Quote:
Originally Posted by Buzzard
Oh. I get it now.
I figured there was a possibility of someone trying to turn this into a "chiropractors work/dont work" argument. That didnt too take long.
|
There ARE significant risks involved:
Safety
Chiropractic care in general is safe when employed skillfully and appropriately. Manipulation is regarded as relatively safe, but as with all therapeutic interventions, complications can arise, and it has known adverse effects, risks and contraindications. Absolute
contraindications to spinal manipulative therapy are conditions that should not be manipulated; these contraindications include
rheumatoid arthritis and conditions known to result in unstable joints. Relative contraindications are conditions where increased risk is acceptable in some situations and where low-force and soft-tissue techniques are treatments of choice; these contraindications include
osteoporosis.
[23] Although most contraindications apply only to manipulation of the affected region, some neurological signs indicate referral to
emergency medical services; these include sudden and severe
headache or
neck pain unlike that previously experienced.
[25]
Spinal manipulation is associated with frequent, mild and temporary
adverse effects,
[24][25] including new or worsening pain or stiffness in the affected region.
[153] They have been estimated to occur in 33% to 61% of patients, and frequently occur within an hour of treatment and disappear within 24 to 48 hours;
[154] adverse reactions appear to be more common following manipulation than mobilization.
[155] A 2009 study assessed the prevalence of musculoskeletal injuries sustained by chiropractic students giving or receiving manipulations while attending a chiropractic college found that 31% of the students who responded to the survey reported an injury, 44% of which were exacerbations of preexisting injuries. Injuries from receiving manipulation were most prevalent in the neck/shoulder at 65%, while hand/wrist injuries were most common when administering manipulations at 45%. Diversified, Gonstead, and upper cervical manipulations methods were the most related to injuries.
[156] Chiropractors are more commonly associated with serious manipulation related adverse effects than other professionals.
[26] Rarely,
[23] spinal manipulation, particularly on the upper spine, can also result in complications that can lead to permanent disability or
death; these can occur in adults
[24] and children.
[157] Estimates vary widely for the
incidence of these complications,
[154] and the actual incidence is unknown, due to high levels of underreporting and to the difficulty of linking manipulation to adverse effects such as
stroke, which is a particular concern.
[24] Estimates for serious adverse events vary from 5 strokes in 100,000 manipulations to 1.46 serious adverse events in 10,000,000 manipulations and 2.68 deaths in 10,000,000 manipulations.
[154] Several case reports show temporal associations between interventions and potentially serious complications.
Vertebrobasilar artery stroke is
statistically associated with chiropractic services in persons under 45 years of age, but it is similarly associated with general practitioner services, suggesting that these associations are likely explained by preexisting conditions.
[133][158] Weak to moderately strong evidence supports causation (as opposed to statistical association) between cervical manipulative therapy (whether chiropractic or not) and vertebrobasilar artery stroke.
[159] The published medical literature contains reports of 26 deaths since 1934 following chiropractic manipulations and many more seem to remain unpublished. The dissection of a vertebral artery, typically caused by neck manipulation, is a causality that is a possibility.
[26]
Chiropractors, like other primary care providers, sometimes employ diagnostic imaging techniques such as
X-rays and
CT scans that rely on
ionizing radiation.
[160] Although there is no clear evidence for the practice, some chiropractors may X-ray a patient several times a year.
[40] Practice guidelines aim to reduce unnecessary radiation exposure,
[160] which increases cancer risk in proportion to the amount of radiation received.
[161]
Risk-benefit
A 2006
systematic review of systematic reviews of spinal manipulation found the risk-benefit balance does not favor
spinal manipulation over other treatments like
physiotherapeutic exercise.
[115] A 2007 systematic review found that with uncertain efficacy and definite risks, the risk-benefit balance of spinal manipulation can't be positive.
[24] A 2009 review evaluating maintenance chiropractic care as a useful preventative approach found that spinal manipulation is routinely associated with considerable harm, thus the risk-benefit is not clearly evident
Recommend a Chiropractor
)
Not in the area you're looking at, but I just figured I'd point her out heh.
