2012Focus on Alternative and Complementary TherapiesRequires access

Chiropractic spinal manipulation: what does the ‘best’ evidence show?

Edzard Ernst

Open publisher page 1 citations

Abstract

Abstract Background The evidence of effectiveness of chiropractic is controversial. Objectives To summarise all Cochrane reviews of chiropractic spinal manipulation. Methods The Cochrane database was searched for all Cochrane reviews of chiropractic manipulation. Cochrane reviews with the terms ‘chiropractic’, ‘manipulation’ or ‘manual therapy’ in the title, abstract or keywords were considered. Protocols of reviews were excluded, as were studies that did not focus specifically on chiropractic spinal manipulation. Data extraction was performed by the author according to predefined criteria. Results Five Cochrane reviews were eligible for inclusion. Due to clinical and statistical heterogeneity, a meta‐analysis was not possible and the findings of the reviews were discussed narratively. The five reviews related to the following conditions: low back pain, asthma, dysmenorrhoea and neck pain. Each review included between three and 39 primary studies. Cautiously positive conclusions emerged for low back pain and neck pain. For the two non‐spinal conditions, the conclusions were negative. Conclusions Cochrane reviews, generally considered to be the most reliable evidence, provide limited evidence that chiropractic may be effective for low back and neck pain, but failed to support the use of chiropractic for non‐spinal conditions.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

Abstract Background The evidence of effectiveness of chiropractic is controversial. Objectives To summarise all Cochrane reviews of chiropractic spinal manipulation. Methods The Cochrane database was searched for all Cochrane reviews of chiropractic manipulation. Cochrane reviews with the terms ‘chiropractic’, ‘manipulation’ or ‘manual therapy’ in the title, abstract or keywords were considered. Protocols of reviews were excluded, as were studies that did not focus specifically on chiropractic spinal manipulation. Data extraction was performed by the author according to predefined criteria. Results Five Cochrane reviews were eligible for inclusion. Due to clinical and statistical heterogeneity, a meta‐analysis was not possible and the findings of the reviews were discussed narratively. The five reviews related to the following conditions: low back pain, asthma, dysmenorrhoea and neck pain. Each review included between three and 39 primary studies. Cautiously positive conclusions emerged for low back pain and neck pain. For the two non‐spinal conditions, the conclusions were negative. Conclusions Cochrane reviews, generally considered to be the most reliable evidence, provide limited evidence that chiropractic may be effective for low back and neck pain, but failed to support the use of chiropractic for non‐spinal conditions.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 1 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

Abstract Background The evidence of effectiveness of chiropractic is controversial. Objectives To summarise all Cochrane reviews of chiropractic spinal manipulation. Methods The Cochrane database was searched for all Cochrane reviews of chiropractic manipulation. Cochrane reviews with the terms ‘chiropractic’, ‘manipulation’ or ‘manual therapy’ in the title, abstract or keywords were considered. Protocols of reviews were excluded, as were studies that did not focus specifically on chiropractic spinal manipulation. Data extraction was performed by the author according to predefined criteria. Results Five Cochrane reviews were eligible for inclusion. Due to clinical and statistical heterogeneity, a meta‐analysis was not possible and the findings of the reviews were discussed narratively. The five reviews related to the following conditions: low back pain, asthma, dysmenorrhoea and neck pain. Each review included between three and 39 primary studies. Cautiously positive conclusions emerged for low back pain and neck pain. For the two non‐spinal conditions, the conclusions were negative. Conclusions Cochrane reviews, generally considered to be the most reliable evidence, provide limited evidence that chiropractic may be effective for low back and neck pain, but failed to support the use of chiropractic for non‐spinal conditions.

Key concepts: Chiropractic, Spinal manipulation, Medicine, Neck pain, Manual therapy, Physical therapy, Low back pain, Data extraction

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Chiropractic spinal manipulation: what does the ‘best’ evidence show? — Research Paper | ScholarLens