X-rays have been the gold standard for diagnosis, evaluation, and management of spinal scoliosis for decades as other assessment methods are indirect, too expensive, or not practical in practice. The average scoliosis patient will receive 10 to 25 spinal X-rays over several years equating to a maximum estimated dose of 10 to 25 mGy. Some patients, those getting diagnosed at a younger age and receiving early and ongoing treatments, may receive up to 40 to 50 X-rays, approaching at most 50 mGy. There are concerns that repeated radiographs given to patients are carcinogenic. Some studies have used the linear no-threshold model to derive cancer-risk estimates; however, it is invalid for low-dose irradiation (ie, X-rays); these estimates are untrue. Other studies have calculated cancer-risk ratios from long-term health data of historic scoliosis cohorts. Since data indicate reduced cancer rates in a cohort receiving a total radiation dose between 50 and 300 mGy, it is unlikely that scoliosis patients would get cancer from repeated X-rays. Moreover, since the threshold for leukemia is about 1100 mGy, scoliosis patients will not likely develop cancers from spinal X-rays. Scoliosis patients likely have long-term health consequences, including cancers, from the actual disease entity itself and not from protracted X-ray radiation exposures that are essential and indeed safe.

To systematically review the literature on the use of cervical extension traction methods for increasing cervical lordosis in those with hypolordosis and cervical spine disorders. [Methods] Literature searches for controlled clinical trials were performed in Pubmed, PEDro, Cochrane, and ICL databases. Search terms included iterations related to the cervical spine, neck pain and disorders, and extension traction rehabilitation. [Results] Of 1,001 initially located articles, 9 met the inclusion/exclusion criteria. The trials demonstrated increases in radiographically measured lordosis of 12-18°, over 5-15 weeks, after 15-60 treatment sessions. Untreated controls/ comparison groups not receiving extension traction showed no increase in cervical lordosis. Several trials demonstrated that both traction and comparison treatment groups experienced immediate pain relief. Traction treatment groups maintained their pain and disability improvements up to 1.5 years later. Comparative groups not receiving lordosis improvement experienced regression of symptoms towards pre-treatment values by 1 years' follow-up.[Conclusion] There are several high-quality controlled clinical trials substantiating that increasing cervical lordosis by extension traction as part of a spinal rehabilitation program reduces pain and disability and improves functional measures, and that these improvements are maintained long-term. Comparative groups who receive multimodal rehabilitation but not extension traction experience temporary relief that regresses after treatment cessation.

[Purpose] To systematically review controlled trial evidence for the use of lumbar extension traction by Chiropractic BioPhysics ® methods for the purpose of increasing lumbar lordosis in those with hypolordosis and low back disorders. [Methods] Literature searches were performed in Pubmed, PEDro, CINAHL, Cochrane, and ICL databases. Search terms included iterations related to the lumbar spine, low back pain and extension traction rehabilitation. [Results] Four articles detailing 2 randomized and 1 non-randomized trial were located. Trials demonstrated increases in radiographic measured lordosis of 7–11°, over 10–12 weeks, after 30–36 treatment sessions. Randomized trials demonstrated traction treated groups mostly maintained lordosis correction, pain relief, and disability after 6-months follow-up. The non-randomized trial showed lordosis and pain intensity were maintained with periodic maintenance care for 1.5 years. Importantly, control/comparison groups had no increase in lumbar lordosis. Randomized trials showed comparison groups receiving physiotherapy-less the traction, had temporary pain reduction during treatment that regressed towards baseline levels as early as 3-months after treatment. [Conclusion] Limited but good quality evidence substantiates that the use of extension traction methods in rehabilitation programs definitively increases lumbar hypolordosis. Preliminarily, these studies indicate these methods provide longer-term relief to patients with low back disorders versus conventional rehabilitation approaches tested.

There is substantial evidence for normal relationships between spine and postural parameters, as measured from radiographs of standing patients. Sagittal balance, cervical lordosis, thoracic kyphosis, lumbar lordosis, pelvic tilt, and the more complex understanding of the interrelations between these essential components of normal stance have evolved to where there are known, established thresholds for normalcy. These spinal parameters are reliably measured from X-ray images and serve as goals of care in the treatment of spine and postural disorders. Initial and follow-up spinal imaging by X-ray is thus crucial for the practice of contemporary and evidence-based structural rehabilitation. Recent studies have demonstrated that improvement in the spine and posture by nonsurgical methods offers superior long-term patient outcomes versus conventional methods that only temporarily treat pain/dysfunction. Low-dose radiation from repeated X-ray imaging in treating subluxated patients is substantially below the known threshold for harm and is within background radiation exposures. Since alternative imaging methods are not clinically practical at this time, plain radiography remains the standard for spinal imaging. It is safe when used in a repeated fashion for quantifying pre–post spine and postural subluxation and deformity patterns in the practice of structural correction methods by chiropractic and other manual medicine practices.

Radiographic imaging for scoliosis screening, diagnosis, treatment, and management is the gold standard assessment tool. Scoliosis patients receive many repeat radiographs, typically 10-25 and as many as 40-50, equating to a maximum 50 mGy of cumulative exposure. It is argued this amount of radiation exposure is not carcinogenic to scoliosis patients for 5 main reasons: 1. Estimated theoretical cumulative effective doses remain below the carcinogenic dose threshold; 2. Scoliosis patient x-rays are delivered in serial exposures and therefore, mitigate any potential cumulative effect; 3. Linear no-threshold cancer risk estimates from scoliosis patient cohorts are flawed due to faulty science; 4. Standardized incidence/mortality ratios demonstrating increased cancers from aged scoliosis cohorts are confounded by the effects of the disease entity itself making it impossible to claim cause and effect resulting from low-dose radiation exposures from spinal imaging; 5. Children are not more susceptible to radiation damage than adults. Radiophobia concerns from patients, parents, and doctors over repeat imaging for scoliosis treatment and management is not justified; it adds unnecessary anxiety to the patient (and their parents) and interferes with optimal medical management. X-rays taken in the evidence-based management of scoliosis should be taken without hesitation or concern about negligible radiation exposures.