Cervical spinal manipulation (CSM) and cervical mobilization are frequently used in patients with neck pain and headache. Pre-manipulative cervical instability and arterial integrity tests appear to be unreliable in identifying patients at risk at risk for adverse events. It would be valuable if patients at risk could be identified by specific characteristics during the preliminary screening.
Cervical spinal manipulation (CSM) and cervical mobilization are frequently used in patients with neck pain and headache. Pre-manipulative cervical instability and arterial integrity tests appear to be unreliable in identifying patients at risk for adverse events. It would be valuable if patients at risk could be identified by specific characteristics during the preliminary screening.Objective was to identify characteristics of 1) patients, 2) practitioners, 3) treatment process and 4) adverse events (AE) occurring after CSM or cervical mobilization.A systematic search was performed in PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, Web-of-science, AMED, and ICL (Index Chiropractic Literature) up to December 2014.Of the initial 1043 studies, 144 studies were included, containing 227 cases. 117 cases described male patients with a mean age of 45 (SD 12) and a mean age of 39 (SD 11) for females. Most patients were treated by chiropractors (66%). Manipulation was reported in 95% of the cases, and neck pain was the most frequent indication. Cervical arterial dissection (CAD) was reported in 57% (P = 0.21) of the cases and 45.8% had immediate onset symptoms. The overall distribution of gender for CAD is 55% (n = 71) for female and therefore opposite of the total AE.Patient characteristics were described poorly. No clear patient profile, related to the risk of AE after CSM, could be extracted. However, women seem more at risk for CAD. There seems to be under-reporting of cases. Further research should focus on a more uniform and complete registration of AE using standardized terminology.
Introduction:Major Adverse Events (MAE) following Cervical Spinal Manipulations (CSM) have been described anecdotally and are frequently discussed. Until now, exact incidence rates are unknown. Furthermore, there are doubts concerning the factors which may play a role in the occurrence of MAE.Objectives:Determine incidence rates of CSM following CSM.Inventory of patient and clinician characteristics.Introduce an incidence reporting system that fulfils all proposed criteria.Methods:A twofold prospective cohort study will be performed in The Netherlands. Underreporting is particularly likely to be present in primary care, but also likely to be present in secondary care.For this reason measurements will be done in both primary care (MCM -1 group) and secondary care (MCM – 2 group). Data will be collected from September 2016 to September 2017.Considering the sensitivity of the subject and to gain the participants trust, an independent privacy monitoring board is to be founded.Discussion:This study may be helpful in collecting incidence rates of MAE following CSM, collecting relevant factors that play a role in the occurrence of these MAE, collecting epidemiological data and gain insight in the behavior of health professionals.
