Explore the vast range of titles available.

For individuals with recurrent or persistent non-specific low back pain (LBP), exercise and exercise combined with education have been shown to be effective in preventing new episodes or in reducing the impact of the condition. Chiropractors have traditionally used Maintenance Care (MC), as secondary and tertiary prevention strategies. The aim of this trial was to investigate the effectiveness of MC on pain trajectories for patients with recurrent or persistent LBP. This pragmatic, investigator-blinded, two arm randomized controlled trial included consecutive patients (18-65 years old) with non-specific LBP, who had an early favorable response to chiropractic care. After an initial course of treatment, eligible subjects were randomized to either MC or control (symptom-guided treatment). The primary outcome was total number of days with bothersome LBP during 52 weeks collected weekly with text-messages (SMS) and estimated by a GEE model. Three hundred and twenty-eight subjects were randomly allocated to one of the two treatment groups. MC resulted in a reduction in the total number of days per week with bothersome LBP compared with symptom-guided treatment. During the 12 month study period, the MC group (n = 163, 3 dropouts) reported 12.8 (95% CI = 10.1, 15.5; p = <0.001) fewer days in total with bothersome LBP compared to the control group (n = 158, 4 dropouts) and received 1.7 (95% CI = 1.8, 2.1; p = <0.001) more treatments. Numbers presented are means. No serious adverse events were recorded. MC was more effective than symptom-guided treatment in reducing the total number of days over 52 weeks with bothersome non-specific LBP but it resulted in a higher number of treatments. For selected patients with recurrent or persistent non-specific LBP who respond well to an initial course of chiropractic care, MC should be considered an option for tertiary prevention.

Objective To evaluate the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of physiotherapy, chiropractic care, and the combination of physiotherapy and chiropractic care compared with information and advice for the treatment of patients with nonspecific chronic low-back pain (CLBP) in Sweden. Design A multicentre pragmatic randomized controlled trial. Setting Ten primary care rehabilitation units in Sweden. Participants Eighty-eight participants with nonspecific CLBP. Interventions The participants were randomly assigned to receive physiotherapy, chiropractic care, combination treatment, or information and advice. Main outcome measures This study measured the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), health-related quality of life (HRQoL), quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), working status, and costs. Results The study revealed no statistically significant differences in any of the outcome measures when physiotherapy, chiropractic care, and combination treatment with information and advice were compared ( p  > 0.05). The ODI changes between baseline and the 6-month follow-up ranged from 6.13 to 12.56 across the treatment groups, indicating reduced disability in all groups. Compared with the other treatment options, the combination treatment resulted in the greatest QALY gain (0.418) and lowest cost (SEK 3,081). Conclusion Compared with alternative standalone treatment options, the combination treatment strategy resulted in greater QALY gain and lower costs from a heath care perspective. Although the study did not detect statistically significant differences in outcomes or costs among the treatment options, the combination treatment showed promising potential for cost-effectiveness. Given the small sample size and low statistical power of the study, further clinical trials with fewer treatment arms and a focus on the combination group are warranted to confirm these findings. The insights gained from this study are important for informing the design and conduct of future clinical studies investigating the effectiveness, costs and cost-effectiveness of treatments for CLBP. Trial registration The study is registered in the ISRCTN registry (2017-02-20: ISRCTN15830360).

Background Dizziness in older people is a risk factor for falls. Neck pain is associated with dizziness and responds favourably to neck manipulation. However, it is unknown if chiropractic intervention including instrument-assisted manipulation of the neck in older people with neck pain can also improve dizziness. Methods This parallel two-arm pilot trial was conducted in Melbourne, Australia over nine months (October 2015 to June 2016). Participants aged 65–85 years, with self-reported chronic neck pain and dizziness, were recruited from the general public through advertisements in local community newspapers and via Facebook. Participants were randomised using a permuted block method to one of two groups: 1) Activator II™-instrument-assisted cervical and thoracic spine manipulation plus a combination of: light massage; mobilisation; range of motion exercises; and home advice about the application of heat, or 2) Sham-Activator II™-instrument-assisted manipulation (set to zero impulse) plus gentle touch of cervical and thoracic spinal regions. Participants were blinded to group allocation. The interventions were delivered weekly for four weeks. Assessments were conducted one week pre- and post-intervention. Clinical outcomes were assessed blindly and included: dizziness (dizziness handicap inventory [DHI]); neck pain (neck disability index [NDI]); self-reported concerns of falling; mood; physical function; and treatment satisfaction. Feasibility outcomes included recruitment rates, compliance with intervention and outcome assessment, study location, success of blinding, costs and harms. Results Out of 162 enquiries, 24 participants were screened as eligible and randomised to either the chiropractic ( n  = 13) or sham ( n  = 11) intervention group. Compliance was satisfactory with only two participants lost to follow up; thus, post-intervention data for 12 chiropractic intervention and 10 sham intervention participants were analysed. Blinding was similar between groups. Mild harms of increased spinal pain or headaches were reported by 6 participants. Costs amounted to AUD$2635 per participant. The data showed a trend favouring the chiropractic group in terms of clinically-significant improvements in both NDI and DHI scores. Sample sizes of n  = 150 or n  = 222 for dizziness or neck pain disability as the primary outcome measure, respectively, would be needed for a fully powered trial. Conclusions Recruitment of participants in this setting was difficult and expensive. However, a larger trial may be feasible at a specialised dizziness clinic within a rehabilitation setting. Compliance was acceptable and the outcome measures used were well accepted and responsive. Trial registration Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR) ACTRN12613000653763 . Registered 13 June 2013. Trial funding: Foundation for Chiropractic Research and Postgraduate Education (Denmark).

Background Veteran Response to Dosage in Chiropractic Therapy (VERDICT) was a pragmatic randomized trial testing chiropractic dosage effects in 766 veterans with chronic low back pain (CLBP) of ≥ 3 months. This cross-sectional analysis compares baseline characteristics of younger (18-to-64 years) and older veterans (≥ 65 years). Methods Data were collected from February 22, 2021 to May 21, 2025 via electronic health records and REDCap questionnaires. Descriptive statistics and tests of group differences were performed using SAS. Results VERDICT enrolled 188 older veterans (25%; mean 72 years) and 578 younger veterans (75%; mean 44 years). More female (24.7% vs. 10.6%, p  < .001), Black (18.9% vs. 12.2%), and Hispanic (11.8% vs. 3.7%, p  = .001) veterans comprised the younger cohort. Employment differed ( p  < .001) with older veterans retired (78.2% vs. 14.2%) and younger veterans employed (59% vs. 16.5%). About 14% lived rurally and period of military service was similar. Pain profiles were similar between younger and older veterans for > 5 years duration (78.4% vs. 73.4%), high-impact chronic pain (64.5% vs. 62.2%), mean pain interference [63.8(4.8) vs. 63.2(5.0)], and mean back-related disability (primary outcome) [11.9(5.2) vs. 13.3(4.9)]. Younger veterans scored significantly higher than older veterans for depression (44.8% vs. 31.4%, p  = .001), anxiety (41.5% vs. 20.7%, p  < .001), post-traumatic stress (38.4% vs. 17.6%, p  < .001), sleep disturbance (57.1% vs. 34.6%, p  < .001), and high-risk alcohol use (25.4% vs. 18.1%, p  = .05). Previous chiropractic use was similar (younger 75.4% vs. older 80.3%). Medications in past 3 months differed with younger veterans reporting cannabis (25.8% vs. 12.8%, p  < .001) and muscle relaxants (31.7% vs. 17.6%, p  < .001) and more older veterans reporting acetaminophen (63.3% vs. 49.3%, p  < .001) and gabapentin (34% vs. 20.1%, p  < .001). NSAIDs use was highest among both younger (62.8%) and older (56.9%) veterans. While two-thirds had tried exercise in the past 3 months, only 16% reported exercising for their pain condition, with older veterans more likely to report providers encouraging physical activity. Conclusions Similar pain profiles were reported among older and younger veterans seeking chiropractic care for CLBP within a clinical trial. However, potentially important age differences were noted in demographics, mental health and substance use, and CLBP treatments. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04087291. Date of Registration: 9/12/2019. Enrollment Duration: 2/22/2021 (first participant enrolled) through 5/10/2024 (last participant enrolled).

Individuals with subclinical neck pain (SCNP) exhibit altered cerebellar processing, likely due to disordered sensorimotor integration of inaccurate proprioceptive input. This association between proprioceptive feedback and SMI has been captured in cervico-ocular reflex (COR) differences where SCNP showed higher gain than healthy participants. Previous neurophysiological research demonstrated improved cerebellar processing in SCNP participants following a single treatment session, but it is unknown whether these neurophysiological changes transfer to cerebellar function. In a parallel group, randomized control trial conducted at Ontario Tech University, 27 right-hand dominant SCNP participants were allocated to the 8-week chiropractic care (n = 15; 7M & 8 F) or 8-week control (n = 12; 6M & 6 F) group. COR gain (ratio of eye movement to trunk movement) was assessed using an eye-tracking device at baseline and at post 8-weeks (treatment vs. no treatment). COR gain (10 trials): participants gazed at a circular target that disappeared after 3 s, while a motorized chair rotated their trunk at a frequency of 0.04 Hz, with an amplitude of 5º, for 2 minutes. A 2 × 2 repeated measures ANOVA was performed. COR gain was significantly reduced following 8-weeks of chiropractic care compared to the SCNP control (8-weeks of no treatment) group (p = 0.012, ηp2 = 0.237). The decrease in COR gain following treatment is likely due to normalized proprioceptive feedback from the neck, enabling improved processing and integration within the flocculonodular lobe of the cerebellum.

Longer-term effects of chiropractic care on neuroplasticity, stress, and immune biomarkers remain unclear. This study evaluates the effects of chiropractic care on physiological biomarkers, including brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF), cortisol (saliva, blood, hair), and inflammatory cytokines [interleukin-6 (IL-6), tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-α), interferon-gamma (IFN-γ), C-reactive protein (CRP), B-lymphocytes (CD19), T-helper cells (CD4), cytotoxic T cells (CD8), and natural killer cells (CD56)] in subclinical spinal pain patients. Parallel-group, pragmatic randomized controlled trial conducted at the Rehabilitation Center of Railway General Hospital, Rawalpindi, Pakistan. Intervention: 12 weeks; follow-up: 16 weeks (May-December 2022). Participants with subclinical spinal pain were randomly assigned by using simple lottery method to either 12 weeks of chiropractic or sham care. We aimed to recruit up to 150 participants over three months; however, given the pragmatic nature of the trial and logistical constraints, including the availability of chiropractors, the final number enrolled was determined by how many eligible participants could be recruited during this time. Adults aged 20-60 years with subclinical spinal pain (n = 106 randomized; 88 completed 12-week measures; 73 completed 16-week follow-up). Among those who finished 12 weeks: chiropractic, 26 males/15 females, mean age 37.49 ± 12.39 years; sham, 24 males/23 females, mean age 26.85 ± 7.13 years. The primary outcome blood BDNF and secondary outcome, including saliva, blood and hair cortisol, IL-6, TNF-α, IFN-γ, CRP, CD19, CD4, CD8, and CD56 levels were measured at baseline, after 12 weeks of intervention, and at a 16-week follow-up. Linear and linear mixed-effects regression models were used to assess the effect of care and time on biological measures. Significant between-group differences were observed after 12 weeks of intervention, with higher salivary cortisol 5 ± 2 [0, 10], p = 0.045 and blood BDNF150 ± 60 (40, 270), p = 0.009 and IL-6 1.0 ± 0.3 [0.5, 1.5], p < 0.001 levels in the chiropractic care group. At the 16-week follow-up, blood cortisol -9 ± 4 [-17, -1], p = 0.024, IFN-γ - 22 ± 7 [-35, -9], and TNF-α -2 ± 1 [-5, 0], p = 0.028 levels increased in the sham group. Within-group comparisons showed a non-significant 10 ± 20 [-20, 50], p = 0.439 reduction in hair cortisol levels in the chiropractic group at 12 weeks, along with increased levels of blood cortisol, BDNF, CD8, CD4, IL-6, and CD19. 12 weeks of Chiropractic care modulates biomarkers linked to neuroplasticity, inflammation, and stress. Increases in brain-derived neurotrophic factor and interleukin-6 suggest enhanced neuroplasticity and inflammatory responses, while decreases in tumor necrosis factor-alpha indicate a regulatory effect on systemic inflammation. These findings support the notion that chiropractic care modulates physiological systemic biomarkers, which may underscore its benefits on clinical outcomes. ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05369156.

ObjectivesThere is no current detailed profile of people seeking chiropractic care in Canada. We describe the profiles of chiropractors’ practice and the reasons, nature of the care provided to their patients and extent of interprofessional collaborations in Ontario, Canada.DesignCross-sectional observational study.SettingPrimary care setting in Ontario, Canada.ParticipantsWe randomly recruited chiropractors from a list of registered chiropractors (n=3978) in active practice in 2015. Of the 135 randomly selected chiropractors, 120 were eligible, 43 participated and 42 completed the study.Outcome measuresEach chiropractor recorded information for up to 100 consecutive patient encounters, documenting patient health profiles, reasons for encounter, diagnoses and care provided. Descriptive statistics summarised chiropractor, patient and encounter characteristics, with analyses accounting for clustering and design effects.ResultsChiropractors provided data on 3523 chiropractor-patient encounters. More than 65% of participating chiropractors were male, mean age 44 years and had practised on average 15 years. The typical patient was female (59% of encounters), between 45 and 64 years (43%) and retired (21%) or employed in business and administration (13%). Most (39.4%) referrals were from other patients, with 6.8% from physicians. Approximately 68% of patients paid out of pocket or claimed extended health insurance for care. Most common diagnoses were back (49%, 95% CI 44 to 56) and neck (15%, 95% CI 13 to 18) problems, with few encounters related to maintenance/preventive care (0.86%, 95% CI 0.2 to 3.9) and non-musculoskeletal problems (1.3%, 95% CI 0.7 to 2.3). The most common treatments included spinal manipulation (72%), soft tissue therapy (70%) and mobilisation (35%).ConclusionsThis is the most comprehensive profile to date of chiropractic practice in Canada. People who present to Ontario chiropractors are mostly adults with a musculoskeletal condition. Our results can be used by stakeholders to make informed decisions about workforce development, education and healthcare policy related to chiropractic care.

Abstract Objective To examine patient sociodemographic and clinical characteristics associated with opioid use among Veterans of Operations Enduring Freedom/Iraqi Freedom/New Dawn (OEF/OIF/OND) who receive chiropractic care, and to explore the relationship between timing of a chiropractic visit and receipt of an opioid prescription. Methods Cross-sectional analysis of administrative data on OEF/OIF/OND veterans who had at least one visit to a Veterans Affairs (VA) chiropractic clinic between 2004 and 2014. Opioid receipt was defined as at least one prescription within a window of 90 days before to 90 days after the index chiropractic clinic visit. Results We identified 14,025 OEF/OIF/OND veterans with at least one chiropractic visit, and 4,396 (31.3%) of them also received one or more opioid prescriptions. Moderate/severe pain (odds ratio [OR] = 1.87, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.72–2.03), PTSD (OR = 1.55, 95% CI = 1.41–1.69), depression (OR = 1.40, 95% CI = 1.29–1.53), and current smoking (OR = 1.39, 95% CI = 1.26–1.52) were associated with a higher likelihood of receiving an opioid prescription. The percentage of veterans receiving opioid prescriptions was lower in each of the three 30-day time frames assessed after the index chiropractic visit than before. Conclusions Nearly one-third of OEF/OIF/OND veterans receiving VA chiropractic services also received an opioid prescription, yet the frequency of opioid prescriptions was lower after the index chiropractic visit than before. Further study is warranted to assess the relationship between opioid use and chiropractic care.

ObjectiveWe evaluate change in low back pain (LBP) intensity and interference as the mechanism by which chiropractic care affects other biopsychosocial factors in US active-duty military members.DesignWe conducted secondary, exploratory mediation analysis of pragmatic, multisite, clinical trial (NCT01692275) post results using natural effect modeling. Mediators were the 6-week values of Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS)-29 pain interference and intensity. Outcomes were 12-week values of other PROMIS-29 biopsychosocial subdomains. Models evaluated overall and individual factor contribution and were adjusted for baseline age, sex, LBP duration, LBP intensity and mediator and outcome values.SettingThree US military treatment facilities.Participants750 US active-duty military members with LBP.InterventionsTrial participants received 6 weeks of treatment with chiropractic care plus usual medical care or usual medical care alone.ResultsIn multiple mediator models, pain interference and pain intensity explained much of the effect of chiropractic care on physical function (proportion mediated=0.77, 95% CI 0.43 to 2.0), fatigue (0.62, 95% CI 0.30 to 1.0), sleep disturbance (0.49, 95% CI 0.31 to 1.5) and social roles (0.81, 95% CI 0.50 to 2.0). Mental health was not evaluable due to the low prevalence of symptoms reported. The combined models of pain interference and pain intensity did not have a higher proportion mediated than the individual pain intensity models except for fatigue outcome models.ConclusionPain intensity appeared to be the mechanism by which much of the change in biopsychosocial factors occurred and should be considered a key clinical indicator for improvement in biopsychosocial health when chiropractic care is added to usual medical care for US active-duty military members.