Objective: The purpose of this review was to evaluate the effectiveness of conservative nondrug, nonsurgical interventions, either alone or in combination, for conditions of the shoulder. Methods: The review was conducted from March 2016 to November 2016 in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA), and was registered with PROSPERO. Eligibility criteria included randomized controlled trials (RCTs), systematic reviews, or meta-analyses studying adult patients with a shoulder diagnosis. Interventions qualified if they did not involve prescription medication or surgical procedures, although these could be used in the comparison group or groups. At least 2 independent reviewers assessed the quality of each study using the Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network checklists. Shoulder conditions addressed were shoulder impingement syndrome (SIS), rotator cuff-associated disorders (RCs), adhesive capsulitis (AC), and nonspecific shoulder pain. Results: Twenty-five systematic reviews and 44 RCTs met inclusion criteria. Low-to moderate-quality evidence supported the use of manual therapies for all 4 shoulder conditions. Exercise, particularly combined with physical therapy protocols, was beneficial for SIS and AC. For SIS, moderate evidence supported several passive modalities. For RC, physical therapy protocols were found beneficial but not superior to surgery in the long term. Moderate evidence supported extracorporeal shockwave therapy for calcific tendinitis RC. Low-level laser was the only modality for which there was moderate evidence supporting its use for all 4 conditions. Conclusion: The findings of this literature review may help inform practitioners who use conservative methods (eg, doctors of chiropractic, physical therapists, and other manual therapists) regarding the levels of evidence for modalities used for common shoulder conditions. (J Manipulative Physiol Ther 2017;40:293-319)

BackgroundSpinal epidural lipomatosis is an uncommon source of neurogenic claudication. We present two cases of spinal epidural lipomatosis as it relates to diagnosis, management, and a possible association with common medical intervention.Case presentationCase 1: 63-year old male patient presented with neurogenic claudication symptoms, but without evidence of bony central canal stenosis on lumbar computed tomography. He entered a trial of spinal manipulation with transient beneficial gains after seven appointments, but no durable change in neurogenic claudication. An MRI was recommended at this point which revealed grade III spinal epidural lipomatosis at the L5/S1 level.Case 2: 51-year old male patient presented to a pain management physician with radicular symptoms for a series of lumbar epidural steroid injections. He completed a series of three lumbar epidural steroid injections with only short-term benefit. A repeat MRI demonstrated the presence of grade I (borderline grade II) spinal epidural lipomatosis.ConclusionsThe first case illustrates a limitation of ruling out central canal stenosis with computed tomography for patients unable to undergo an MRI. The second case demonstrates a possible association between steroid injections and spinal epidural lipomatosis. An association of this kind has not been established; further research is needed to determine the significance.

This literature review examined studies that described practice, utilization, and policy of chiropractic services within military and veteran health care environments. A systematic search of Medline, CINAHL, and Index to Chiropractic Literature was performed from inception through April 2015. Thirty articles met inclusion criteria. Studies reporting utilization and policy show that chiropractic services are successfully implemented in various military and veteran health care settings and that integration varies by facility. Doctors of chiropractic that are integrated within military and veteran health care facilities manage common neurological, musculoskeletal, and other conditions; severe injuries obtained in combat; complex cases; and cases that include psychosocial factors. Chiropractors collaboratively manage patients with other providers and focus on reducing morbidity for veterans and rehabilitating military service members to full duty status. Patient satisfaction with chiropractic services is high. Preliminary findings show that chiropractic management of common conditions shows significant improvement.

Objective: To develop an evidence-based clinical practice guideline (CPG) through a broad-based consensus process on best practices for chiropractic management of patients with chronic musculoskeletal (MSK) pain. Design: CPG based on evidence-based recommendations of a panel of experts in chronic MSK pain management. Methods: Using systematic reviews identified in an initial literature search, a steering committee of experts in research and management of patients with chronic MSK pain drafted a set of recommendations. Additional supportive literature was identified to supplement gaps in the evidence base. A multidisciplinary panel of experienced practitioners and educators rated the recommendations through a formal Delphi consensus process using the

Objective: The purpose of this report is to present the case of a 10-year-old football player with bilateral plantar fasciitis who improved with a multimodal conservative approach using chiropractic treatment. Clinical Features: The patient presented with bilateral plantar heel pain at the origin of the plantar fascia with a duration of 3 weeks. Intervention and Outcome: Treatment was provided for 6 visits over a 6-week period. Chiropractic care consisted of manipulative therapy, soft tissue therapy, and home rehabilitation exercises. The soft tissue technique (Graston Technique) was performed to the origin of the plantar fascia and the triceps surae bilaterally. High-velocity, low-amplitude manipulation was applied to the restricted ankle mortise joint. After 6 treatments, the patient reported resolution of foot pain bilaterally and improvements in activities of daily livings. Three months later, the patient reported no further complications and the absence of pain. Conclusion: This patient with bilateral plantar fasciitis improved after a course of a multimodal treatment approach using chiropractic manipulation and soft tissue therapy in addition to exercise and stretching therapies.

Background The purpose was to identify, summarize, and rate scholarly literature that describes manipulative and manual therapy following lumbar surgery. Methods The review was conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) and was registered with PROSPERO. PubMed, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, ICL, CINAHL, and PEDro were searched through July 2019. Articles were screened independently by at least two reviewers for inclusion. Articles included described the practice, utilization, and/or clinical decision making to post surgical intervention with manipulative and/or manual therapies. Data extraction consisted of principal findings, pain and function/disability, patient satisfaction, opioid/medication consumption, and adverse events. Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network critical appraisal checklists were utilized to assess study quality. Results Literature search yielded 1916 articles, 348 duplicates were removed, 109 full-text articles were screened and 50 citations met inclusion criteria. There were 37 case reports/case series, 3 randomized controlled trials, 3 pilot studies, 5 systematic/scoping/narrative reviews, and 2 commentaries. Conclusion The findings of this review may help inform practitioners who utilize manipulative and/or manual therapies regarding levels of evidence for patients with prior lumbar surgery. Following lumbar surgery, the evidence indicated inpatient neural mobilization does not improve outcomes. There is inconclusive evidence to recommend for or against most manual therapies after most surgical interventions.

This article describes the indications for fusion, common surgical practice, potential complications, and relevant published chiropractic literature. This review includes 10 cases that showed positive benefits from chiropractic manipulation, flexion-distraction, and/or manipulation under anesthesia for postfusion lumbar pain. Chiropractic care may have a role in helping patients in pain who have undergone lumbar fusion surgery.

IntroductionThere are limited available research and guidance regarding the use of spinal manipulative therapy (SMT) in patients with low back-related symptoms following lumbar spine surgery, a condition called persistent spinal pain syndrome type 2 (PSPS-2). This publication outlines a review protocol to identify and synthesise individual participant data (IPD) to examine associations between patient, clinical and surgical variables and SMT application in adults with PSPS-2.Methods and analysisPubMed, OVID, Web of Science, Scopus, PEDro, Index to Chiropractic Literature and KoreaMed will be searched from inception to 1 January 2022 without language restrictions. Case reports, series, observational studies and cases from grey literature of adults receiving SMT for PSPS-2 will be included. Two investigators will independently screen citations, abstracts and full-text articles. A risk-of-bias assessment will be performed in duplicate to rate cases according to exposure and outcome ascertainment and data completeness. Data extraction will be performed in duplicate and missing IPD will be requested from corresponding authors. Multiple binary logistic regression will be used to identify independent predictors of the use of lumbar–SMT, lumbar–manual-thrust SMT and SMT within 1-year postsurgery. Patient, clinical and surgical variables will be summarised using descriptive statistics, while SMT-related outcomes (lumbar–SMT, lumbar–manual-thrust SMT and 1-year surgery-to-SMT interval) will be described using adjusted ORs with 95% CIs.Ethics and disseminationThis study was deemed not human subjects research by the University Hospitals’ institutional review board. The results of this review will be disseminated at conferences and/or published in a peer-reviewed journal.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42021250039.