If you go on Twitter you will find that chiropractors are keen like mustard to promote the idea that, after a car accident, you should consult a chiropractor. Here is just one Tweet that might stand for hundreds, perhaps even thousands:
Recovering from a car accident? If you have accident-related injuries such as whiplash, chiropractic care may provide relief. Treatments like spinal manipulation and soft tissue therapy can aid in your recovery.
In case you don’t like Twitter, you could also go on the Internet where you find hundreds of websites that promote the same idea. Here are just two examples:
There is no question, chiropractors earn much of their living by treating patients suffering from whiplash (neck injury caused by sudden back and forth movement of the neck often causing neck pain and stiffness, shoulder pain, and headache) after a car accident with spinal manipulation.
Why?
There are two not mutually exclusive possibilities:
- They think it is effective.
- It brings in good money.
I have no doubt about the latter notion, yet I think we should question the first. Is there really good evidence that chiropractic manipulations are effective for whiplash?
When I was head of the PMR department at the University of Vienna, treating whiplash was my team’s daily bread. At the time, our strategy was to treat each patient according to the whiplash stage and to his/her individual signs and symptoms. Manipulations were generally considered to be contra-indicated. But that was about 30 years ago. Perhaps the evidence has now changed. Perhaps manipulation therapy has been shown to be effective for certain types of whiplash injuries?
To find out, I did a few Medline searches. These did, however, not locate compelling evidence for spinal manipulation as a treatment of any stage of whiplash injuries. Here is an example of the evidence I found:
In 2008, the Bone and Joint Decade 2000-2010 Task Force on Neck Pain and Its Associated Disorders (Neck Pain Task Force) found limited evidence on the effectiveness of manual therapies, passive physical modalities, or acupuncture for the management of whiplash-associated disorders (WAD) or neck pain and associated disorders (NAD). This review aimed to update the findings of the Neck Pain Task Force, which examined the effectiveness of manual therapies, passive physical modalities, and acupuncture for the management of WAD or NAD. Its findings show the following: Evidence from 15 evaluation studies suggests that for recent neck pain and associated disorders grades I-II, cervical and thoracic manipulation provides no additional benefit to high-dose supervised exercises.
But this is most puzzling!
Why do chiropractors promote their manipulations for whiplash, if there is no compelling evidence that it does more good than harm? Again, there are two possibilities:
- They erroneously believe it to be effective.
- They don’t care but are in it purely for the money.
Whatever it is – and obviously not all chiropractors would have the same reason – I must point out that, in both cases, they behave unethically. Not being informed about the evidence related to the interventions used clearly violates healthcare ethics, and so does financially not informing and exploiting patients.
41 Responses to Chiropractic manipulations after car accidents: best avoided, if you ask me
Leave a Reply
This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.
luckily thousands of patients don’t (ask you)
we treat RTA patients in the ER at my hospital all the time with good results but please don’t let me stop you in your crusade
LONG LIVE NON-EVIDENCE-BASED QUACKERY!
funny YOU should say that since most of your comments are based on assumptions and cherry picking based medicine… but please don’t let me stop you…while we actually treat patients
OH, DEAR!
when quacks have no arguments left, they use ad hominem!
https://edzardernst.com/2012/12/ad-hominem-attacks-are-signs-of-victories-of-reason-over-unreason/
But not in UK NHS Emergency Departments?
Which hospital is this? (So I know to avoid it)
Let us not forget to list Dr Katz, Chiropractor on your website list. He is an authority on the non-surgical management of whiplash disorders caused by motor vehicle accidents. https://katzchiropractic.com/overview/. In addition, this “quack” according to your opinion is a published author in a Harvard University peer-reviewed journal, Brain Circulation.https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31001596/ I find your quest to degrade the chiropractic profession’s contribution to human health and welfare disappointing and in my opinion, a fruitless endeavour.
thank you for offering the usual fallacies;
asking chiros for EVIDENCE seems to be a fruitless endeavor!
All readers are advised to read my comments on Edzard’s most recent blog that follows this one. Asking chiropractors for evidence is very much NOT a fruitless endeavour! https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0383/11/19/5768
yes, it unearths all sorts of rubbish
Mr Epstein wrote “Let us not forget to list Dr Katz, Chiropractor on your website list. …”
I just discovered this highly entertaining video of “Dr” Epstein working with a patient
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZgYHUWIWeBo
If only he restricted himself to working with the undead people in Australia would be a lot safer
I’m happy you enjoyed my lighthearted video. After 38 years in clinical practice, I’m still clear of any catastrophic event with a patient. The risk is real but rare…very rare.
how do you know?
maybe a % of those pts who never came back had strokes?
I see that there is another case ofvertebral artery dissection following chiropractic manipulation featured in The Independent yesterday https://www.msn.com/en-gb/health/medical/my-daughter-went-for-a-routine-chiropractor-appointment-now-she-s-paralysed/ar-AA12iFKg?ocid=msedgntp&cvid=2140faaa430041eca5fd4df2ec012e71
https://edzardernst.com/2022/07/catastrophic-injuries-after-chiropractic-treatment/
Hah! I had a feeling I’d encountered the report before! I do actually read this blog – but memory, you know, as one gets older……
Anyway, It’s good that this tragic case has received some further media coverage.
Memory!
Yes, I know the feeling
Interesting:
“Passive joint mobilisation / manipulation may be given in combination with active exercises, in situations where exercise and advice alone are not proving effective, provided there is evidence of continuing measurable improvement. This technique should be restricted to registered health professionals trained in the specific methods of passive joint mobilisation and manipulation and undertaken according to current professional standards.”
Clinical guidelines for best practice management
of acute and chronic whiplash-associated disorders
Commissioned by the South Australian
Centre for Trauma and Injury Recovery (TRACsa)
“Our findings suggest that passive treatments are frequently applied for WAD, which is of significant concern, and supported by a recent cross-sectional survey in which 80% of Australian GPs identified manipulation as a recommended treatment [54].”
Evidence-based care in high- and low-risk groups following whiplash injury: a multi-centre inception cohort study. BMC Health Serv Res 19, 806 (2019).
“Although the active implementation program increased guideline-consistent practice, patient outcomes and cost of care were not affected.”
Evaluating two implementation strategies for whiplash guidelines in physiotherapy: A cluster-randomised trial Australian Journal of Physiotherapy
Volume 52, Issue 3, 2006, Pages 165-174
“Scientific evidence for the diagnosis and physiotherapeutic management of whiplash is sparse; therefore, consensus is used in different parts of the guideline.” Clinical Practice Guideline for the Physiotherapy of Patients With Whiplash-Associated Disorders March 2002Spine 27(4):412-22
“ It would seem logical that a primary aim of early whiplash management would be to decrease levels of pain. Consistent with this are current recommendations for pain management that advocate adequate pain relief following acute injury.27, 28 Despite this, very few trials of pain relief using medication in the early stages of whiplash have been conducted.”
Primary care management of acute whiplash injury. Chapter 11. Michele Sterling, Justin Kenardy
1) “may be given” does not mean ” is effective”
2) clinical guidelines are not always trustworthy or based on best evidence
3) surveys do not generate good evidence of efficacy
4) BMC Health Serv Res 19, 806 (2019) = an observational study that allows no conclusions about efficacy
5) Australian Journal of Physiotherapy Volume 52, Issue 3, 2006, Pages 165-174 “Although the active implementation program increased guideline-consistent practice, patient outcomes and cost of care were not affected.” This was not a trial testing SMT
6) Spine 27(4):412-22 “Scientific evidence for the diagnosis and physiotherapeutic management of whiplash is sparse; therefore, consensus is used in different parts of the guideline. The guideline reflects the current state of knowledge of the effective and appropriate physiotherapy in whiplash patients. More and better research is necessary to validate this guideline in the future.”
THANK YOU FOR SUCH A GREAT EFFORT DEMONSTRATING THAT THERE IS NO GOOD EVIDENCE!
7)
EE: THANK YOU FOR SUCH A GREAT EFFORT DEMONSTRATING THAT THERE IS NO GOOD EVIDENCE!
It appears there is “no good evidence” for any therapy, active or passive, for a low grade whiplash (other than perhaps caring attention). So shall we conclude those without “good evidence” are all “unethical”?
thank you for demonstrating your proficiency in touting fallacies.
TU QUOQUE
because your neighbor beats up his wife, you are entitled to do the same?
_________
in any case, not all treatments are not evidence-based
so, you know that you are posting rubbish but try to pass it to the less astute reader as evidence?
you know this is less than honest, don’t you?
EE: so, you know that you are posting rubbish but try to pass it to the less astute reader as evidence? you know this is less than honest, don’t you?
where did i say I was posting anything on this topic as evidence? I simply stated it was interesting and then I even stated that there is no “good evidence” for any therapy (at least for lower grades).
Do you need new glasses?
I see!
what you post is just interesting but not evidence
GOOD TO KNOW
it is interesting when one considers what is or is not ethical, based upon your criteria. Seems like a lot of unethical stuff going on out there.
Another one.
“ In view of the current evidence, clinical guidelines advocate that manual therapy can be used in conjunction with exercise and advice, if there is evidence of continued benefit via validated outcome measures.37”
Journal of Physiotherapy
Volume 60, Issue 1, March 2014, Pages 5-12
interesting non-evidence
Wrong, again.
Grade C evidence
“Body of evidence provides some support for recommendation(s) but care should be taken in its application.”
Sterling M (2014) Physiotherapy management of whiplash-associated disorders (WAD). Journal of Physiotherapy 60: 5–12
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jphys.2013.12.004
Mentions physiotherapists 15 times; physiotherapist 4 times; chiro… 0 times. Therefore it provides zero evidence against: Chiropractic manipulations after car accidents: best avoided, if you ask me.
So it’s ok if a PT does it?
probably not but it’s better because
– physios do not tell pts all the nonsense chiros do
– physios use less thrusts
EE: physios do not tell pts all the nonsense chiros do
Yah, it’s just different nonsense.
like ” don’t consult a chiro”?
more like this:
https://accessphysicaltherapywellness.com/importance-of-posture/
The UK Advertising Standards Authority do not permit chiropractors to advertise their treatments for whiplash because “The ASA and CAP have not seen evidence sufficient to support claims that chiropractic is effective for the treatment of whiplash, or for neck pain arising from other types of injury”. https://www.asa.org.uk/static/uploaded/330d2d20-28e3-4cf2-b4772c19555c2afa.pdf
I think they think chiropractic and spinal manipulation are synonyms, they are not.
“It emphasises manual therapy including spinal manipulation and other joint and soft-tissue manipulation, joint mobilisation, and includes exercises, and health and lifestyle counselling.”
Also,
“The 2017 evidence review found some evidence for the use of manual therapy for whiplash, but it was not sufficiently conclusive to support the claim that chiropractic is effective for whiplash.”
I wonder, what approach does have “sufficiently conclusive” evidence?
“I wonder, what approach does have “sufficiently conclusive” evidence?”
I bet you do because you are good at fallacies.
EE: I bet you do because you are good at fallacies.
Nah, I am just not limited to the topics of this little blog.
oh, how could I forget?
EE: oh, how could I forget?
Old age?