Labelle Chiropractic Clinic

New Trial provides convincing evidence of Effectiveness…

This is an excerpt from the May ‘07 issue of “The Chiropractic Report”, providing chiropractors with research from around the globe.  The Journal of Human Hypertension published a clinical trial performed at Rush University in Chicago; To summarize, 25 patients received upper cervical specific adjustments, to correct the poor alignment (subluxations) of the C1 vertebra (Atlas).  Both systolic and diastolic levels of pressure were significantly reduced in the treatment vs. control group.  This is the first proven non-surgical and non-medicated approach to alleviating high blood pressure, and paves the way for more research to be performed.

An international magazine for study of the spine has published an article stating the true safety of chiropractic adjustments on the neck.  To further this, they implemented the most “aggressive” form of adjusting.  The public may still be unaware just how gentle chiropractic adjustments are.

Here is a summary:

Abstract:

Study Design. Prospective national survey.

Objective.
To estimate the risk of serious and relatively minor adverse events
following chiropractic manipulation of the cervical spine by a sample
of U.K. chiropractors.

Summary of Background Data. The risk of a
serious adverse event following chiropractic manipulation of the
cervical spine is largely unknown. Estimates range from 1 in 200,000 to
1 in several million cervical spine manipulations.

Methods. We
studied treatment outcomes obtained from 19,722 patients. Manipulation
was defined as the application of a high-velocity/low-amplitude or
mechanically assisted thrust to the cervical spine. Serious adverse
events, defined as “referred to hospital A&E and/or severe
onset/worsening of symptoms immediately after treatment and/or resulted
in persistent or significant disability/incapacity,” and minor adverse
events reported by patients as a worsening of presenting symptoms or
onset of new symptoms, were recorded immediately, and up to 7 days,
after treatment.

Results. Data were obtained from 28,807
treatment consultations and 50,276 cervical spine manipulations. There
were no reports of serious adverse events. This translates to an
estimated risk of a serious adverse event of, at worse [almost equal
to]1 per 10,000 treatment consultations immediately after cervical
spine manipulation, [almost equal to]2 per 10,000 treatment
consultations up to 7 days after treatment and [almost equal to]6 per
100,000 cervical spine manipulations. Minor side effects with a
possible neurologic involvement were more common. The highest risk
immediately after treatment was fainting/dizziness/light-headedness in,
at worse [almost equal to]16 per 1000 treatment consultations. Up to 7
days after treatment, these risks were headache in, at worse [almost
equal to]4 per 100, numbness/tingling in upper limbs in, at worse
[almost equal to]15 per 1000 and fainting/dizziness/light-headedness
in, at worse [almost equal to]13 per 1000 treatment consultations.

Conclusion.
Although minor side effects following cervical spine manipulation were
relatively common, the risk of a serious adverse event, immediately or
up to 7 days after treatment, was low to very low.

(C) 2007 Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, Inc.

J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 1993 Nov-Dec;16(9):595-600.Links

Clinical presentation of a patient with multiple sclerosis and response to manual chiropractic adjustive therapies.

Stude DE, Mick T.

Northwestern College of Chiropractic, Bloomington, MN 55431.

OBJECTIVE:
To present a clinical case presentation of a patient with multiple
sclerosis (MS). Diagnostic criteria are presented, including advanced
imaging; and, for the first time, a potential relationship between
chiropractic manual adjustive therapies and the symptoms associated
with MS is presented. CLINICAL FEATURES: A 32-yr-old male presented
with numbness from the lower trunk to the distal lower extremities,
anteriorly and posteriorly, bilaterally equal. There was a family
history suggestive of MS, reflexes were hyperactive, and hypoesthesia
was present with the neurological pinwheel exam. There was evidence to
suggest biomechanical vertebral segmental dysfunction. A second-opinion
medical neurological evaluation and multifocal demyelination lesions
confirmed with magnetic resonance imaging reinforced the working
impression. Laboratory screening was conducted but was non-revealing.
INTERVENTION AND OUTCOME: Conservative chiropractic manual adjustive
therapies were provided to address spinal segmental dysfunction and the
patient reported complete absence of symptoms following the first
treatment intervention. It was at this time, in order to rule out other
possibilities and to confirm the working impression of MS, that a
second opinion with a medical neurologist was recommended. CONCLUSION:
Manual adjustive therapies appear to be responsible for the dramatic
symptomatic relief provided for a patient diagnosed with MS. The
relative risk-to-benefit ratio suggests that this approach may be
appropriate as an alternative symptom management approach for MS
patients, and future research efforts can and should direct the
comprehensive management approach to the treatment of this disorder.

Research from 25 years ago had significant findings of subluxations in children:

Children
are generally extremely active and their bodies absorb stress during movement.
A child may fall, be pushed or jolted, twist or turn, outside the normal range
of motion. These forceful activities can produce vertebral subluxations disturb
the normal nerve reflex pathways, causing what is termed traditionally in
chiropractic as “nerve interference”. Too little attention is paid to tramatic
incidents which fixate or decrease normal movement of spinal segments, causing
the typical hypomobile subluxation or creating excessive spinal joint play with
the resulting hypermobile subluxation. It is important here to note that some
authorities feel that this trauma need only be “MICRO” (minor, ie., slips and
falls, bad posture) trauma, as distinct from”MACRO” (major, ie., car accidents,
falls down the stairs, off beds and changing tables) trauma.

From a
presentation titled Children and Chiropractic: A Summary of Subluxation and Its
Ramifications by Hinwood and Hinwood.

OBJECTIVE: To survey members of the International Chiropractic
Pediatric Association (ICPA); regarding the use of the Webster
Technique for managing the musculoskeletal causes of intrauterine
constraint, which may necessitate cesarean section. METHODS: Surveys
were mailed to 1047 US and Canadian members of the ICPA. RESULTS: One
hundred eighty-seven surveys were returned from 1047 ICPA members,
constituting a return rate of 17.86%. Seventy-five responses did not
meet the study inclusion criteria and were excluded; 112 surveys (11%)
provided the data. Of these 112 surveys, 102 (92%) resulted in
resolution of the breech presentation, while 10 (9%) remained
unresolved. CONCLUSION: The surveyed doctors reported a high rate of
success (82%) in relieving the musculoskeletal causes of intrauterine
constraint using the Webster Technique. Although the sample size was
small, the results suggest that it may be beneficial to perform the
Webster Technique in month 8 of pregnancy, when breech presentation is
unlikely to spontaneously convert to cephalic presentation and when
external cephalic version is not an effective technique. When
successful, the Webster Technique avoids the costs and/or risks of
external cephalic version, cesarean section, or vaginal trial of
breech.In view of these findings, the Webster Technique deserves
serious consideration in the health care management of expectant
mothers exhibiting adverse fetal presentation.

JMPT 2002 - Jul-Aug; 25(6)