بيانات النشر: Umeå universitet, Obstetrik och gynekologi
Allied Health Research Unit, University of Central Lancashire, Preston, United Kingdom; Health Sciences, Doornfontein Campus, University of Johannesburg, Johannesburg, South Africa
Department of Regional Health Research, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark; University of Central Lancashire, Preston, United Kingdom
Department of Chiropractic Medicine, Integrative Spinal Research Group, Balgrist University Hospital, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
School of Sport, Exercise and Rehabilitation Sciences, University of Birmingham, Edgbaston, Birmingham, United Kingdom
Karolinska Institutet, Institute of Environmental Medicine, Nobels V. 13, Stockholm, Sweden; The Norwegian Chiropractors’ Research Foundation «Et Liv I Bevegelse», Lilleakerveien 31, Oslo, Norway
Department of Health and Functioning, Faculty of Health and Social Sciences, Western Norway University of Applied Sciences, Bergen, Norway
Université de Paris-Saclay, Gif-sur-Yvette, France
Advanced Physiotherapist Practitioner, University of Nottingham, A25 Academic Rheumatology, Clinical Sciences Building, City Hospital, Nottingham, United Kingdom
Allied Health Research Unit, University of Central Lancashire, Preston, United Kingdom
Synthesis, Economic Evaluation and Decision Science (SEEDS) Group, Health Technology Assessment Unit | Applied Health Research Hub, University of Central Lancashire, Preston, United Kingdom; Methodological Innovation, Development, Adaptation and Support (MIDAS) Group, NIHR Applied Research Collaboration North West Coast (ARC NWC), Liverpool, United Kingdom
Center for Muscle and Joint Health, Department of Sports Science and Clinical Biomechanics, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark; Medical Research Unit, Spine Centre of Southern Denmark, Lillebaelt Hospital, University Hospital of Southern Denmark, Middelfart, Denmark
School of Health Sciences, Medical School, Queen’s Medical Centre, University of Nottingham, Room B228a, Nottingham, United Kingdom
Division of Physiotherapy and Rehabilitation Sciences, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, United Kingdom
Department of Health Professions, Faculty of Health and Education, Brooks Building, Manchester Metropolitan University, Manchester, United Kingdom
Department of Regional Health Research, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark; Center for Muscle and Joint Health, Department of Sports Science and Clinical Biomechanics, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark; Medical Research Unit, Spine Centre of Southern Denmark, Lillebaelt Hospital, University Hospital of Southern Denmark, Middelfart, Denmark
University College of Osteopathy, 275 Borough High Street, London, United Kingdom
نبذة مختصرة : Background: Spinal manipulation (SM) has been claimed to change anatomy, either in structure or position, and that these changes may be the cause of clinical improvements. The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate and synthesise the peer-reviewed literature on the current evidence of anatomical changes in response to SM. Methods: The review was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42022304971) and reporting was guided by the standards of the PRISMA Statement. We searched Medline, Embase, CINAHL, AMED, Cochrane Library all databases, PEDro, and the Index to Chiropractic Literature from inception to 11 March 2022 and updated on 06 June 2023. Search terms included manipulation, adjustment, chiropractic, osteopathy, spine and spine-related structures. We included primary research studies that compared outcomes with and without SM regardless of study design. Manipulation was defined as high-velocity, low-amplitude thrust delivered by hand to the spine or directly related joints. Included studies objectively measured a potential change in an anatomical structure or in position. We developed a novel list of methodological quality items in addition to a short, customized list of risk of bias (RoB) items. We used quality and RoB items together to determine whether an article was credible or not credible. We sought differences in outcomes between SM and control groups for randomised controlled trials and crossover studies, and between pre- and post-SM outcomes for other study designs. We reported, in narrative form, whether there was a change or not. Results: The search retrieved 19,572 articles and 20 of those were included for review. Study topics included vertebral position (n = 3) facet joint space (n = 5), spinal stiffness (n = 3), resting muscle thickness (n = 6), intervertebral disc pressure (n = 1), myofascial hysteresis (n = 1), and further damage to already damaged arteries (n = 1). Eight articles were considered credible. The credible articles indicated that lumbar facet joint space increased and spinal ...
Processing Request
No Comments.