March 2018 - chiropracticforward March 2018 - chiropracticforward

Month: March 2018

CF 015: DEBUNKED: The Odd Myth That Chiropractors Cause Strokes (Part 3 of 3)

Debunking the odd myth that chiropractors cause strokes. I’m almost done with this y’all. In this final episode of this series, we will discuss risky interventions, papers having to do with the risk, or lack thereof, of chiropractic adjustments to the cervical region specifically, and then a wrap up of the information.

CF 014: DEBUNKED: The Odd Myth That Chiropractors Cause Strokes (Part 2 of 3)

DEBUNKED: The Odd Myth That Chiropractors Cause Strokes Revisited

Part 2 of 3

Chirorpactic Forward Podcast Subscribe Link

Click to Subscribe!

This week we are in Episode #2 of the 3 episodes where we are systematically debunking the odd myth that chiropractors cause strokes. I’m not having it folks. The chiropractors cause strokes myth is old and tired and in need of retirement. In this episode, we will discuss research papers demonstrating and validating benefits of having cervical manipulation treatments. Or chiropractic adjustments to the neck. We will talk about the benefits, according to research, for neck pain as well as for headaches. And we’ll also talk a little about where this chiropractors cause strokes myth came from and why it perpetuates to this day.

Before we get started, I want to draw your attention to the reviews over at iTunes. If you would be kind enough to leave us a great review we sure would appreciate you! This is a new podcast and we need all the help we can get!

Right now though, it’s time for bumper music!

Welcome to the podcast today, I’m Dr. Jeff Williams and I’m your host for the Chiropractic Forward podcast where we talk about issues related to health, chiropractic, evidence, chiropractic advocacy, and research. Thank you for taking time out of your day I know your time is valuable and I want to fill it with value so here we go. I can’t think of a more valuable way to spend you time if you’re a chiropractor than to learn how to debunk the chiropractors cause strokes myth and shut people down on it.

Let’s begin this episode by thanking those of you that sent emails to me after this chiropractors cause strokes myth series kicked off last week. You guys are great. The best way you can help is to share these episodes with as many people as you can. We can get this myth debunked and we can put it to rest right here, right now. But, obviously, I can’t do it myself. I need your help to do it.

I also want to remind you that this is part 2 of a three part series on the chiropractors cause strokes myth. Last week was part one of the chiropractors cause strokes myth where we discussed some risky odds, some case specific discussion, some signs and symptoms of vertebral artery dissection, and some research dealing with common treatments within the medical profession.

Be sure to go back and listen to it if you have not. It’s essential.

Then next week we will discuss other risky interventions, papers having to do with the risk, or lack thereof, of chiropractic adjustments to the cervical region specifically, and then a wrap up of the information putting the chiropractors cause strokes myth to bed once and for all.

Don’t miss it folks.

Now, let’s get on with our risk vs. reward discussion with the BENEFITS of cervical manipulation therapy.

I want to start off with the benefits of cervical manipulation for neck pain specifically. Each paper mentioned includes a short description of the conclusion for each paper cited. Also each of these papers is referenced in the show notes and can be very easily reviewed independently. You have to know that I am going to absolutely murder some of these names and I don’t even care. I’m small town South y’all. I’m not fancy at all. All I can is do my best but I assure you I’m not going to do backflips trying to figure out the correct pronunciation of each of these names. Be sure though, the days of Dr. Smith or Dr. Jones doing all of the research are no longer Take this first name as an example.

  1. Korthalis-de Bos IB, et. al. – “Manual therapy (spinal mobilization) is more effective and less costly for treating neck pain than physiotherapy or care by a general practitioner[1].”
  2. Dewitte V, et. al. – “Based on key features in subjective and clinical examination, patients with mechanical nociceptive pain probably arising from articular structures can be categorized into specific articular dysfunction patterns. Pending on these patterns, specific mobilization and manipulation techniques are warranted. The proposed patterns are illustrated in 3 case studies. This clinical algorithm is the corollary of empirical expertise and is complemented by in-depth discussions and knowledge exchange with international colleagues. Consequently, it is intended that a carefully targeted approach contributes to an increase in specificity and safety in the use of cervical mobilizations and manipulation techniques as valuable adjuncts to other manual therapy modalities[2].”
  3. Dunning JR, et. al. – “The combination of upper cervical and upper thoracic HVLA thrust manipulation is appreciably more effective in the short term than nonthrust mobilization in patients with mechanical neck pain[3].”
  4. Brontfort G, et. al. – “For participants with acute and subacute neck pain, SMT was more effective than medication in both the short and long term. However, a few instructional sessions of HEA resulted in similar outcomes at most time points[4].”
  5. Puentedura EJ, et. al. – The objective of the paper was as follows: “Thrust joint manipulation to the cervical spine has been shown to be effective in patients presenting with a primary report of neck pain. It would be useful for clinicians to have a decision-making tool, such as a clinical prediction rule, that could accurately identify which subgroup of patients would respond positively to cervical thrust joint manipulation.” In the results, they showed if 3 or more of the 4 attributes were present,” the probability of experiencing a successful outcome improved from 39% to 90%[5].”
  6. Yu H, et. al. – “Chiropractic management of atlantoaxial osteoarthritis yielded favorable outcomes for these 10 patients[6].”
  7. Puentedura EJ, et. al. – “Patients with neck pain who met 4 of 6 of the CPR criteria for successful treatment of neck pain with a thoracic spine thrust joint manipulation demonstrated a more favorable response when the thrust joint manipulation was directed to the cervical spine rather than the thoracic spine. Patients receiving cervical thrust joint manipulation also demonstrated fewer transient side-effects[7].”
  8. Miller J, et. al. – “Moderate quality evidence supports this treatment combination (cervical manual therapy combined with exercise) for pain reduction and improved quality of life over manual therapy alone for chronic neck pain; and suggests greater short-term pain reduction when compared to traditional care for acute whiplash[8].”
  9. Hurwitz EL, et. al. – “Our best evidence synthesis suggests that therapies involving manual therapy and exercise are more effective than alternative strategies for patients with neck pain[9].”
  10. Muller R, et. al. – “In patients with chronic spinal pain syndromes, spinal manipulation, if not contraindicated, may be the only treatment modality of the assessed regimens that provides broad and significant long-term benefit[10].”
  11. Zhu L, et. al. – “There was moderate level evidence to support the immediate effectiveness of cervical spine manipulation in treating people with cervical radiculopathy[11].”
  12. Giles LG, et. al. – “The consistency of the results provides, despite some discussed shortcomings of this study, evidence that in patients with chronic spinal pain, manipulation, if not contraindicated, results in greater short-term improvement than acupuncture or medication[12].”
  13. Bronfort G, et. al. – “Our data synthesis suggests that recommendations can be made with some confidence regarding the use of spinal manipulative therapy and/or mobilization as a viable option for the treatment of both low back pain and neck pain[13].”

There you have a fairly thick list of research papers demonstrating the effectiveness of chiropractic adjustments for uncomplicated neck pain but neck pain is not the only reason to have a chiropractic adjustment delivered to the cervical region. Another very common reason for neck adjustments would be for the treatment of acute and chronic headaches.

In fact, I have an episode of this podcast that dealt with a paper showing the effectiveness of chiropractic for headaches. Episode #6 to be exact.

Here is a listing of papers demonstrating the benefits of cervical manipulation for headaches. Each paper mentioned includes a short description of the conclusion for each paper cited. Also each of these papers is referenced in the show notes and can be very easily reviewed independently

  1. Malo-Urries M, et. al. – “Upper cervical translatoric spinal mobilization intervention increased upper, and exhibited a tendency to improve general, cervical range of motion and induce immediate headache relief in subjects with cervicogenic headache[14].”
  2. Espi-Lopez GV, et. al. – “In short, manual therapy techniques and manipulation applied to the suboccipital region for four weeks or more showed great improvement and in effectiveness for several aspects that measure the quality of life of a patient having suffered from tension type headaches[15].”
  3. Dunning J, et. al. – “Six to eight sessions of upper cervical and upper thoracic manipulation were shown to be more effective than mobilization and exercise in patients with cervicogenic headache, and the effects were maintained at 3 months[3].”
  4. Hurwitz EL, et. al. – “Utilization and expenditures for headache treatment increased from 2000 to 2009 across all provider groups. MD care represented the majority of total allowed charges in this study. MD care and DC care, alone or in combination, were overall the least expensive patterns of headache care. Risk-adjusted charges were significantly less for DC-only care[16].”
  5. Bronfort G, et. al. – “SMT appears to have a better effect than massage for cervicogenic headache. It also appears that SMT has an effect comparable to commonly used first-line prophylactic prescription medications for tension-type headache and migraine headache[17].”
  6. Bronfort G, et. al. – “Chiropractic is effective in acute, subacute, and chronic low back pain, migraines and headaches originating from the neck, for the treatment of some forms of dizziness, extremity and joint issues, as well as mid back and acute and subacute neck pain[18].
  7. Tuchin PJ, et. al. – “The results of this study support previous results showing that some people report significant improvement in migraines after chiropractic spinal manipulative therapy. A high percentage (>80%) of participants reported stress as a major factor for their migraines. It appears probable that chiropractic care has an effect on the physical conditions related to stress and that in these people the effects of the migraine are reduced[19].”
  8. McCrory D, et. al. – “Cervical spinal manipulation was associated with improvement in headache outcomes in two trials involving patients with neck pain and/or neck dysfunction and headache. Manipulation appeared to result in immediate improvement in headache severity when used to treat episodes of cervicogenic headache when compared with an attention-placebo control. Furthermore, when compared to soft-tissue therapies (massage), a course of manipulation treatments resulted in sustained improvement in headache frequency and severity[20].”

Many headache patients present to chiropractors after a considerable amount of time spent taking headache and migraine medications. Medications do not come without consequences. Certainly when taking long-term. Not only have they spent a considerable amount of time on medication, they often have had botox injections, steroid injections, and worse before finally going to the chiropractor.

It is a fact that patients should have the GUARANTEED of the best treatment that does the LEAST amount of harm. In that spirit, and considering that chiropractic is safe, effective, and non-pharmacologic, it makes sense that the medical field should actually PROMOTE chiropractic as a viable and valuable treatment for headaches and migraines rather than dismiss it as ineffectual and dangerous.

Having demonstrated study upon study validating the effectiveness and benefit of cervical manipulation for neck pain (acute, subacute, and chronic) and headaches (chronic, acute, subacute, tension-type, cervicogenic, and migraines), we can now focus attention on research papers and abstracts having to do with the risk of stroke instance (lack of risk) as a direct result of cervical chiropractic adjustments. Hopefully, you are getting a more clear picture of the chiropractors cause strokes myth and its absolutely foolishness.

But first, where would you think the idea of chiropractors running around stroking everyone out might come from? I believe there are at least a few root sources.

  • You guessed it: our old friend the American Medical Association and their state association underlings. This group deemed it unethical to refer to chiropractors or accept referrals FROM They tried to run us out of business by conducting conferences about chiropractic and generating literature that was anti-chiropractic. They then dispersed the misinformation down through the channels of the state medical associations all the way out to the medical doctors, nurses, and medical field profession out in the field, and then ultimately to their patient bases. The “Chiropractors Cause Strokes” myth was well within their ability to propagate. When your initiative is to rid the Earth of the chiropractic profession, you take advantage of what you can. The Federal Court decision in Wilk vs. AMA shows the AMA did just that.
  • The other likely culprit for the chiropractors cause strokes myth in my estimation would be patients visiting medical professionals after having been to a chiropractor and having suffering a stroke sometime afterward. I did not say chiropractors “causing” strokes. Research shows us that people are going to chiropractors already suffering arterial tears that are sometimes spontaneous in nature. While chiropractors have a high level of education, there are many out there that are simply untrained at catching red flags and making the proper referral. Other times, patients present with very common symptoms and there are no red flags present whatsoever. The chiropractor treats the patient thinking they are going to help improve a neck complaint or a headache while in reality they may be exacerbating a tear. When the patient reaches the medical professional, the link is easy to make for the uninformed: chiropractor causes stroke.
  • Ignorance – The simple lack of knowledge regarding the body of evidence and research that is available dealing with the chiropractors cause strokes myth perpetuates the myth. It is clear the benefits are present. It is clear the risks are not. End of story. But if one is ignorant of the literature,

This is where we are going to stop for this second episode of the chiropractors cause strokes series. Remember, it is a three part series.

KEY TAKEAWAY:

The benefit is researched and it’s real. There is no denial possible.

Be sure to tune in next week for the third and final part of the three part series. Next week, we will discuss risky interventions, papers having to do with the risk, or lack thereof, of chiropractic adjustments to the cervical region specifically, and then a wrap up of the information.

Please feel free to send us an email at dr dot williams at chiropracticforward.com and let us know what you think or what suggestions you may have for us for future episodes

If you love what you hear, be sure to check out www.chiropracticforward.com. As this podcast builds, so will the website with more content, products, and chances to learn.

We cannot wait to connect again with you next week for third and final part of the debunking of the chiropractors cause strokes myth. From Creek Stone, my office here in Amarillo, TX, home of the Chiropractic Forward Podcast flight deck, this is Dr. Jeff Williams saying upward, onward, and forward.

Other episodes of interest include:

CF Episode #13: DEBUNKED: The Odd Myth That Chiropractors Cause Strokes (Part 1 of 3)

Source Material

  1. Korthals-de Bos IB, Cost effectiveness of physiotherapy, manual therapy, and general practitioner care for neck pain: economic evaluation alongside a randomised controlled trial. British Medical Journal, 2003. 326(7395): p. 911.
  2. Dewitte V, Articular dysfunction patterns in patients with mechanical neck pain: a clinical algorithm to guide specific mobilization and manipulation techniques. Man Ther, 2014. 19(2-9).
  3. Dunning J, Upper cervical and upper thoracic manipulation versus mobilization and exercise in patients with cervicogenic headache: a multi-center randomized clinical trial. BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders, 2016. 16(64).
  4. Bronfort G, Spinal Manipulation, Medication, or Home Exercise With Advice for Acute and Subacute Neck Pain: A Randomized Trial. Annals of Internal Medicine 2012. Ann Intern Med, 2012. 156(1): p. 1-10.
  5. Puentedura EJ, Development of a clinical prediction rule to identify patients with neck pain likely to benefit from thrust joint manipulation to the cervical spine. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther, 2012. 42(7): p. 577-92.
  6. Yu H, Upper cervical manipulation combined with mobilization for the treatment of atlantoaxial osteoarthritis: a report of 10 cases. J Manipulative Physiol Ther, 2011. 34(2): p. 131-7.
  7. Puentedura EJ, Thoracic spine thrust manipulation versus cervical spine thrust manipulation in patients with acute neck pain: a randomized clinical trial. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther, 2011. 41(4): p. 208-20.
  8. Miller J, Manual therapy and exercise for neck pain: a systematic review. Man Ther, 2010. 15(4): p. 334-54.
  9. Hurwitz EL, e.a., Treatment of neck pain: noninvasive interventions: results of the Bone and Joint Decade 2000-2010 Task Force on Neck Pain and Its Associated Disorders. Spine, 2008. 33(4 Suppl): p. S123-52.
  10. Muller R, G.L., Long-term follow-up of a randomized clinical trial assessing the efficacy of medication, acupuncture, and spinal manipulation for chronic mechanical spinal pain syndromes. J Manipulative Physiol Ther., 2005. 28(1): p. 3-11.
  11. Zhu L, Does cervical spine manipulation reduce pain in people with degenerative cervical radiculopathy? A systematic review of the evidence, and a meta-analysis. Clin Rehabil, 2015.
  12. Giles LGF, M.R., Chronic spinal pain syndromes: a clinical pilot trial comparing acupuncture, a nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug, and spinal manipulation. J Manipulative Physiol Ther, 1999. 22(6): p. 376-81.
  13. Bronfort G, Efficacy of spinal manipulation and mobilization for low back pain and neck pain: a systematic review and best evidence synthesis. Spine, 2004. May-Jun 4(3): p. 335-56.
  14. Malo-Urries M, Immediate Effects of Upper Cervical Translatoric Mobilization on Cervical Mobility and Pressure Pain Threshold in Patients With Cervicogenic Headache: A Randomized Controlled Trial. J Manipulative Physiol Ther, 2017. 40(9): p. 649-658.
  15. Espi-Lopez G, e.a., Do manual therapy techniques have a positive effect on quality of life in people with tension-type headache? A randomized controlled trial. Eur J Phys Rehabil Med, 2016. 13(1): p. 4-13.
  16. Hurwitz EL, e.a., Variations in Patterns of Utilization and Charges for the Care of Neck Pain in North Carolina, 2000 to 2009: A Statewide Claims’ Data Analysis. J Manipulative Physiol Ther, 2016. May 39(4): p. 240-51.
  17. Bronfort G, Efficacy of spinal manipulation for chronic headache: a systematic review. J Manipulative Physiol Ther, 2001. 24(7): p. 457-466.
  18. Bronfort G, Effectiveness of manual therapies: The UK evidence report. Chiropr Osteopat, 2010. 18(3).
  19. Tuchin PJ, e.a., A randomized controlled trial of chiropractic spinal manipulative therapy for migraine. J Manipulative Physiol Ther, 2000. 23(2): p. 91-95.
  20. McCrory D, Behavioral and Physical Treatments for Tension-type and Cervicogenic Headache. Duke University Evidence-based Practice Center, Center for Clinical Health Policy Research.


SUBSCRIBE!

CF 013: DEBUNKED: The Odd Myth That Chiropractors Cause Strokes (Part 1 of 3)

This week, we are going to start tackling the chiropractors cause strokes myth that has run rampant for years and I hope to once and for all dispel it. The information could not be clearer on the chiropractors cause strokes myth and we’re gonna to show it to you in a way that you can understand and in a way that allows you to show it to others. I’m done with this myth, folks!

Before we get started, I want to draw your attention to the reviews over at iTunes. If you would be kind enough to leave us a great review we sure would appreciate you! This is a new podcast and we need all the help we can get!

Right now though, it’s time for bumper music!

Welcome to the podcast today, I’m Dr. Jeff Williams and I’m your host for the Chiropractic Forward podcast where we talk about issues related to health, chiropractic, evidence, chiropractic advocacy, and research. Thank you for taking time out of your day I know your time is valuable and I want to fill it with value so here we go.

Unfortunately, you have often read, watched, or heard me complaining about how our profession has been historically attacked by those organizations in charge of the medical profession. I hope those paying attention understand it is not just sour grapes.

It is education.

I continually bring these facts up in my articles, videos, and podcast because many of the things we talk about have their roots in our history, in the attacks our profession has sustained, and in the attacks our profession is currently battling.

From the start, let me state that research simply does NOT support the chiropractors cause strokes myth.

If you have seen the TV series called “Mythbusters,” then you know the smart red-headed guy and the bald bespectacled serious guy both, along with their rascally cohorts, took a common myth and tested its validity.

Some of the myths were outrageous and some seemed like they may actually be plausible. The show, whenever I watched it was highly entertaining and extremely educational. The entertaining part always came toward the end of the show when they would blow something to smithereens. That’s the part where the inner child in me would leap with glee. Internally of course, not externally.

This mythbusting process has already been carried out for the chiropractors cause strokes myth. Several times, in fact. Without the show-ending explosion of course. Although, at the end of this Mythbusting series, I may walk away with a mic drop if you’re all OK with that.

I say mythbusting series because there is SO MUCH information here that I have to split it into 3 different episodes for the chiropractors cause strokes podcast series. I’m pumping my own tires and I am completely full of myself on what I’m about to say here and I’m well-aware of the fact but, from what I have seen out there on the interwebs, I feel like this is, or at least CAN be, the definitive article, the definitive podcast, the definitive gathering of the information for this topic. If that is indeed the lofty goal I’m aiming for, it has to be comprehensive and somewhat exhaustive and I don’t think I can maintain your focus and interest for the entire amount of the information to be compiled into one super long episode. Dispelling the chiropractors cause strokes myth is too important to lose your attention.

I have split it into three episodes that will break up like this

The first episode, the one you’re currently listening to will include some risky odds, some case specific discussion, some signs and symptoms of vertebral artery dissection, and some research dealing with common treatments within the medical profession.

In the second episode coming next Thursday we will discuss research papers demonstrating and validating benefits of having cervical manipulation treatments. Or chiropractic adjustments to the neck. We will talk about the benefits, according to research, for neck pain as well as for headaches. And we’ll also talk a little about where this chiropractors cause strokes myth came from and why it perpetuates to this day.

In the third and final episode we will discuss risky interventions, papers having to do with the risk, or lack thereof, of chiropractic adjustments to the cervical region specifically, and then a wrap up of the information on this chiropractors cause strokes myth.

Stick with us on this.

Now, let’s dive into this first episode of the chiropractors cause stroke series.

Through the RAND institute, it is estimated that a serious, adverse reaction (such as stroke as a result to a chiropractic adjustment alone) happens in approximately 1 out of every 1 million treatments?

Let’s put that finding into perspective by comparing it to some other odds.

  • The odds of being struck and killed by lightning is 1 in 174,426 according to the National Safety Council.
  • The odds of being told to “Come on down,” on The Price Is Right is 1 in 36!
  • The odds of being born with 11 fingers or toes is 1 in 500.
  • The odds of dying from a firearms assault is 1 in 113.
  • How about this one: the odds of winning an Oscars are 1 in 11,500.

I think it’s time to move to LA!

Consider that there are 70,000+ chiropractors in the United States of America. If Doctors of Chiropractic were out in the world causing strokes “all of the time,” it would be apparent, it would be obvious, and our malpractice insurance would reflect the fact that a visit to the chiropractor comes with a considerable amount of risk. To the contrary, we chiropractors have malpractice insurance that costs chiropractors approximately 1/10th of what it costs our medical counterparts. This fact alone should dispel the chiropractors cause strokes myth.

Before we start diving off into the research too deeply, I want to talk about a case that happened within the last couple of years (February 2016) that brought the “Chiropractors Cause Strokes” myth back to the forefront. It had to do with the “Queen of Snapchat” Katie May. Katie died of a stroke at the age of 34 and, by many, it was immediately assumed the stroke was caused by her two visits to a chiropractor to treat her recent onset of neck pain.

I actually wrote about this case shortly after it originally happened. Initial reports stated that she had a horrible fall while on the set of a photoshoot, which resulted in her neck pain. Then, for some reason, this fact seemed to disappear from further reports.

Also, initial reports stated that Katie visited either the ER or a medical professional prior to her visits with a chiropractor. The family later denies this so, admittedly, there is some confusion on the matter. With this information brought back into the reporting, let’s begin breaking it all down.

Katie posted this message to Twitter: “Pinched a nerve in my neck on a photoshoot and got adjusted this morning. It really hurts! Any home remedy suggestions loves? XOXO.”

Keep that in mind as we run through things that can cause a vertebral artery dissection such as Katie May suffered. They are as follows:

  • Physical Trauma (direct blow to the neck, traffic collision, etc.)
  • Strangulation
  • Spontaneous (from underlying connective tissue disorder)

According to one paper by Debette et. al., “Trauma has been reported to have occurred within a month of dissection in 40% with nearly 90% of this time the trauma being minor[1]. “

Vertebral artery dissection (VAD) can be particularly difficult to diagnose without the use of a CT Angiogram. For instance, some common symptoms of VAD are as follows:

  • Pain and/or numbness in the same side of the face.
  • Head pain/Headache that develops gradually and can be dull or throbbing
  • In less than 1/5th of the cases of VAD, people suffer difficulty speaking or swallowing.
  • Possible unsteadiness or lack of coordination
  • Visual abnormalities
  • Hiccups
  • Nausea/Vomiting
  • Hearing loss

When one reads this list, it is easy to diagnose a VAD, right?

It rarely presents with these classic signs.

Is a medical professional or chiropractor going to refer every single one of these patients for a CT Angiogram or an MRI? Not very likely. It is simply not economically feasible to do so and good luck getting insurance companies to cover the costs of the CT Angiograms!

If Katie did indeed visit a medical professional after her fall, they missed it. Unfortunately, it seems obvious that the chiropractor missed it as well. That does not, however, mean the two professionals are inept. As the website for emedicine.com states, “The focal signs may not appear until after a latent period lasting as long as three days, however, and delays of weeks and years also have been reported[2].”

With that being said, I don’t want to be completely biased here. If a healthy person shows up with a headache and neck pain BUT has a history of recent trauma, more exploration is advised, without question. Knowing this, I can relay countless stories of medical doctors having made bad decisions as well. I have heard countless stories throughout my twenty years of practice. Ultimately, we are all human which is why chiropractors and medical doctors both carry malpractice insurance. But, as I mentioned before, chiropractors’ malpractice is approximately 1/10th that of their medical counterparts because, basically, we do not typically cause any harms in our patients.

As we go through more and more papers, it should be clear that Katie likely suffered the VAD as a result of the fall during the photo shoot and the VAD was missed by the medical professionals (if she did indeed go) and then certainly missed by the chiropractor BUT, the chiropractor almost certainly did not CAUSE the VAD. There’s no we he helped it and could have even potentially exacerbated it, but it is highly doubtful and exceedingly rare that he could have been the CAUSE of it.

Some time later, the Los Angeles coroner reported that the chiropractor was responsible for Katie’s death. This finding really opened the door to all of the chiropractic haters to bash away at the profession.

The LA coroner’s office is an appointed position that, in some states, requires little training, to be quite honest. While I am unaware of this particular coroner’s level of training and expertise, this coroner has been under scrutiny for being understaffed and underfunded to mention just a couple of issues. In addition, I would argue that simply because a man or a woman is a county coroner, does not mean they are above being affected by bias or by their profession’s long-held beliefs and teachings. I would say they most certainly are not above influence and, in my opinion, are highly likely to be affected by them. When they are told by their schools, their national and state associations, and their mentors that chiropractors cause strokes, don’t you think they probably believe it?

I would also argue that the coroner likely has little to zero knowledge of the current body of research regarding cervical manipulation and the instance of stroke. How could an educated person aware of the body of literature on the matter decide otherwise?

For years, I have experienced nurses, physician assistants, medical doctors, and others in an online setting claiming that chiropractic adjustments are dangerous and ineffective. A common theme amongst them is, “It happens all of the time.” We see it “all of the time.” Research proves the notion is a lie.

I would like to be less dramatic or inflammatory in my wording but I do not know of another way to describe it.

Let’s assume that this myth has its base rooted in some sort of fact. Let us be clear. It does not. But, for argument sake, let us say that it does. At that point, we would need to assess the benefits of chiropractic treatment vs. the risks of chiropractic treatment.

In Southern terms, “Is the squeeze worth the push?”

Is there a return on the investment?

Again, this is purely for argument sake because the chiropractors cause strokes myth is not real to start with but playing the devil’s advocate can be of use and is almost always entertaining.

Before we step into deeper water with the research papers, let us discuss benefits & effectiveness vs. risk for some common treatments for spinal complaints in the medical world. If the discussion is focused on doing away with cervical adjustments, what then would be the alternatives and how effective are they? Basically, if the medical field is looking in OUR backyard, maybe we should take a peek into theirs as well.

Keep in mind that all of the research we discuss will be cited in the show notes so that those of you that wish can easily research these independently on your own.

  • The opioid crisis cost the US economy $504 billion dollars in 2015 and a total of $221 billion to $431 billion in lost economic output due to there being 33,000 opioid-related deaths in 2015[3].
  • There were 63,600 opioid-related deaths in 2016, which was an increase of 21% from the 2015.[4].
  • Chou R, et. al. – Although the steroid injections for radiculopathy showed some short-term relief in pain and short-term increase in function, the benefits seen in the patients were only small and short-term only. There was no effect long-term and no affect on whether or not the person had surgery eventually. The evidence in this paper suggested there was no effectiveness at all for the treatment of spinal stenosis[5].
  • Epstein N, et. al. – “Although not approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), injections are being performed with an increased frequency (160%), are typically short-acting and ineffectiveover the longer-term, while exposing patients to major risks/complications[6].”
  • Peterson CK, et. al. – “Subacute/chronic patients treated with SMT (spinal manipulative therapy) were significantly more likely to report relevant “improvement” compared with CNRI (CERVICAL NERVE ROOT INJECTION) patients.There was no difference in outcomes when comparing acute patients only[7].”
  • Chou R, et. al. – “Epidural corticosteroid injections for radiculopathy were associated with immediate improvements in pain and might be associated with immediate improvements in function, but benefits were small and not sustained, and there was no effect on long-term risk of surgery. Evidence did not suggest that effectiveness varies based on injection technique, corticosteroid, dose, or comparator. Limited evidence suggested that epidural corticosteroid injections are not effective for spinal stenosis or nonradicular back pain and that facet joint corticosteroid injections are not effective for presumed facet joint pain[5].”
  • Chou R, et. al – “Surgery for radiculopathy with herniated lumbar disc and symptomatic spinal stenosis is associated with short-term benefits compared to nonsurgical therapy, though benefits diminish with long-term follow-up in some trials. For nonradicular back pain with common degenerative changes, fusion is no more effective than intensive rehabilitation, but associated with small to moderate benefits compared to standard nonsurgical therapy[8].”
  • Maghout J, et. al. – “Use of intervertebral fusion devices rose rapidly after their introduction in 1996. This increased use was associated with an increased complication risk without improving disability or reoperation rates[9].”

 

At this point, it is clear the medical field has its own issues to concentrate on and improve upon when it comes to spinal pain and the treatment of it. It is my opinion these facts are but only a few of the concerns in the medical field and, if taken individually, are much more concerning than any one single issue that can be found within the chiropractic profession.

This is where we are going to stop for this first episode of the Chiropractors cause strokes series. Remember, our” chiropractors cause strokes” series is a three part series.

Be sure to tune in next week for the second part of the three part series. Next week, we will be talking about the benefits, according to research, for neck pain as well as for headaches. And we’ll also talk a little about where this myth came from and why it perpetuates to this day.

You may also consider listening to a recent episode in which we covered some great new research on treating neck pain conservatively through chiropractic care. Check it out at https://www.chiropracticforward.com/2018/03/08/proven-means-to-treat-neck-pain/

­­­­­­­­Please feel free to send us an email at dr dot williams at chiropracticforward.com and let us know what you think about the chiropractors cause strokes myth or what suggestions you may have for us for future episodes.

If you love what you hear, be sure to check out www.chiropracticforward.com. As this podcast builds, so will the website with more content, products, and chances to learn.

We cannot wait to connect again with you next week. From Creek Stone, my office here in Amarillo, TX, home of the Chiropractic Forward Podcast flight deck, this is Dr. Jeff Williams saying upward, onward, and forward.

 

References

  1. Debette S, “Pathophysiology and risk factors of cervical artery dissection: what have we learnt from large hospital-based cohorts?”. . Current Opinion in Neurology, 2014. 27(1): p. 20-8.
  2. Lang E. Vertebral Artery Dissection. Emergency Medicine 2017 January 18]; Available from: https://emedicine.medscape.com/article/761451-overview.
  3. Mutikani L. Opioid crisis cost U.S. economy $504 billion in 2015: White House. 2017; Available from: https://www.reuters.com/article/legal-us-usa-opioids-cost/opioid-crisis-cost-u-s-economy-504-billion-in-2015-white-house-idUSKBN1DL2Q0.
  4. Glenza J. Life expectancy in US down for second year in a row as opioid crisis deepens. 2017 December 21; Available from: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/dec/21/us-life-expectancy-down-for-second-year-in-a-row-amid-opioid-crisis.
  5. Chou R, Epidural Corticosteroid Injections for Radiculopathy and Spinal Stenosis: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Ann Intern Med, 2015. 163(5): p. 373-81.
  6. Epstein N, The risks of epidural and transforaminal steroid injections in the Spine: Commentary and a comprehensive review of the literature. Surg Neurol Int, 2013. 4(Suppl 2): p. S74-93.
  7. Peterson CK, Symptomatic, Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Confirmed Cervical Disk Herniation Patients: A Comparative-Effectiveness Prospective Observational Study of 2 Age- and Sex-Matched Cohorts Treated With Either Imaging-Guided Indirect Cervical Nerve Root Injections or Spinal Manipulative Therapy. J Manipulative Physiol Ther, 2016. 39(3): p. 210-7.
  8. Chou R, Surgery for low back pain: a review of the evidence for an American Pain Society Clinical Practice Guideline. Spine, 2009. 34(10): p. 1094-109.
  9. Maghout J, e.e., Lumbar fusion outcomes in Washington State workers’ compensation. Spine (Phila Pa 1976), 2006. 31(23): p. 2715-23.

CF 012: Proven Means To Treat Neck Pain

Proven Means To Treat Neck Pain

In today’s podcast, we are going to talk about research on how to treat neck pain but hopefully in a fun way. We like to have fun on the Chiropractic Forward podcast. Let’s face it, research can be a bit boring so why not try to have some fun with it?

Before we get started, I want to draw your attention to the reviews over at iTunes. If you would be kind enough to leave us a great review, that tells iTunes that people are finding value in what we are sharing and it will help us grow this podcast. We sure would appreciate you!

Welcome to the podcast today, I’m Dr. Jeff Williams and I’m your host for the Chiropractic Forward podcast where we talk about issues related to health, chiropractic, evidence, and research and how those things all fit into a comprehensive approach for treating different conditions. Thank you for taking time out of your day to give us a listen. I know your time is valuable and I will always try hard to fill our time with valuable content.

In the words of Chris Berman, you have back back back backed into Episode #12 and this week we’re going to have more fun than having your teenage son spank you in video games that you’ve always beat him at. Yes, this recently happened to yours truly. Not only that but he did it with a pistol and I’m asham   ed. Call of Duty was my safe space y’all…..

So, I’ll just bury myself into my work, stuff it deep down inside to explode at a later date.

Now, If you have spent any significant amount of time with our videos, podcasts, or blogs, you are probably aware that there is an excess of research regarding chiropractic’s effectiveness in patients suffering from low back pain.

Although there are some excellent research papers having to do with chiropractic and neck pain, I would argue that it demands more attention. Without question. The first reason being that neck pain is as important or more so than low back pain. In the paper we will be discussing this week, they cite research suggesting that neck pain is responsible for up to 25% of the patients seen in outpatient orthopedic practices and 50% of the general population will have neck pain at some point in their lives.

The second reason I believe neck pain demands more attention from our industry is that we have been unfairly labeled as the profession out there in the world causing strokes every day. There needs to be a clear, factual representation of the risk vs. reward ratio and, if there is a small body of evidence, our case doesn’t stand up quite as strongly.

To be more clear, there is an abundance of evidence that Chiropractic is not linked to strokes any more than going to the primary practitioner. However, there is scant evidence of Chiropractic’s effectiveness to treat neck pain WHEM COMPRAED to the research available to treat low back pain.

This does not mean there isn’t great research in our favor on hwo to treat neck pain. That is not what I’m saying at all. It just means we have not documented it through research in the amounts that we have for the low back pain and I would like to see more. If I were a researcher myself, it is the condition I would be targeting without question.

Now, with that being said, this week’s paper is titled “The Immediate Effects of Upper Thoracic Translatoric Spinal Manipulation on Cervical Pain and Range of Motion: A Randomized Clinical Trial” published in the Journal of Manual Manipulative Therapeutics in 2008 that shows the effectiveness of spinal manipulative therapy. Here’s the catch, it was performed by physical therapists, not chiropractors. It was done by John Krauss, PT, PhD, OCS, FAAOMPT, et. al. Look at all of those letters.

At this point, I would like to diverge from the original path for a few moments. If chiropractors are unaware, along with research validating the chiropractic adjustment to treat neck pain, low back pain, and other maladies comes more competition for the service.

Physical therapists were restricted to muscles and exercise essentially. Now, they are adjusting. This is going to become a turf war between chiropractors doing what we have always done and physical therapists adopting our treatments as their own.

Of course, physical therapists can’t call what they do “chiropractic adjustments” so they have changed the term to “translatoric spinal manipulation.”

It’s irritating to the chiropractic profession but it is a fact the profession will be facing more and more in the years to come so be prepared for it.

It is particularly irritating when you consider that physical therapists have been part of the medical machine that have torn down the chiropractic profession for generations prior to adopting its techniques as their own.

Now, back to the research paper.

Why They Did It

The authors of the paper wanted to determine the effectiveness of thoracic (upper back) adjustments to treat neck pain and neck range of motion.

How They Did It

  • The active range of motion of the neck in each subject was measured before and after the manipulation. The term “active range of motion” means the patient turned their neck as far as possible in rotation both ways without the assistance of the researcher.
  • The range of motion was measured with a cervical inclinometer.
  • The patient’s neck pain was measured prior to and after treatment with the Faces Pain Scale. A quick trip to Wikipedia tells us that the Wong-Baker Faces Pain Rating Scale is a pain scale that was developed by Donna Wong and Connie Baker. The scale shows a series of faces ranging from a happy face at 0 which represents “no hurt” to a crying face at 10 which represents “hurts worst.”
  • The study included 32 patients having pain in the cervical region and limited range of motion.
  • 22 of these were randomly split into an experimental group while the other ten were randomly placed into a control group.
  • The evaluator measuring the pre- and post-manipulation outcomes was a blinded evaluator to reduce risk of bias.
  • The experimental (treatment) group received the manipulation treatment to the areas of the upper back region that had been determined to be hypomobile. In simpler terms, they delivered the adjustment to the areas of the upper back that were stiff or not moving like they should.
  • The control group had no treatment.
  • Paired t-tests were used to determine the changes within the group for cervical rotation and pain. A paired t-test is used to compare two population means where you have two samples in which observations in one sample can be paired with observations in the other sample.
  • A 2-way repeated-measure ANOVA was used to analyze between-group differences in cervical rotation and pain. A two-way repeated measures ANOVA is often used in studies where you have measured a dependent variable over two or more time points, or when subjects have undergone two or more conditions. The primary purpose of a two-way repeated measures ANOVA is to understand if there is an interaction between these two factors on the dependent variable.

What They Found

  • Significant changes were found for neck rotation within the group as well as between the groups.
  • The translatoric spinal manipulative group showed more range of motion in right rotation as well as in left rotation.
  • The levels of pain the subjects experienced after the manipulation were significantly reduced.

Wrap It Up

The authors of the paper concluded by saying, “This study supports the hypothesis that spinal manipulation applied to the upper thoracic spine (T1-T4 motion segments) significantly increases cervical rotation ROM and may reduce cervical pain at end range rotation for patients experiencing pain during bilateral cervical rotation.”

Did you know that research and clinical experience shows that, in about 80%-90% of headaches, neck, and back pain, compared to the traditional medical model, patients get good to excellent results with Chiropractic. It’s safe, more cost-effective, decreases chances of surgery, and reduces chances of becoming disabled. We do this conservatively and non-surgically with minimal time requirements and hassle on the part of the patient. And, if the patient develops a “preventative” mindset going forward, we can likely keep it that way while raising the general, overall level of health! What better way to treat neck pain?

Please feel free to send us an email at dr dot williams at chiropracticforward.com and let us know what you think or what suggestions you may have for us for future episodes. If you love what you hear, be sure to check out www.chiropracticforward.com.

As this podcast builds, so will the website as we add more content, educational products, and a little further down the road, webinars, seminars, and speaking dates as they get added.

We cannot wait to connect again with you next week. From Creek Stone here in Amarillo, TX, home of the Chiropractic Forward Podcast flight deck, this is Dr. Jeff Williams saying upward, onward, and forward.

Source Material

Krauss J, et. al., “The Immediate Effects of Upper Thoracic Translatoric Spinal Manipulation on Cervical Pain and Range of Motion: A Randomized Clinical Trial.” J Man Manip Ther. 2008; 16(2): 93–99.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2565124/

CF 011: With Dr. Tyce Hergert: It’s Here. New Guides For Low Back Pain That Medical Doctors Are Ignoring

This week, we are talking about acute and non-acute low back pain. What are current healthcare guidelines? Why does it matter to chiropractic patients and non-chiropractic patients and are those in the medical field getting (and implementing) the information?

I’m Dr. Jeff Williams and I’m your host for the Chiropractic Forward podcast where we talk about issues related to health, chiropractic, evidence, and research and how those things all fit into a comprehensive approach for treating different conditions. Thank you for taking time out of your day to give us a listen. I know your time is valuable and I will always try hard to fill our time with valuable content.

We’re going to have more fun this week than stepping on a nail. Which I have done.

Before we dive in, it was so nice we had to do it twice. What am I talking about? I’m talking about bringing on Tyce. Tyce Hergert that is down in Southlake, TX. Owner and operator of Chiropractic Care Center of Southlake as well as Southlake Physical Medicine where he oversees an integrated practice. Dr. Hergert is also the immediate former President of the Texas Chiropractic Association so now he can say what he really thinks. He was the big cheese, the illustrious potentate of chiropractic in Texas.

Although it’s highly unlikely, should you enjoy what Tyce shares with us here today, go and listen to his other guest spot which can be found in Episode #6. You can find episode #6 at the following link:

CF 006: With Dr. Tyce Hergert: Astounding Expert Information On Immediate Headache Relief

Welcome to the show Tyce. Nice to have you back.

I would say that a chiropractor would be completely oblivious to not understand that Chiropractic is considered to be on the fringe of healthcare by many to most in the medical field. It’s just a fact and chiropractors deal with this daily. We Chiropractors are used to feeling like the black sheep of the healthcare family off in a corner keeping all to ourselves.

In other articles, podcasts, and videos of mine, you’ll notice I have covered the Wilk vs. AMA case. I’ve covered the Doctored film by Jeff Hayes spotlighting mistreatment of chiropractors. I’ve also covered current attacks on Texas Chiropractors by the Texas Medical Association. It is all very well-documented at this point.

Chiropractic is currently undergoing an amazing renaissance. This is due to a couple of key factors. The first being the need to develop non-pharmacological treatment recommendations in the midst of a national opioid addiction crisis. A crisis that has killed thousands and thousands in the last several years. The second reason being the body of high-quality research that is consistently coming to light almost every month showing the effectiveness of Chiropractic and evidence-based chiropractors.

Do you feel this renaissance, Tyce, or is it just me living inside my head?

With all of the new information and new healthcare laws emerging, the questions going forward SHOULD be, “Is the medical field and is the insurance industry listening and implementing?” We shall see. So far, the answer is, “Absolutely not.” In fact, it’s almost defiant.

Is that an accurate statement Tyce? You’re my checks and balance guy on everything.

Let’s begin with the most glaring denial of Federal Law by the insurance companies right now. It has to do with Section 2706 of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. Also commonly known as “Obamacare.” Section 2706 of the PPACA is entitled the nondiscrimination In Health Care section of the Federal Law and is intended to keep insurance companies and health plans from keeping chiropractors and the services they provide out of the system.

It reads as follows, “A group health plan and a health insurance issuer offering group or individual health insurance coverage shall not discriminate with respect to participation under the plan or coverage against any health care provider who is acting within the scope of that provider’s license or certification under applicable State law. This section shall not require that a group health plan or health insurance issuer contract with any health care provider willing to abide by the terms and conditions for participation established by the plan or issuer. Nothing in this section shall be construed as preventing a group health plan, a health insurance issuer, or the Secretary from establishing varying reimbursement rates based on quality or performance measures.”

On the American Chiropractic Association’s FAQ site for 2706, they state, “It is important to understand that Section 2706 and its assurance of non-discrimination in terms of participation and coverage requires that doctors of chiropractic not be discriminated against in the provision of any “essential benefit” that is within their scope of practice.”

Here’s the rub on 2706: part of its purpose is to reimburse chiropractors performing the same services under their scope and license at the same level financially as any other profession that provides that service.

For instance, under the PPACA Section 2706 Federal Law, chiropractors are to be paid the exact same for an 99203 exam code as a doctor of medicine or osteopathy is paid.

Would you agree with that assessment Dr. Hergert? Is this your understanding of the law?

Plain and simple. This is not happening. With so many chiropractors now integrating their practices with medical directors, physician assistants, nurse practitioners, and physical therapists like Dr. Hergert has in Southlake, it’s painfully clear that doctors of chiropractic are being discriminated against when it comes to reimbursements for the same codes performed.

In fact, chiropractors are integrating with these other professions just so that they can finally GET the reimbursements that the other practitioners are allowed! It is madness and clearly violates Section 2706 of PPACA.

Dr. Hergert, you are a great resource here since you’re in the middle of the two professions. What is your experience on this?

Tyce: The carriers will come right out and tell you they don’t think they have to play by this rule.

Also, there is violation of the law if an insurer does something such as applying caps on specific services provided by one healthcare provider whereas the cap does not apply to another type of provider. It is my understanding that United Healthcare has moved to a $65 visit cap on chiropractic care here in Texas.

Am I misinformed here Tyce? Does United Healthcare only put caps on Chiropractors or are they capping services with all providers?
Tyce: That gets very frustrating for those patients with a $50-70 copay.

It is the American Chiropractic Association’s opinion that a violation exists if the insurer or plan denies specific forms of care that is otherwise covered if it is a chiropractor providing the service and it is within their scope and licensing. I would suggest that a medical doctor probably gets services such as non-surgical decompression covered under insurance but chiropractors are routinely denied coverage.

Are there any better examples of this disparity, Tyce, since I don’t know any medical doctors that have their patients perform decompression?

There is a possible violation of Federal Law when Chiropractors are denied inclusion into a plan or group purely based on the profession. For example, it is my understanding that FirstCare won’t cover Chiropractic. Is that a violation of 2706?

Is that a violation? I suppose I could offer an opinion if I were a lawyer. I’m not sure why exactly other providers are allowed coverage while chiropractors are left out in the cold. Here is a great example though that I’m aware of here locally. there is a local insurance network that will remained un-named that charges $200 per year for chiropractors to be included for coverage however, medical professionals pay nothing to be included. Could that be a violation of the nondiscrimination law? I would say it smells a little fishy.

In my opinion, Federal Law is being violated all over the place in regards to Section 2706 of PPACA. I’m not sure how it can be perceived any other way.

What can you add here Tyce that I may have left out?
Tyce: What this means for patients is you can’t use that shiny new insurance policy that is costing you more than a $250k house payment would. You have to fork over the more money to pay for your chiropractic care.

Moving on from Section 2706…..I love talking about the New Recommendations For Acute and Chronic Low Back Pain.
It is becoming more and more aggravating that we chiropractors are not seeing a flood of acute and chronic low back pain patients. If you read my articles, watch my videos, or listen to my podcast with any regularity, you have no doubt been informed several times over of these new recommendations which, at this point aren’t that new anymore. They have been around for about a year now.

It is my opinion that no long-held beliefs or protocols will change if new information isn’t continually pounded and yelled about from the top of the roofs with megaphones. In marketing, experts have said that it takes a target 7 times of being exposed to information before it is finally received and, hopefully, acted upon.

I know that the medical field has NOT been exposed to this information at least 7 times because of two factors:
1. I have spoken to several medical practitioners here locally and not a single one of them has heard of or were aware of these new recommendations.
2. I am not seeing an incredible, overwhelming influx of acute and chronic low back pain new patients coming through my doors as a result of medical referrals.

Tyce, are you seeing an incredible influx of new low back patients from the medical field these days?

Is this willful disregard for the changing recommendations and a “clinging on” to old dogmatic beliefs passed down from the AMA years ago? I think some of it most certainly is.

Is it that a few bad seeds in the Chiropractic profession are giving the rest of us a bad image? I would say some of it most certainly is.

What I think it is mostly based on, however, is the fact that medical professionals are busy, they’re stressed, and many times over-worked and they simply don’t always have the time or opportunity to stay completely up on every new recommendation or updated protocol.

What do you think about it, Tyce?
Tyce: “You’re not down with, what you’re not up on.” Most don’t know. They didn’t get this info in school, and the pharma reps aren’t out spreading the good news.

With that being said, let’s be clear; the issues of low back pain, its economic impact, and the national opioid epidemic crisis in America combine to make these new recommendations that much more important.

Let’s start with the American College of Physicians. Remember, the American College of Physicians was proven in the Wilk vs. AMA case to have played a part in collaborating with the AMA in an attempt to rid the Earth of Chiropractic. I think that’s important to note as we go through the information because the ACP is historically known as a detractor or the chiropractic profession to put it mildly.

In response to the opioid epidemic gripping the nation currently, the American College of Physicians developed new recommendations for treating acute and chronic low back pain.

Why They Did It
• The American College of Physicians developed this guideline in order to provide updated recommendations on treatment of low back pain.
• With these recommendations, the ACP hoped to influence clinicians AND patients to make the correct decision for care in acute, subacute, or chronic low back pain conditions.

How They Did It
• They based their recommendations on a systematic review of randomized controlled trials and other systematic reviews.
• The research they reviewed included those papers available through April of 2015.
• The research included only those on noninvasive pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic treatments.

What They Found
• Recommendation #1: patients with subacute or acute low back pain should seek nonpharmacologic treatments such as Chiropractic, Massage, Acupuncture, and superficial heat BEFORE resorting to non-steroidal anti-inflammatories such as Ibuprofen, Tylenol, Aleve, etc… (Graded as a strong recommendation)
• Recommendation #2: patients with chronic low back pain should seek nonpharmacologic treatments such as Chiropractic, Exercise/Rehabilitation, Acupuncture, & Cold Laser Therapy BEFORE resorting to non-steroidal anti-inflammatories such as Ibuprofen, Tylenol, Aleve, etc… (Graded as a strong recommendation)
• Recommendation #3: In patients with chronic low back pain that have had no relief from nonpharmacological means, the first line of treatment would consist of NSAIDs like Aleve, Tylenol, Ibuprofen, etc.. As a second-line treatment, the clinician may consider tramadol or duloxetine. Opioids would be a last option and only if all other treatments have been exhausted and failed and even then with lengthy discussion with the patient in regards to the risks and benefits of using opioids. (Graded as weak recommendation)

Let’s recap: in February of 2017, the American College of Physicians, historically a Chiropractic profession detractor and attacker, now recommends Chiropractic as a first-line treatment for acute and chronic low back pain.

Dr. Hergert, does that make you feel warm and fuzzy inside because it does me?

Next, let us discuss the American Medical Association. If you thought the American College of Physicians was guilty of Chiropractic-hating, the American Medical Association is, or was, “Pablo Escobar” or the “El Chapo” of the attacks on the Chiropractic profession. The “El Jefe” of the Chiropractic haters, and the group that not only sat in the driver’s seat but also OWNED the entire truck of destruction back before Wilk vs. AMA came along. I believe I have been watching too much Netflix.

As a side note, I have realized that I have a wife, a daughter, and an all female staff at my office and…..I’m not the El Chapo or El Jefe of really anything. My son and I just walk around following orders pretty much. Tyce, you’re married with two daughters right?

On April 11, 2017, the Journal of the American Medical Association published a study on their website titled “Association of Spinal Manipulative Therapy With Clinical Benefit and Harm for Acute Low Back Pain Systematic Review and Meta-analysis,” authored by Neil Page, MD et. al. In the format of this research paper, they refer to chiropractic treatment as spinal manipulative treatment or SMT. But, because spinal manipulative therapy is what we chiropractors do the most and what we are most identified with, I’m replacing the term “SMT” with “chiropractic adjustment.”

Is that fair, Tyce? I think it’s fair.

Why They Did It
Considering that spinal manipulation, or the chiropractic adjustment, is a treatment option for acute low back pain, and that acute low back pain is one of the most common reasons for visits to the doctor’s office, the authors wanted to systematically review the studies that have been done in the past dealing with the effectiveness as well as the harms of chiropractic adjustments in the treatment of acute low back pain.

How They Did It
• The researchers used searches of MEDLINE, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, EMBASE, and Current Nursing and Allied Health Literature.
• The search spanned 6 years from January 2011 through February 2017 for randomized controlled trials of adults with low back pain comparing spinal manipulative therapy with no treatment or with alternative treatments.
• The accepted papers also had to measure pain or functional outcomes for up to 6 weeks.
• The data extraction was done in duplicate.
• The quality of the study was assessed through use of the Cochrane Back and Neck Risk of Bias tool.
• Finally, the evidence was assessed using the GRADE criteria which stands for Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation.
• 26 eligible randomized controlled trials were identified and accepted

What They Found
• 15 of the RCTs, totaling 1699 patients, showed moderate-quality evidence that chiropractic adjustments had a statistically significant association with improvements in PAIN.
• 12 of the RCTs, totaling 1381 patients, showed moderate-quality evidence that chiropractic adjustments have a statistically significant association with improvements in FUNCTION.
• NO RCTs reported any serious harms or adverse event as a result of undergoing chiropractic adjustments.
• There were only minor events reported like some increased pain, muscle stiffness, and headache in roughly 50%-67% of those treated in the large case series. I would be interested to hear more about this statement by the authors. That is not what we commonly see in our practice. Sometimes, if the patient is new and is not accustomed to chiropractic adjustments, they may experience some soreness or stiffness the next day which is to be expected following a change in the body.
• I want to be as thorough as I can here….Tyce, do you see 50%-67% minor harms in your daily practice?

Wrap It Up
In true AMA fashion, instead of just coming out and saying, “Chiropractic adjustments showed moderate quality evidence for effectiveness in pain as well as in function,” the authors instead stated in conclusion, “Among patients with acute low back pain, spinal manipulative therapy was associated with modest improvements in pain and function at up to 6 weeks, with transient minor musculoskeletal harms. However, heterogeneity in study results was large.” Heterogeneity is defined as, “The quality or state of being diverse in character or content.” In my opinion, this is to give themselves and “out” by implying there was not enough focus to the RCTs to truly state their findings as fact.

Nonetheless, when the AMA comes even remotely close to endorsing anything having to do with Chiropractic, I’ll take it. And so should those in the medical field that commonly come in contact with those seeking help for their acute and chronic low back pain.

So…….We Should Be All Set For Success Now Right? Maybe they’re about to open up a chiropractic low back pain wing of the hospital, right?

That is what you’ think but there is new information from the White House that this simply is not the case despite the obvious ramifications. You can find the link in the show notes but on page 57 of The President’s Commission On Combating Drug Addiction and The Opioid Crisis report, the authors say, “A key contributor to the opioid epidemic has been the excess prescribing of opioids for common pain complaints and for postsurgical pain. Although in some conditions, behavioral programs, acupuncture, chiropractic, surgery, as well as FDA-approved multimodal pain strategies have been proven to reduce the use of opioids, while providing effective pain management, current CMS reimbursement policies, as well as health insurance providers and other payers, create barriers to the adoption of these strategies.” This is straight from the White House.

At the bottom of page 57, you will also see that it says, “The Commission recommends CMS review and modify rate-setting policies that discourage the use of non-opioid treatments for pain, such as certain bundled payments that make alternative treatment options cost prohibitive for hospitals and doctors, particularly those options for treating immediate post-surgical pain.”

What say you Tyce?
Tyce: You mean like a specialist copay for chiro care and a lower copay for primary care? Or covering surgery 100% and NOT covering non-surgical means.

Essentially, the United States Government is admitting there is professional discrimination at the highest levels…..hello Medicare and Health Insurance plans….I’m talking to you….this discrimination creates barriers to doing the smart thing.

The smart thing is seeing a chiropractor for your back pain. The “Big Guys” (AKA: American College of Physicians and the American Medical Association) recommend it and the government says policies are in place to prevent patients from following those recommendations.

In addition, policies that discriminate against chiropractic or chiropractors run in violation of Section 2706 of PPACA. It comes full circle.
I know you have something good to say here Tyce…

Tyce: The beautiful thing we get to see in our office, since we have both medicine and chiropractic working together, is the end of the story…people getting off the mind altering drugs, healing, and getting their lives back. All we do is follow these simple guidelines.

I have a question to pose to the entire Chiropractic profession: How in the heck do we deal with this?

It has to be through either the legislature at the state and federal levels or it has to be through the legal system. A guarantee I feel comfortable making is that the insurance companies won’t begin enforcing it on their own.

Mobilization and unification of the Chiropractic profession is probably where it starts.

Some steps toward that end include:
• Join or get involved with your state association. They’re the only ones effectively fighting for you and your rights on the state level.
• Join or get involved with your national association. They’re the only ones effectively fighting for you and your rights on the national level.
• If possible, build relationships with your state and national legislators.
• Donate to all of the above in the largest amounts you are comfortable with.
• Tell your friends and your colleagues about what is going on and help them get involved if they’re so inclined.
• Follow the news of your industry closely and stay knowledgeable about your profession. Both the good AND the bad.

Tyce, you have served for years and you’re still serving your profession. What you got on this?
Tyce: “Be part of the solution. You don’t have to dedicate 24/7 to the crusade….but you could do a little more. Right?”

A Chiropractic profession that is unified and playing offense instead of defense is powerful and is one of the worst nightmares of some folks I know out there in the world. Personally, as a side note, I like to see people like that squirm just a little don’t you? It just feels good. Makes what’s left of my hair stand up.

So won’t you consider helping if you haven’t before? If you don’t know where to start, email me at dr.williams@chiropracticforward.com and I will help you get on your way.

Tyce, I want to thank you for taking the time to come on the podcast and share your genius with us. With our history, I’m sure that Chiropractic Forward podcast listeners can count on your being a guest many many times. And, the next time will be the third time and I can say something like, “It was so nice, we had to do it thrice, with Tyce….or something stupid but entertaining like that.” Thanks for joining us today.

When Chiropractic is at its best, you cannot beat the risk vs reward ratio.

Did you know that research and clinical experience shows that, in about 80%-90% of headaches, neck, and back pain, in comparison to the traditional medical model, patients get good or excellent results with Chiropractic? Chiropractic care is safe, more cost-effective, it decreases your chances of having surgery, and it reduces your chances of becoming disabled. We do this conservatively and non-surgically. In addition, we can do it with minimal time requirements and minimal hassle on the part of the patient. And, if the patient develops a “preventative” mindset going forward from initial recovery, we can likely keep it that way while raising the general, overall level of health!

Please feel free to send us an email at dr dot williams at chiropracticforward.com and let us know what you think or what suggestions you may have for us for future episodes. If you love what you hear, be sure to check out www.chiropracticforward.com. As this podcast builds, so will the website as we add more content, educational products, and a little further down the road, webinars, seminars, and speaking dates as they get added.

 

In the meantime, here are some of our recent podcasts that may be of interest:

CF 012: Proven Means To Treat Neck Pain

CF 008: With Dr. Craig Benton – Brand New Information Based on Results Chiropractic Proven Effective For Low Back Pain

CF 010: Surprise Unique Information Shows Chiropractic May Work On The Brain Too

 

 

 

 

We cannot wait to connect again with you next week. From Creek Stone here in Amarillo, TX, home of the Chiropractic Forward Podcast flight deck, this is Dr. Jeff Williams saying upward, onward, and forward.

References and Source Material
1. https://www.amarillochiropractor.com/startling-medical-professional-attacks-chiropractic/
2. https://www.amarillochiropractor.com/healthcare-in-texas-the-battle-against-a-monopoly-a-true-story-about-david-goliath-3/
3. https://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/whitehouse.gov/files/images/The%20Underestimated%20Cost%20of%20the%20Opioid%20Crisis.pdf
4. https://www.acatoday.org/Portals/60/Docs/Advocacy%20and%20Reimbursement/2706/2706-FAQs.pdf?ver=2015-12-23-125425-503
5. https://annals.org/aim/fullarticle/2603228/noninvasive-treatments-acute-subacute-chronic-low-back-pain-clinical-practice
6. https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/article-abstract/2616395?widget=personalizedcontent&previousarticle=2616379
7. https://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/whitehouse.gov/files/images/Final_Report_Draft_11-3-2017.pdf