Chiropractic: A system of health care based on the hypothesis that dis-ease is caused by abnormal function
of the nervous system. It attempts to restore normal function to the nervous system by adjustment of the
structures of the human body, especially those of the spinal column.
Chiropractic was and is still based on observations of changes it brings about in humans. It therefore falls
into the category of an empirical science.
Chiropractic has 3 broad categories within which it functions.
This is the professions big picture view of how the body seems to work. Its starting point is the observation
that health in general and not only pain and joint stiffness improve through the adjustment of the spine and
other joints. It encompasses what happens when things go wrong and thoughts of what would need to be
done to correct this situation. More
This is an ever expanding body of knowledge that pertains to the investigation of the views held with regard to
its philosophy. It draws from the sciences of other disciplines and contributes its own scientifically validated
body of knowledge to the pool of knowledge that is science as well. It does this via indexed and peer reviewed
journals. http://www.chiroindex.org/search.php? http://www.jvsr.com/index.asp
http://www.jmptonline.org/ This latter one "J. Manipulative Physiol Ther." is indexed in "PubMed"
In modern times, chiropractic is based on
Philosophy of Science
Clinical Psychology More
Effectiveness is always an issue in any form of health care. If we look at comparisons, of treatments for similar complaints, then chiropractic is effective both on a costs basis and an intervention basis.
Comparative analysis of individuals with and without chiropractic coverage: patient characteristics, utilization, and costs.
Department of Health Services, UCLA School of Public Health, Los Angeles, Calif, USA. firstname.lastname@example.org
BACKGROUND: Back pain accounts for more than $100 billion in annual US health care costs and is the second leading cause of physician visits and hospitalizations. This study ascertains the effect of systematic access to chiropractic care on the overall and neuromusculoskeletal-specific consumption of health care resources within a large managed-care system.
METHODS: A 4-year retrospective claims data analysis comparing more than 700 000 health plan members with an additional chiropractic coverage benefit and 1 million members of the same health plan without the chiropractic benefit.
RESULTS: Members with chiropractic insurance coverage, compared with those without coverage, had lower annual total health care expenditures ($1463 vs $1671 per member per year, P<.001). Having chiropractic coverage was associated with a 1.6% decrease (P = .001) in total annual health care costs at the health plan level. Back pain patients with chiropractic coverage, compared with those without coverage, had lower utilization (per 1000 episodes) of plain radiographs (17.5 vs 22.7, P<.001), low back surgery (3.3 vs 4.8, P<.001), hospitalizations (9.3 vs 15.6, P<.001), and magnetic resonance imaging (43.2 vs 68.9, P<.001). Patients with chiropractic coverage, compared with those without coverage, also had lower average back pain episode-related costs ($289 vs $399, P<.001).
CONCLUSIONS: Access to managed chiropractic care may reduce overall health care expenditures through several effects, including (1) positive risk selection; (2) substitution of chiropractic for traditional medical care, particularly for spine conditions; (3) more conservative, less invasive treatment profiles; and (4) lower health service costs associated with managed chiropractic care. Systematic access to managed chiropractic care not only may prove to be clinically beneficial but also may reduce overall health care costs.
PMID: 15477432 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
This is NOT the only study in which chiropractic's effectiveness has been shown to be superior to medical treatments. See Manga (2 reports) 2, 3 ,
Shekelle& Brook 4, DeCoster & Eberall 5 and many others.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/Spine J. 2010 Feb;10(2):117-28.
Dose response and efficacy of spinal manipulation for chronic cervicogenic headache: a pilot randomized controlled trial.Center for Outcomes Studies, Western States Chiropractic College, 2900 NE 132nd Ave., Portland, OR 97230, USA. email@example.comComment in:
AbstractBACKGROUND CONTEXT: Systematic reviews of randomized controlled trials suggest that spinal manipulative therapy (SMT) is efficacious for care of cervicogenic headache (CGH). The effect of SMT dose on outcomes has not been studied. PURPOSE: To compare the efficacy of two doses of SMT and two doses of light massage (LM) for CGH. PATIENT SAMPLE: Eighty patients with chronic CGH.MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Modified Von Korff pain and disability scales for CGH and neck pain (minimum clinically important difference=10 on 100-point scale), number of headaches in the last 4 weeks, and medication use. Data were collected every 4 weeks for 24 weeks. The primary outcome was the CGH pain scale.METHODS: Participants were randomized to either 8 or 16 treatment sessions with either SMT or a minimal LM control. Patients were treated once or twice per week for 8 weeks. Adjusted mean differences (AMD) between groups were computed using generalized estimating equations for the longitudinal outcomes over all follow-up time points (profile) and using regression modeling for individual time points with baseline characteristics as covariates and with imputed missing data. RESULTS: For the CGH pain scale, comparisons of 8 and 16 treatment sessions yielded small dose effects: |AMD|</=5.6. There was an advantage for SMT over the control: AMD=-8.1 (95% confidence interval=-13.3 to -2.8) for the profile, -10.3 (-18.5 to -2.1) at 12 weeks, and -9.8 (-18.7 to -1.0) at 24 weeks. For the higher dose patients, the advantage was greater: AMD=-11.9 (-19.3 to -4.6) for the profile, -14.2 (-25.8 to -2.6) at 12 weeks, and -14.4 (-26.9 to -2.0) at 24 weeks. Patients receiving SMT were also more likely to achieve a 50% improvement in pain scale: adjusted odds ratio=3.6 (1.6 to 8.1) for the profile, 3.1 (0.9 to 9.8) at 12 weeks, and 3.1 (0.9 to 10.3) at 24 weeks. Secondary outcomes showed similar trends favoring SMT. For SMT patients, the mean number of CGH was reduced by half.CONCLUSIONS: Clinically important differences between SMT and a control intervention were observed favoring SMT. Dose effects tended to be small. Copyright (c) 2010 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.PMID: 19837005 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
My translation (emphasis added) of the above is that Spinal Manipulation Therapy (Chiropractic adjustments) works better than light massage
Makes you wonder why chiropractic is not an integral part of our national health care and included as a fully funded non-gate-keepered Medicare option in Australia and other parts of the world. Maybe it comes back to my interests in cartels.
These are the practice methods used to put into effect the knowledge gained from scientific investigation that
is in line with its philosophy. More
My broad vision for the world is that we may all live in "a world where everybody has the opportunity to fully
understand the chiropractic paradigm and make their choices, health and otherwise, with that knowledge" (1)
"Chiropractic has a unique gift to give to the world. That gift is the paradigm from which it operates, which
encompasses health coming from within, respect for nature, trust in innate intelligence, a proactive approach
to removing interference to that innate intelligence, a striving to be one's best, and personal responsibility for
one's health." (1)
1 "Why vertebral subluxation?" Cahill D, The Australian Chiropractor Aug 2008 p.18
5 DeCoster LD, Ebrall PS. A description of WorkCare claims where chiropractors wrote the initiating certificate: Victoria
1990/91. Chiropr J Aust 1993;23:33-7
"The only way to discover the limits of the possible is to venture a little way past them into the impossible." Arthur C. Clarke