Chiropractic Research

Numerous studies have shown that chiropractic treatment is both safe and effective. the following are excerpts from a few of the more recent studies. By examining the research supporting chiropractic care, you will find that chiropractic offers tremendous potential in meeting todays health care challenges.

For Acute and Chronic Pain

Patients with chronic low back pain treated by chiropractors showed greater improvement and satisfaction at one month than patients treated by family physicians. Satisfaction scores were higher for chiropractic patients. A higher proportion of chiropractic patients (56 percent vs. 13 percent) reported that their low back pain was better or much better, whereas nearly one-third of medical patients reported their low back pain was worse or much worse.

Nyiendo et al (2000), Journal of Manipulative and Physiological Therapeutics

In a Randomized controlled trial, 183 patients with neck pain were randomly allocated to manual therapy (spinal mobilization), physiotherapy (mainly exercise) or general practitioner care (counseling, education and drugs) in a 52 week study. The clinical outcomes measures showed that manual therapy resulted in faster recovery than physiotherapy and general practitioner care. Moreover, total costs of the manual therapy-treated patients were about one third of the costs of physiotherapy or general practitioner care.

-Korthals-de Bos et al (2003), British Medical Journal

In Comparison to Other Treatment Alternatives

Acute and chronic chiropractic patients experienced better outcomes in pain, functional disability, and patient satisfaction. Clinically important differences in pain and disability improvement were found for chronic patients.

Haas et al (2005), Journal of Manipulative and Physiological Therapeutics

In our randomized, controlled trial, we compared the effectiveness of manual therapy, physical therapy, and continued care by a general practitioner in patients with nonspecific neck pain. The success rate at seven weeks was twice as high for the manual therapy group (68.3 %) as for the continued care group (general practitioner). Manual therapy scored better than physical therapy on all outcome measures. Patients receiving manual therapy had fewer absences from work than patients receiving physical therapy each resulted in statistically significant less analgesic use than continued care.

Hoving et al (2002), Annals of Internal Medicine

For Headaches

Cervical spine manipulation was associated with significant improvement in headache outcomes in trials involving patients with neck pain and/or neck dysfunction and headache.

-Duke Evidence Report, McCrory, Penzlen, Hasselblad, Gray (2001)

The results of this study show that spinal manipulative therapy is an effective treatment for tensions headaches...Four weeks after cessation of treatment...the patients who received spinal manipulative therapy experienced a sustained therapeutic benefit in all major outcomes in contrast to the patients that received amitriptyline therapy, who reverted to baseline values.

-Journal of Manipulative and Physiological Therapeutics, Boline et al. (1995)

Cost Effectiveness

Chiropractic care appeared relatively cost effective for the treatment of chronic low back pain. Chiropractic and medical care performed comparably for acute patients. Practice based clinical outcomes were consistent with systematic reviews of spinal manipulative efficacy: manipulation based therapy is at least as good as and in some cases, better than other therapeusis.

Haas et al (2005), Journal of Manipulative and Physiological Therapeutics

Popularity of Chiropractic

Chiropractic is the largest, most regulated, and best recognized of the complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) professions. CAM patient surveys show that chiropractors are used more often than any other alternative provider group and patient satisfaction with chiropractic care is very high. There is steadily increasing patient use of chiropractic in the United States, which has tripled in the past two decades.

Meeker, Haldeman (2002), Annals of Internal Medicine