International Journal of Osteopathic Medicine
Volume 13, Issue 3 , Pages 83-84 , September 2010

Adverse events and treatment reactions in osteopathy

References 

  1. Rothwell DM, Bondy SJ, Williams JL. Chiropractic manipulation and stroke: a population-based case-control study. Stroke. 2001;32:1054–1060
  2. Haldeman S, Kohlbeck FJ, McGregor M. Unpredictability of cerebrovascular ischemia associated with cervical spine manipulation therapy. Spine. 2002;27:49–55
  3. Smith WSM, Johnston SC, Skalabrin EJ, Weaver M, Azari P, Albers GW, et al. Spinal manipulative therapy is an independent risk factor for vertebral artery dissection. Neurology. 2003;60:1424–1428
  4. Ernst E. Cerebrovascular complications associated with spinal manipulation. Phys Ther Rev. 2004;9:5–15
  5. Rosner AL. Chiropractic manipulation and stroke. A population-based case-control study. Stroke. 2001;32:2207–2208
  6. Breen A. Manipulation of the neck and stroke: time for more rigorous evidence. Med J Aust. 2002;176:364–365
  7. Taylor A, Kerry R. A ’system based’ approach to risk assessment of the cervical spine prior to manual therapy. Int J Osteopath Med. 2010;13:85–93
  8. Rubinstein SM, Leboeuf-Yde C, Knol DL, de Koekkoek TE, Pfeifle CE, van Tulder MW. The benefits outweigh the risks for patients undergoing chiropractic care for neck pain: a prospective, multicenter, cohort study. J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 2007;30:408–418
  9. Rivett D, Shirley D, Magarey M, Refshauge R. Clinical guidelines for assessing vertebrobasilar insufficiency in the management of cervical spine disorders. Australian Physiotherapy Association (APA); 2006;Retrieved 02.06.10 from: http://tinyurl.com/2a69m7x
  10. Barker S, Kesson M, Ashmore J, Turner G, Conway J, Stevens D. Guidance for pre-manipulative testing of the cervical spine. Man Ther. 2000;5:37–40
  11. The Canadian Chiropractic Association and the Canadian Federation of Chiropractic Regulatory Boards, Clinical Practice Guidelines Development Initiative, Guidelines Development Committee (GDC) comprising Anderson-Peacock E, Blouin JS, Bryans R, Danis N, Furlan A, Marcoux H, et al. Chiropractic clinical practice guideline: evidence-based treatment of adult neck pain not due to whiplash. J Can Chiropr Assoc. 2005;49:158–209Retrieved 02.06.10 from: http://tinyurl.com/2ejeeur
  12. Kerry R, Taylor A, Mitchell J, Brew J, Kiely R, Robertson G, et al. Cervical artery dysfunction and manipulative therapy information document. Manipulation association of chartered physiotherapists. Retrieved 02.06.10 from http://www.macpweb.org/home/index.php?m=file&f=3952006;
  13. General Chiropractic Council . C-100107 Minutes of the meeting of the GCC. General Chiropractic Council; 2007;p. 1–16
  14. Oppenheim JS, Spitzer DE, Segal DH. Non-vascular complications following spinal manipulation. Spine. 2006;5:660–666[discussion 666-7]
  15. Snelling NJ. Spinal manipulation in patients with disc herniation: a critical review of risk and benefit. Int J Osteopath Med. 2006;9:77–84
  16. Barrett AJ, Breen AC. Adverse effects of spinal manipulation. J R Soc Med. 2000;93:258–259
  17. MacPherson H, Thomas K, Walters S, Fitters M. A prospective survey of adverse events and treatment reactions following 34,000 consultations with professional acupuncturists. Acupunct Med. 2001;19:93–102
  18. Carnes D, Mullinger B, Underwood M. Defining adverse events in manual therapies: a modified Delphi consensus study. Manual Therapy. 2010;15(1):2–6
  19. McIlwraith B. A survey of 1200 osteopathic patients in the United Kingdom. J Osteopath Med. 2003;6:7–12
  20. Berthon J, Team 3. Research into archival data. Br Osteopath J. 1993;XII:32–39
  21. Hinkley H, Drysdale I. Audit of 1000 patients attending the clinic of the British College of Naturopathy and Osteopathy. Br Osteopath J. 1995;XVI:17–27
  22. Pringle M, Tyreman S. Study of 500 patients attending an osteopathic practice. Br J Gen Pract. 1993;43:15–18
  23. General Osteopathic Council . Osteopathy snapshot survey unpublished results. General Osteopathic Council; 1998;
  24. General Osteopathic Council . Snapshot survey 2001 unpublished results. General Osteopathic Council; 2001;
  25. UK BEAM Trial Team (a) . United Kingdom back pain exercise and manipulation (UK BEAM) randomised trial: effectiveness of physical treatments for back pain in primary care. Br Med J. 2004;329:
  26. UK BEAM Trial Team (b) . United Kingdom back pain exercise and manipulation (UK BEAM) randomised trial: cost effectiveness of physical treatments for back pain in primary care. Br Med J. 2004;329:doi:101136/bmj.38282.607859.AE
  27. Williams N, Edwards R, Linck P, Muntz R, Hibbs R, Wilkinson C, et al. Cost utility analysis of osteopathy in primary care: results from a pragmatic randomized controlled trial. Fam Pract. 2004;21:643–650
  28. Williams NH, Wilkinson C, Russell I, Edwards RT, Hibbs R, Linck P, et al. Randomized osteopathic manipulation study (ROMANS): pragmatic trial for spinal pain in primary care. Fam Pract. 2003;20:662–669
  29. Carnes D, Mars TS, Mullinger B, Froud R, Underwood M. Adverse events and manual therapy: a systematic review. Man Ther 2010, in press. doi:10.1016/j.math.12.006.

PII: S1746-0689(10)00054-4

doi: 10.1016/j.ijosm.2010.06.001

International Journal of Osteopathic Medicine
Volume 13, Issue 3 , Pages 83-84 , September 2010

Article Tools