So the new age practice that has repeatedly been show to have no medical benefit is opposes to the one that has been shown to have medical benefit? It's like the person who cures you with incense telling you not to be a vegetarian anymore.
After 6 months of follow-up, chiropractic care and medical care for low back pain were comparable in their effectiveness. Physical therapy may be marginally more effective than medical care alone for reducing disability in some patients, but the possible benefit is small.
Differences in outcomes between medical and chiropractic care without physical therapy or modalities are not clinically meaningful, although chiropractic may result in a greater likelihood of perceived improvement, perhaps reflecting satisfaction or lack of blinding. Physical therapy may be more effective than medical care alone for some patients, while physical modalities appear to have no benefit in chiropractic care.
As much or more evidence exists for the use of spinal manipulation to reduce symptoms and improve function in patients with chronic LBP as for use in acute and subacute LBP. Use of exercise in conjunction with manipulation is likely to speed and improve outcomes as well as minimize episodic recurrence. There was less evidence for the use of manipulation for patients with LBP and radiating leg pain, sciatica, or radiculopathy.
There was little or no difference in pain reduction or the ability to perform everyday activities between people with low-back pain who received spinal manipulation and those who received other advocated therapies.
Because, (1) as has been discussed here before, the evidence for the benefit spinal manipulation therapy for back pain is "very low quality" (BMJ Clinical Evidence), and (2) because chiropractors often go beyond even this questionable remit.
« Older Dog and Deco.... | Welcome to Quartzite, Arizona,... Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
Buy a Shirt