|
The Original Study
The 2003 study1 examined
care for chronic patients with more than 13 weeks of spinal pain. After
randomization, the chiropractic manipulation group was found to be the
most chronic - the "average duration of spinal pain symptoms was 8.3
years for the spinal manipulation group, 6.4 years for the medication
group, and 4.5 years for the acupuncture group."
In that study, the investigators utilized a number of evaluation
instruments to measure patient status: the Oswestry Back Pain
Disability Index (Oswestry), the Neck Disability Index (NDI), the
Short-Form-36 Health Survey questionnaire (SF-36), and visual analog
scales (VAS) of pain intensity and ranges of movement. These
instruments were administered to the study participants before care
began and again at two, five and nine weeks after the onset of
treatment.
Initially, the patients were randomly divided into three groups:
acupuncture, chiropractic manipulation, and medication. Those in the
acupuncture and chiropractic manipulation groups were given "two
treatments per week."
The medication group was given one of three drugs, based upon what
other drugs they may have already tried. Patients in the medication
group were given Celebrex (200-400 mg/day), unless it had previously
been tried. The next drug of choice was Vioxx (12.5-25 mg/day),
followed by paracetamol (up to 4 g/day).
The results of the 2003 study found that the "highest proportion of early (asymptomatic status) recovery was found for manipulation (27.3%), followed by acupuncture (9.4%) and medication (5%)." The chiropractic manipulation group achieved the best overall results.
The original study demonstrated very clearly that chiropractic
manipulation was superior to both acupuncture and medication in all of
the above areas, with the one exception being the VAS neck score. And
according to the investigators, medication "apparently did not achieve
a marked improvement in chronic spinal pain and caused adverse
reactions in 6.1% of the patients."
The Follow-Up Study
The follow-up study3
reapplied the same measurement instruments to the patients after more
than a year. The results of this follow-up study demonstrated that:
"Comparisons of initial and extended follow-up questionnaires to assess
absolute efficacy showed that only the application of spinal
manipulation revealed broad-based, long-term benefit." (emphasis ours)
And while there were observed improvements in each group, statistical
testing "revealed that only in the manipulation group, 5 of the 7
observed improvements were statistically significant, which compares
with only 1 item in each of the acupuncture and the medication groups,
respectively." The medication group again "did not achieve an
improvement in chronic spinal pain."
The investigators made additional comments that emphasize the strength of their findings:
"It seems noteworthy that the comparison of the percentages of those
who had to change the treatment modality (because of side effects or
unsatisfactory results) also appears to favor manipulation, in that
manipulation showed by far the lowest proportion (38.7%) of changeovers
compared with acupuncture (53.3%) and medication (81.2%). Consequently,
spinal manipulation appeared to provide the highest satisfaction.
"Overall, patients who have chronic mechanical spinal pain syndromes
and received spinal manipulation gained significant broad-based
beneficial short-term and long-term outcomes. 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."
|
Findings From the Original Study
| Main Outcome Measures: Percentage Changes From Initial Assessment |
|
| |
Chiropractic |
Acupuncture |
Medication |
| (Decreasing values reflect improvement) |
| VAS Back |
-50% |
-15% |
0% |
| VAS Neck |
-42% |
-50% |
0% |
| Oswestry Back Disability |
-50% |
-5% |
4% |
| Neck Disability Index |
-38% |
-16% |
-8% |
| Lumbar Sitting Flexion |
-20% |
-2% |
-7% |
| Lumbar Standing Flexion |
-38% |
-2% |
-4% |
| |
| (Increasing values reflect improvement) |
| Cervical Sitting Flexion |
+25% |
+20% |
+8% |
| Cervical Sitting Extension |
+18% |
+2% |
0% |
| SF-36 |
+47% |
+15% |
+18% |
|
|
References
- Giles LGF, Muller R. Chronic spinal pain: a randomized
clinical trial comparing medication, acupuncture, and spinal
manipulation. Spine 2003;28:1490-1503.
- Chiropractic best for chronic spine pain: new research shows manipulation superior to acupuncture, drugs. Dynamic Chiropractic, Sept. 1, 2003: www.chiroweb.com/archives/21/18/18.html.
- Muller
R, Giles LGF. 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;28:3-11.
 Dr. George Manlove
© 2009 George Manlove, DC All rights reserved.
Disclaimer: The
entire contents of this website are based upon the opinions of Dr.
Manlove, unless otherwise noted. The information on this website is not
intended to replace a one-on-one relationship with a qualified health
care professional and is not intended as medical advice. It is intended
as a sharing of knowledge and information from the research and
experience of Dr. Manlove. Dr. Manlove encourages you to make your own
health care decisions based upon your research and in partnership with
a qualified health care professional.
These
statements have not been evaluated by the Food and Drug Administration.
Products discussed in these articles are not intended to diagnose,
treat, cure or prevent any disease. If you are pregnant, nursing,
taking medication, or have a medical condition, consult your physician
before using any product.
|