312052e61a5dfe1ae0f4c2a&pid=1-s2.0-S0161475422001592-main.pdf","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"9252621","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}