Revision as of 10:33, 4 December 2012 editPigsonthewing (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Event coordinators, Extended confirmed users, Page movers, File movers, IP block exemptions, New page reviewers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers, Template editors266,399 edits dead link; now a spam site← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 21:45, 22 December 2024 edit undoMlejmle (talk | contribs)26 editsm Not sure who "Mainstream Medicine" is. Let's make sure our wording reflects the actual group of people behind these claims! | ||
(329 intermediate revisions by more than 100 users not shown) | |||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{About|the ] concept|medical subluxations|Subluxation}} | {{About|the ] concept|medical subluxations|Subluxation}} | ||
{{short description|Chiropractic concept}} | |||
In ], '''vertebral subluxation''' is a set of ] of the spinal column.{{Specify|date=October 2012}} Those chiropractors who assert this concept (specifically, "straight chiropractors") also add a visceral component to the definition. Chiropractors maintain that a vertebral subluxation complex is a dysfunctional biomechanical spinal segment which is fixated. Chiropractors additionally assert that the dysfunction actively alters neurological function, which in turn, is believed to lead to neuromusculoskeletal and ] disorders. The ] acknowledges this difference between the medical and chiropractic definitions of a ]. Medical doctors only refer to "significant structural displacements" as subluxations, whereas chiropractors suggest that a dysfunctional segment, whether displaced significantly or not, should be referred to as a subluxation.<ref name="WHO_guidelines"/> This difference has been noted in the proceedings of the chiropractic profession's ''Mercy Center Consensus Conference'': "The chiropractic profession refers to this concept as a 'subluxation'. This use of the word ''subluxation'' should not be confused with the term's precise anatomic usage, which considers only the anatomical relationships."<ref name=Guidelines>Haldeman, Chapman-Smith, Petersen. p. 103.</ref> | |||
{{npov|date=May 2024}} | |||
{{rewrite|date=May 2024}} | |||
{{Infobox:Alternative therapy | |||
|name = Vertebral subluxation | |||
|image = File:Kiropraktisk ledd-korreksjon av rygg.jpg | |||
|caption = A ] performing a precise vertebral adjustment of the ] on a patient | |||
|NCCIH = Manipulative and body-based | |||
|benefits = clearing nerve pressure and so enabling the body to heal by itself | |||
|risks = No proven risks, when executed correctly | |||
|legality = differs from country to country | |||
| | |||
}} | |||
{{alternative medicine sidebar|fringe|diagnoses}} | |||
In ], a '''vertebral subluxation''' means pressure on nerves, abnormal functions creating a lesion in some portion of the body, either in its action or makeup (defined by D.D. Palmer and B.J. Palmer, founders of chiropractic). Chiropractors claim subluxations are not necessarily visible on ]s. | |||
The chiropractic vertebral subluxation complex has been a source of controversy since its inception in 1895 due to its ] origins and claims of far reaching effects on health and disease. Although some chiropractic associations and colleges support the concept of subluxation,<ref name=Cooperstein_ACC_paradigm/> many in the chiropractic profession reject it and shun the use of this term as a diagnosis<ref name=Cooperstein_ACC_paradigm/><ref name=Petersen/> In the United States and in Canada the term ''nonallopathic lesion'' is commonly used in place of ''subluxation'' as a diagnosis, and is considered a more accurate descriptor of lesions that chiropractors treat most commonly.<ref name=Definition>Robert D. Mootz, DC; Paul G. Shekelle, MD, PhD. </ref> | |||
] continue to follow Palmer's tradition, claiming that vertebral subluxation has considerable health effects and also adding a visceral component to the definition. Most medical experts and some ] consider these ideas to be ] and dispute these claims, as there is no scientific ] for the existence of chiropractic subluxations or proof they or their treatment have any effects on health.<ref name=History-Primer2>{{cite web|title=Chiropractic history: a primer | author=Joseph C. Keating Jr. |author2=Cleveland CS III |author3=Menke M |url=http://www.historyofchiropractic.org/assets/documents/ChiroHistoryPrimer.pdf |year=2005 |access-date=2008-06-16 |publisher=Association for the History of Chiropractic |archive-date=19 June 2013 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130619204140/http://www.historyofchiropractic.org/assets/documents/ChiroHistoryPrimer.pdf |quote=A significant and continuing barrier to scientific progress within chiropractic are the anti-scientific and pseudo-scientific ideas (Keating 1997b) which have sustained the profession throughout a century of intense struggle with political medicine. Chiropractors' tendency to assert the meaningfulness of various theories and methods as a counterpoint to allopathic charges of quackery has created a defensiveness which can make critical examination of chiropractic concepts difficult (Keating and Mootz 1989). One example of this conundrum is the continuing controversy about the presumptive target of DCs' adjustive interventions: subluxation (Gatterman 1995; Leach 1994). |url-status=dead |author-link=Joseph C. Keating Jr }}</ref><ref name=Keating-subluxation /><ref>{{cite journal | author=Joseph C. Keating Jr. |journal=Skeptical Inquirer |volume=21 |issue=4 |pages=37–43 |title=Chiropractic: science and antiscience and pseudoscience side by side |year=1997|author-link=Joseph C. Keating Jr }}</ref><ref>{{cite book|author= Phillips RB|chapter= The evolution of vitalism and materialism and its impact on philosophy|pages=65–76|title= Principles and Practice of Chiropractic|edition=3rd|veditors=Haldeman S, Dagenais S, Budgell B |publisher=]|year=2005|isbn=978-0-07-137534-4|display-editors=etal}}</ref><ref name=Reggars2011>{{cite journal | author = Reggars JW | title = Chiropractic at the crossroads or are we just going around in circles? | journal = Chiropractic & Manual Therapies| volume = 19 | page = 11 | year = 2011 | pmid = 21599991 | pmc = 3119029 | doi = 10.1186/2045-709X-19-11 | doi-access = free }}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |vauthors=Suter E, Vanderheyden LC, Trojan LS, Verhoef MJ, Armitage GD | title = How important is research-based practice to chiropractors and massage therapists? | journal = Journal of Manipulative and Physiological Therapeutics| volume = 30 | issue = 2 | pages = 109–15 | date = February 2007 | pmid = 17320731 | doi = 10.1016/j.jmpt.2006.12.013 }}</ref> | |||
== History == | |||
The use of the word ''vertebral subluxation'' should not be confused with the term's precise usage in medicine, which considers only the anatomical relationships.<ref name=Guidelines>Haldeman, Chapman-Smith, Petersen. p. 103.</ref> | |||
In 1909 ] wrote that: | |||
According to the ] (WHO), a ''chiropractic subluxation'' is a "dysfunction in a joint or motion segment in which alignment, movement integrity and/or physiological function are altered, although contact between joint surfaces remains intact". Chiropractic subluxation should not be confused with a medical ], which is a "significant structural displacement" visible on static imaging studies such as ]s.<ref name="WHO_guidelines">, p. 4, including footnote.</ref> Chiropractic is a field of ] outside ] ], whose practitioners (chiropractors) are not ]. | |||
: "Chiropractors have found in every disease that is supposed to be contagious, ''a cause in the spine''. In the spinal column we ''will'' find a subluxation that corresponds to every type of disease. If we had one hundred cases of small-pox, I can prove to you where, in one, you ''will'' find a subluxation and you will find the ''same conditions'' in the other ninety-nine. I adjust one and return his functions to normal... . There is no contagious disease... . There is no infection... . There is a cause internal to man that makes of his body in a certain spot, more or less a breeding ground . It is a place where they can multiply, propagate, and then because they become so many they are classed as a cause." -- B.J. Palmer, ''The Philosophy of Chiropractic'', V. Davenport, IA: Palmer School of Chiropractic; 1909<ref name=Campbell>{{cite journal |journal=Pediatrics |year=2000 |volume=105 |issue=4 |page=e43 |title=Chiropractors and vaccination: a historical perspective |author= Campbell JB, Busse JW, Injeyan HS |quote=... considered disease the result of spinal nerve dysfunction caused by misplaced (subluxated) vertebrae. Although rejected by medical science, this concept is still accepted by a minority of chiropractors. |pmid=10742364 |url=http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/cgi/content/full/105/4/e43 |doi= 10.1542/peds.105.4.e43}}</ref> | |||
== History == | |||
== Definitions and current official status == | |||
In 1910, ], the founder of chiropractic, wrote:<ref name="SciArtPhi">Palmer DD (1910) ''The Science, Art and Philosophy of Chiropractic'' Portland, Oregon: Portland Printing House Company p. 20.</ref><blockquote>Nerves carry impulses outward and sensations inward. The activity of these nerves, or rather their fibers, may become excited or allayed by impingement, the result being a modification of functionating—too much or not enough action—which is dis-ease.</blockquote>In 1909, D.D. Palmer's son, ], incorrectly claimed that chiropractic subluxation caused contagious diseases, writing:<ref name="Campbell">{{cite journal |journal=Pediatrics |year=2000 |volume=105 |issue=4 |page=e43 |title=Chiropractors and vaccination: a historical perspective |vauthors=Campbell JB, Busse JW, Injeyan HS |quote=... considered disease the result of spinal nerve dysfunction caused by misplaced (subluxated) vertebrae. Although rejected by medical science, this concept is still accepted by a minority of chiropractors. |pmid=10742364 |url=http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/cgi/content/full/105/4/e43 |doi= 10.1542/peds.105.4.e43|doi-access=free }}</ref><blockquote>Chiropractors have found in every disease that is supposed to be contagious, ''a cause in the spine''. In the spinal column we ''will'' find a subluxation that corresponds to every type of disease. If we had one hundred cases of ], I can prove to you where, in one, you ''will'' find a subluxation and you will find the ''same conditions'' in the other ninety-nine. I adjust one and return his functions to normal... . There is no contagious disease... . There is no infection... . There is a cause internal to man that makes of his body in a certain spot, more or less a breeding ground . It is a place where they can multiply, propagate, and then because they become so many they are classed as a cause.</blockquote> | |||
The ] definition of the chiropractic vertebral subluxation is: | |||
== Clinical practice == | |||
: "A lesion or dysfunction in a joint or motion segment in which alignment, movement integrity and/or physiological function are altered, although contact between joint surfaces remains intact. It is essentially a functional entity, which may influence biomechanical and neural integrity." | |||
{{Too many quotes|date=January 2021|section=yes}} | |||
=== Definitions === | |||
Chiropractors use and have used various terms to express this concept: subluxation, vertebral subluxation (VS), vertebral subluxation complex (VSC),<ref name=VSC>Joseph M. Flesia, Jr., D.C. {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20060925163501/http://www.chiro.org/LINKS/FULL/The_VSC_1.shtml |date=September 25, 2006 }} ICA International Review of Chiropractic 1992 (Mar): 25-27</ref> "killer subluxations",<ref name=Keating-subluxation>{{cite journal |journal= ] |year=2005 |volume=13 |pages=17 |title= Subluxation: dogma or science? |author1=Keating JC Jr |author2=Charlton KH |author3=Grod JP |author4=Perle SM |author5=Sikorski D |author6=Winterstein JF |doi=10.1186/1746-1340-13-17 |pmid=16092955 |pmc= 1208927 |issue=1 |doi-access=free }}</ref> and the "silent killer".<ref name=WCA_asymptomatic>World Chiropractic Alliance. {{webarchive |url=https://web.archive.org/web/20060911230816/http://www.worldchiropracticalliance.org/media/asymptomatic.htm |date=September 11, 2006 }}. </ref> | |||
The purported displacement is not necessarily visible on ]s.<ref name="WHO_guidelines">, p. 4, including footnote.</ref> This is in contrast to the medical definition of spinal ] which, according to the WHO, is a ''"significant structural displacement"'', and therefore visible on ]s.<ref name="WHO_guidelines"/> | |||
Chiropractors along with some physical therapists and osteopathic physicians,<ref name=SIF-BOOP>{{cite web |url=http://www.spinalinjuryfoundation.org/101_new/boop.htm |title=Bone Out of Place – Boop |author=Spinal Injury Foundation |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080317072709/http://www.spinalinjuryfoundation.org/101_new/boop.htm |archive-date=17 March 2008}}</ref> have also used another term, BOOP, meaning "bone out of place".<ref name=Leach_BOOP>Robert A. Leach. ''Lippincott Williams & Wilkins'', 2003, {{ISBN|0-683-30747-9}}, {{ISBN|978-0-683-30747-4}}, 463 pages. Book search with numerous mentions of BOOP's history.</ref> | |||
In 1996 an official consensus definition of subluxation was formed. Cooperstein and Gleberzon have described the situation: "... although many in the chiropractic profession reject the concept of "subluxation" and shun the use of this term as a diagnosis, the presidents of at least a dozen chiropractic colleges of the ] (ACC) developed a consensus definition of "subluxation" in 1996. It reads: | |||
The ] definition of the chiropractic vertebral subluxation is:<blockquote>A lesion or dysfunction in a joint or motion segment in which alignment, movement integrity and/or physiological function are altered, although contact between joint surfaces remains intact. It is essentially a functional entity, which may influence biomechanical and neural integrity.</blockquote>The purported displacement is not necessarily visible on static imaging studies, such as ]s.<ref name="WHO_guidelines" /> This is in contrast to the medical definition of spinal ] which, according to the WHO, is a "significant structural displacement", and therefore visible on X-rays.<ref name="WHO_guidelines" /> | |||
: "Chiropractic is concerned with the preservation and restoration of health, and focuses particular attention on the subluxation. A subluxation is a complex of functional and/or structural and/or pathological articular changes that compromise neural integrity and may influence organ system function and general health. A subluxation is evaluated, diagnosed, and managed through the use of chiropractic procedures based on the best available rational and empirical evidence."<ref name=Cooperstein_ACC_paradigm>Robert Cooperstein, Brian J. Gleberzon. . '']'', 2004, ISBN 0-443-07413-5, ISBN 978-0-443-07413-4, 387 pages.</ref> | |||
As of 2014, the ] states:<ref name="NBCE_about_chiro">{{Citation |last=NBCE |date=2014 |title=About Chiropractic |publisher=] |url=http://www.nbce.org/about/about_chiropractic/ |access-date=February 1, 2015 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150619234625/http://www.nbce.org/about/about_chiropractic/ |archive-date=June 19, 2015 |url-status=dead |df=mdy-all }}</ref> | |||
In 2001 the ], representing the national chiropractic associations in 77 countries, adopted this consensus statement which reaffirms belief in the vertebral subluxation.<ref name=Petersen>Donald M. Petersen Jr. . '']'', July 2, 2001, Vol. 19, Issue 14.</ref> | |||
: <blockquote>The specific focus of chiropractic practice is known as the chiropractic subluxation or joint dysfunction. A subluxation is a health concern that manifests in the skeletal joints, and, through complex anatomical and physiological relationships, affects the nervous system and may lead to reduced function, disability or illness.</blockquote> | |||
The ACC paradigm has been criticized by chiropractic authors: | |||
In 1996 an official consensus definition of subluxation was formed. Cooperstein and Gleberzon have described the situation: "... although many in the chiropractic profession reject the concept of "subluxation" and shun the use of this term as a diagnosis, the presidents of at least a dozen chiropractic colleges of the ] (ACC) developed a consensus definition of "subluxation" in 1996. It reads:<ref name="Cooperstein_ACC_paradigm">Robert Cooperstein, Brian J. Gleberzon. . '']'', 2004, {{ISBN|0-443-07413-5}}, {{ISBN|978-0-443-07413-4}}, 387 pages.</ref> | |||
: "All in all, the ambiguities that permeate the ACC's statements on subluxation render it inadequate as a guide to clinical research... Whether the ACC's subluxation claims have succeeded as a political statement is beyond our concern here. These assertions were published as a priori truths (what many chiropractors have traditionally referred to as "principle"), and are exemplary of scientifically unjustified assertions made in many corners of the profession. It matters not whether unsubstantiated assertions are offered for clinical, political, scientific, educational, marketing or other purposes; when offered without acknowledgment of their tentative character, they amount to dogmatism. We contend that attempts to foster unity (among the schools or in the wider profession) at the expense of scientific integrity is ultimately self-defeating. To be sure, the profession's lack of cultural authority is based in part upon our characteristic disunity. However, attempts to generate unity by adoption of a common dogma can only bring scorn and continued alienation from the wider health care community and the public we all serve."<ref name=Keating-subluxation/> | |||
: <blockquote>Chiropractic is concerned with the preservation and restoration of health, and focuses particular attention on the subluxation. A subluxation is a complex of functional and/or structural and/or pathological articular changes that compromise neural integrity and may influence organ system function and general health. A subluxation is evaluated, diagnosed, and managed through the use of chiropractic procedures based on the best available rational and empirical evidence.</blockquote> | |||
In May 2010 the ], the statutory regulatory body for chiropractors in the United Kingdom, issued guidance for chiropractors stating that the chiropractic vertebral subluxation complex "is an historical concept" and "is not supported by any clinical research evidence that would allow claims to be made that it is the cause of disease or health concerns."<ref name=GCC_VSC>{{cite web | url=http://www.gcc-uk.org/files/link_file/Guidance_on_claims_made_for_the_chiropractic_VSC_18August10.pdf | format=PDF |title=Guidance on claims made for the chiropractic vertebral subluxation complex | publisher=General Chiropractic Council |accessdate=2010-11-04}}</ref> | |||
In 2001 the ], representing the national chiropractic associations in 77 countries, adopted this consensus statement which reaffirms belief in the vertebral subluxation.<ref name=Petersen>Donald M. Petersen Jr. . '']'', July 2, 2001, Vol. 19, Issue 14.</ref> | |||
== Components == | |||
The ACC paradigm has been criticized by chiropractic authors:<ref name="Keating-subluxation" /><blockquote>All in all, the ambiguities that permeate the ACC's statements on subluxation render it inadequate as a guide to clinical research... Whether the ACC's subluxation claims have succeeded as a political statement is beyond our concern here. These assertions were published as a priori truths (what many chiropractors have traditionally referred to as "principle"), and are exemplary of scientifically unjustified assertions made in many corners of the profession. It matters not whether unsubstantiated assertions are offered for clinical, political, scientific, educational, marketing or other purposes; when offered without acknowledgment of their tentative character, they amount to dogmatism. We contend that attempts to foster unity (among the schools or in the wider profession) at the expense of scientific integrity is ultimately self-defeating. To be sure, the profession's lack of cultural authority is based in part upon our characteristic disunity. However, attempts to generate unity by adoption of a common dogma can only bring scorn and continued alienation from the wider health care community and the public we all serve.</blockquote>In May 2010 the ], the statutory regulatory body for chiropractors in the United Kingdom, issued guidance for chiropractors stating that the chiropractic vertebral subluxation complex "is an historical concept" and "is not supported by any clinical research evidence that would allow claims to be made that it is the cause of disease or health concerns."<ref name=GCC_VSC>{{cite web | url=http://www.gcc-uk.org/files/link_file/Guidance_on_claims_made_for_the_chiropractic_VSC_18August10.pdf | archive-url=http://www.webcitation.org/5xywlByZ0?url=http://www.gcc-uk.org/files/link_file/Guidance_on_claims_made_for_the_chiropractic_VSC_18August10.pdf | url-status=dead | archive-date=2011-04-16 | title=Guidance on claims made for the chiropractic vertebral subluxation complex | publisher=General Chiropractic Council | access-date=2010-11-04 }}</ref> | |||
Traditionally there have been 5 components that form the chiropractic subluxation. The vertebral subluxation complex is differentiated by the fifth component, general systemic disturbances secondary to the spinal misalignment (vertebral subluxation). | |||
The chiropractic vertebral subluxation complex has been a source of controversy since its inception in 1895 due to the lack of empirical evidence for its existence, its ] origins, and claims of its far reaching effects on health and disease. Although some chiropractic associations and colleges support the concept of subluxation,<ref name=Cooperstein_ACC_paradigm /> many in the chiropractic profession reject it and shun the use of this term as a diagnosis.<ref name=Cooperstein_ACC_paradigm /><ref name=Petersen /> In the United States and in Canada the term ''nonallopathic lesion'' may be used in place of ''subluxation''.<ref name=Definition>Robert D. Mootz, DC; Paul G. Shekelle, MD, PhD. </ref> | |||
# Spinal Kinesiopathology | |||
Other chiropractors consider subluxation as more of an abstract concept rather than a medical condition. Tedd Koren says, | |||
# Neuropathophysiology/Neuropathology | |||
# Myopathology | |||
# Histopathology | |||
# Pathophysiology/Pathology<ref>{{cite journal |last=Keating |first=Joseph, Jr. |date=March 2003, |title=Evaluating the quality of clinical practice guidelines |journal=Journal of Manipulative and Physiological Therapeutics |volume=26 |issue=3 |pages=209–11 |doi=10.1016/S0161-4754(02)54104-X }}</ref> | |||
{{Blockquote| | |||
== Examination == | |||
The vertebral subluxation cannot be precisely defined because it is an abstraction, an intellectual construct used by chiropractors, chiropractic researchers, educators and others to explain the success of the chiropractic adjustment. | |||
This is not a unique state of affairs, abstract entities populate many branches of science... | |||
Historically, the detection of spinal misalignments (subluxations) by the chiropractic profession has relied on X-ray findings and physical examination. At least 2 of the following 4 physical signs and/or ] must be documented to qualify for reimbursement: | |||
Subluxations, genes, gravity, the ego and life are all heuristic devices, "useful fictions" that are used to explain phenomenon that are far larger than our understanding. We use them as long as they work for us and discard or limit their application when they become unwieldy or unable to account for new observations... | |||
* Pain and tenderness | |||
* Asymmetry/misalignment | |||
* Range of motion abnormality | |||
* Tissue/tone changes<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.chiro.org/Medicare/ABSTRACTS/Medicare_Documentation_ACA.pdf |format=PDF |title=ACA CMS Clinical Documentation Guidelines |publisher=American Chiropractic Association |accessdate=2008-05-06}}</ref> | |||
Critics of chiropractic have incorrectly assumed that chiropractic is based on the theory or principle that vertebral subluxations cause "pinched" nerves that cause disease. They have it backwards. Chiropractic is based on the success of the spinal adjustment. The theory attempting to explain the success of the adjustment (nerve impingement, disease, subluxations) followed its clinical discovery. | |||
== Background == | |||
Examples of such erroneous criticisms based on this straw man argument abound in the medical literature. Some examples: "The teachers, research workers and practitioners of medicine reject the so-called principle on which chiropractic is based and correctly and bluntly label it a fraud and hoax on the human race." "The basis of chiropractic is completely unscientific." The theory on which chiropractic is based , namely that a "subluxation" of a spinal vertebra presses on a nerve interfering with the passage of energy down that nerve causing disease to organs supplied by that nerve, and that chiropractic "adjustments" can alleviate the pressure thereby treating or preventing such disease. There is no scientific evidence for the validity of this theory." | |||
It has been proposed that a vertebral subluxation can negatively affect general ] by altering the neurological communication between the ], ] and ]. Although individuals may not always be ], ] chiropractors believe that the presence of vertebral subluxation is in itself justification for correction via spinal adjustment. | |||
To be fair, statements by some chiropractors have tended to perpetuate this misunderstanding: "Pressure on nerves causes irritation and tension with deranged functions as a result." | |||
Chiropractic treatment of vertebral subluxation focuses on delivering a ] which is a high velocity low amplitude (HVLA) thrust to the dysfunctional spinal segments to help correct the chiropractic subluxation complex. ] is the primary procedure used by chiropractors in the adjustment. Adjustment/manipulation has been shown to help with low back pain, neck pain and tension type headaches, but further studies are inconclusive on the use of spinal manipulation outside the treatment of neuromusculoskeletal disorders. | |||
When chiropractors declare that "pinched nerves" "nerve impingement" "spinal fixations" or others mechanisms of action explain how subluxations affect the person and how chiropractic works they are making the same mistake medical critics make – assuming chiropractic is based on theory. Mechanisms and theories are useful tools, but their limitations should always be kept in mind.<ref name="Koren">{{cite web |last1=Koren |first1=Tedd |title=Does the Vertebral Subluxation Exist? |url=http://www.chiro.org/LINKS/ABSTRACTS/Does_VS_Exist.shtml |access-date=January 22, 2019}}</ref>}} | |||
== Rationale and disagreements == | |||
=== International Classification of Diseases coding === | |||
In 1910, ], the founder of chiropractic, wrote: | |||
The differences between a medical subluxation and a chiropractic "vertebral subluxation" create confusion and difficulties when it comes to following official ] and ] coding. In a 2014 article in '']''<ref name=Gwilliam /> by a chiropractor who is a ], these difficulties were discussed in detail. He noted that the WHO recognizes the differences between the two types of "subluxations", and also pointed out certain difficulties for chiropractors:<blockquote>...the official definition of 739 codes is "nonallopathic lesions, not elsewhere classified.... In other words, 739 is a code that does not describe a subluxation. It does not even say what the patient has; it says that there is no code to describe what the patient has.... he elusive "vertebral subluxation complex" I learned about in school has no place in the ICD-9 code set. All we get is 739, which is a code for conditions that do not have a code. | |||
: "Physiologists divide nerve-fibers, which form the nerves, into two classes, afferent and efferent. Impressions are made on the peripheral afferent fiber-endings; these create sensations which are transmitted to the center of the nervous system. Efferent nerve-fibers carry impulses out from the center to their endings. Most of these go to muscles and are therefore called motor impulses; some are secretory and enter glands; a portion are inhibitory their function being to restrain secretion. Thus, nerves carry impulses outward and sensations inward. The activity of these nerves, or rather their fibers, may become excited or allayed by impingement, the result being a modification of functionating — too much or not enough action — which is dis-ease."<ref name=SciArtPhi>Palmer DD (1910) ''The Science, Art and Philosophy of Chiropractic'' Portland, Oregon: Portland Printing House Company p. 20.</ref> | |||
ICD-9 has never provided a code that truly describes this and differentiates between the chiropractic subluxation and the allopathic subluxation. Chiropractors have been compelled to try to fit a square peg into a round hole for many years.</blockquote>At the time of writing (August 2014) it was still uncertain which codes in the newer ICD-10 would be useful for chiropractors and how they would be interpreted.<ref name=Gwilliam>{{Citation |last=Gwilliam |first=Evan |date=15 August 2014 |title=Coding for the Subluxation: ICD-9 vs. ICD-10 |work=] |volume=32 |issue=16 |url=http://www.dynamicchiropractic.com/mpacms/dc/article.php?id=57100 |access-date=12 August 2014 }}</ref> | |||
Chiropractors use and have used various terms to express this concept: subluxation, vertebral subluxation (VS), vertebral subluxation complex (VSC),<ref name=VSC>Joseph M. Flesia, Jr., D.C. ICA International Review of Chiropractic 1992 (Mar): 25-27</ref> "killer subluxations",<ref name=Keating-subluxation>{{cite journal |journal= ] |year=2005 |volume=13 |pages=17 |title= Subluxation: dogma or science? |author= Keating JC Jr, Charlton KH, Grod JP, Perle SM, Sikorski D, Winterstein JF |doi=10.1186/1746-1340-13-17 |pmid=16092955 |url=http://chiroandosteo.com/content/13/1/17 |pmc= 1208927 |issue=1}}</ref> and the "silent killer".<ref name=WCA_asymptomatic>World Chiropractic Alliance. .</ref> | |||
=== Components === | |||
They, along with some physical therapists and osteopathic physicians,<ref name=SIF-BOOP>{{cite web |url=<!--http://www.spinalinjuryfoundation.org/101_new/boop.htm --> |title=Bone Out of Place - Boop |author=Spinal Injury Foundation |archiveurl=http://web.archive.org/web/20080317072709/http://www.spinalinjuryfoundation.org/101_new/boop.htm |archivedate=17 March 2008}}</ref> have also used another term, BOOP, meaning "bone out of place".<ref name=Leach_BOOP>Robert A. Leach. ''Lippincott Williams & Wilkins'', 2003, ISBN 0-683-30747-9, ISBN 978-0-683-30747-4, 463 pages. Book search with numerous mentions of BOOP's history.</ref> | |||
Traditionally there have been five components that form the chiropractic subluxation. | |||
Some chiropractors have described the disagreements within the profession about the concept, and have written skeptically about BOOP as an antiquated idea. In 1992 one wrote: | |||
# Spinal Kinesiopathology | |||
: "The main problem we often run into is the bone out of place (BOOP) concept. It seems we somehow step on toes when we describe the spine as a functioning entity instead of a stack of bones that can be shifted back and forth into the ideal configuration. The BOOP concept will eventually fade, and we are grateful for its contribution to chiropractic. For many decades, it offered a model to work from. This model has been updated by the rest of the healing profession, but chiropractors have been hesitant to let this antiquated model go. Some within our profession hold onto this model with a religious fervor. The chiropractic profession has moved into a new age. The BOOP concept has been updated and science is ever upon us in the 90s. Let's start asking questions again and drive the chiropractic profession kicking and screaming into the 21st century."<ref name=Elder_BOOP>Terry Elder, DC. '']'', March 27, 1992, Vol. 10, Issue 07.</ref> | |||
# Neuropathophysiology/Neuropathology | |||
# Myopathology | |||
# Histopathology | |||
# Biochemical changes<ref name="Kent">{{cite journal |last1=Kent |first1=Chris |title=Models of Vertebral Subluxation:A Review |journal=Journal of Vertebral Subluxation Research |volume=1 |issue=1 |url=http://www.chiro.org/LINKS/FULL/Kent_Model_of_Subluxation.pdf |access-date=January 22, 2019}}</ref> | |||
=== Diagnosis === | |||
One wrote in 1994 about the "brutal civil war": | |||
Historically, the detection of spinal misalignment (subluxations) by the chiropractic profession has relied on X-ray findings and physical examination. At least two of the following four physical signs and/or ] must be documented {{How|date=February 2022}} to qualify for reimbursement {{Explain|date=February 2022}}: | |||
: "According to various gossip columnists in chiropractic, our profession appears to be currently enmeshed in a brutal civil war between BOOP (bone-out-of-place) practitioners and low back pain practitioners. It should be known that the BOOPers incorrectly call themselves subluxation-based practitioners. My experience has demonstrated that the BOOPers do not know enough about subluxation to call themselves subluxation-based chiropractors. We would all do well to not be subluxation-based in the BOOP sense. It should also be know that this so-called war is really an over-dramatized skirmish between vocal BOOPers and a theoretical group of anti-chiropractic DCs. I have yet to meet any of these anti-chiropractic DCs. Unfortunately, the BOOPers seem to think that those who do not embrace the totality of BOOP philosophy are merely non-BOOPers who are still very pro-chiropractic and appreciate the philosophy of chiropractic from a contemporary and nondogmatic perspective."<ref name=Seaman_BOOP_1994>David Seaman, DC, MS, DABCN. . '']'', September 23, 1994, Vol. 12, Issue 20.</ref> | |||
* Pain and tenderness | |||
* Asymmetry/misalignment | |||
* Range of motion abnormality | |||
* Tissue/tone changes<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.chiro.org/Medicare/ABSTRACTS/Medicare_Documentation_ACA.pdf |title=ACA CMS Clinical Documentation Guidelines |publisher=American Chiropractic Association |access-date=2008-05-06}}</ref> | |||
===Rationale=== | |||
Ten years later (in 2004) he openly disparaged the idea still propounded by "modern-day advocates of this concept": | |||
{{more citations needed section|date=January 2019}} | |||
It has been proposed that a vertebral subluxation can negatively affect general ] by altering the neurological communication between the ], ] and ]. Although individuals may not always be ], ] chiropractors believe that the presence of vertebral subluxation is in itself justification for correction via spinal adjustment. | |||
: "... it is essentially impossible to have nerve interference. To summarize, nerve interference is described, by modern-day advocates of this concept, as a reduction of neural or mental impulses, which occurs in response to a bone-out-of-place (BOOP) subluxation... Clearly, the BOOP subluxation model fails miserably when considered in the light of basic neuroscience facts... BOOP subluxationists become angry and defensive when the BOOP model of subluxation is criticized... The reactionary nature of certain BOOP subluxationists is to accuse those who don't buy into the BOOP model of being anti-chiropractic - an astonishing leap of ignorance, to say the least. Furthermore, anyone who does not buy into the model is trying to "medicalize chiropractic" - another example of low-IQ thinking. And if tears do not well up in your eyes when you hear the phrase, "The power that made the body, heals the body," you are accused of having no passion for chiropractic - still another example of depressed, frontal-lobe activity. Even worse, if you don't buy into every bizarre, New Age, tree-hugging notion that comes down the pike and is circularly attached to subluxation, you will be accused of being an atheist - an excellent example of the need for psychiatrists and the drugs they prescribe."<ref name=Seaman_BOOP_2004>David Seaman, DC, MS, DABCN. . '']'', June 3, 2004, Vol. 22, Issue 12.</ref> | |||
==Functional theories== | |||
{{Infobox Anatomy | | |||
Name = Spinal nerve roots | | |||
Latin = radix posterior | | |||
GraySubject = 208 | | |||
GrayPage = 916 | | |||
Image = spinal nerve.svg | | |||
Caption = The formation of the spinal nerve from the dorsal and ventral roots | | |||
Image2 = Gray675.png | | |||
Caption2 = A spinal nerve with its anterior and posterior roots. | | |||
System = | | |||
Precursor = | | |||
MeshName = Dorsal+Roots | | |||
MeshNumber = A08.800.800.720.725| | |||
DorlandsPre = r_12 | | |||
DorlandsSuf = 12709389 | | |||
}} | |||
V. Strang, D.C., describes several hypotheses on how a misaligned vertebra may cause interference to the nervous system in his book, ''Essential Principles of Chiropractic'':<ref name = "Ess of Chiro">Strang, V (1984) ''Essential Principles of Chiropractic'' Davenport : Palmer College of Chiropractic, OCLC: 12102972.</ref> | |||
V. Strang, D.C., describes several hypotheses on how a misaligned vertebra may cause interference to the nervous system in his book, ''Essential Principles of Chiropractic'':<ref name="Ess of Chiro">Strang, V (1984) ''Essential Principles of Chiropractic'' Davenport : Palmer College of Chiropractic, {{OCLC|12102972}}.</ref> | |||
* Nerve compression hypothesis: suggests that when the vertebrae are out of alignment, the nerve roots and/or spinal cord can become pinched or irritated. While the most commonly referenced hypothesis, and easiest for a patient to understand, it may be the least likely to occur. | * Nerve compression hypothesis: suggests that when the vertebrae are out of alignment, the nerve roots and/or spinal cord can become pinched or irritated. While the most commonly referenced hypothesis, and easiest for a patient to understand, it may be the least likely to occur. | ||
* Proprioceptive insult hypothesis: focuses on articular alterations causing hyperactivity of the sensory nerve fibers. | * Proprioceptive insult hypothesis: focuses on articular alterations causing hyperactivity of the sensory nerve fibers. | ||
Line 104: | Line 104: | ||
* Somatopsychic hypothesis: the effects of a subluxation on the ascending paths of the reticular activating system. | * Somatopsychic hypothesis: the effects of a subluxation on the ascending paths of the reticular activating system. | ||
* Neurodystrophic hypothesis: focuses on lowered tissue resistance that results from abnormal innervation. | * Neurodystrophic hypothesis: focuses on lowered tissue resistance that results from abnormal innervation. | ||
* Dentate ligament-cord distortion hypothesis: upper cervical |
* Dentate ligament-cord distortion hypothesis: upper cervical misalignment can cause the ] ligaments to put a stress on the spinal cord. | ||
* Psychogenic hypothesis: emotions, such as stress, causing contraction in skeletal muscles. | * Psychogenic hypothesis: emotions, such as stress, causing contraction in skeletal muscles. | ||
The vertebral subluxation has been described as a ] with |
The vertebral subluxation has been described as a ] with signs and symptoms which include: altered alignment; aberrant motion; palpable soft tissue changes; localized/referred pain; muscle contraction or imbalance; altered physiological function; reversible with adjustment/manipulation; focal tenderness.<ref name=Gatterman>M.I. Gatterman, M.A., D.C. | ||
Dynamic Chiropractic, March 27, 1992, Volume 10, Issue 07.</ref> | Dynamic Chiropractic, March 27, 1992, Volume 10, Issue 07.</ref> | ||
===Procedure=== | |||
==Scientific investigation== | |||
{{more citations needed section|date=January 2019}} | |||
Chiropractic treatment of vertebral subluxation focuses on delivering a ] which is a high velocity low amplitude (HVLA) thrust to the dysfunctional spinal segments to help correct the chiropractic subluxation complex. ] is the primary procedure used by chiropractors in the adjustment. | |||
===Disagreement amongst practitioners=== | |||
Investigation to confirm the existence of vertebral subluxations has been ongoing since it was first postulated in 1895. The early practitioners used ] and the anatomy of the nervous system as a guide (meric system). In their efforts to be more specific, they seized the newly discovered ] technology and introduced the neurocalometer (a heat sensing device). It was during those early years that the medical establishment first criticized the chiropractic profession, saying that the conditions that those early chiropractors were treating were only ]. To prove that chiropractic patients had real conditions, BJ Palmer opened a research clinic as a part of the ].{{Citation needed|date=August 2009}} When a patient entered the clinic, they were first examined by medical doctors and a diagnosis was formulated. They were then sent to the chiropractic part of the clinic, treated, and sent back to the medical doctors for evaluation. Since then, chiropractors have sought a greater understanding of the mechanisms and effects of the vertebral subluxation. Today we see motion x-rays, surface EMG, and digital thermography though none of these methods have been proven to be reliable or valid in the detection of vertebral subluxations.{{Citation needed|date=August 2009}} | |||
The chiropractic subluxation is the heart of the split between ] chiropractors. Straight chiropractors continue to follow Palmer's vitalistic tradition, claiming that subluxation has considerable health effects and also adding a visceral component to the definition, while mixers, as exemplified by the United Kingdom's General Chiropractic Council, consider it a historical concept with no evidence identifying it as the cause of disease.{{citation needed|date=November 2019}} | |||
As research projects are able to employ new techniques and technologies to evaluate nervous system function and effects, further support for chiropractic principles has surfaced. Chiropractors have long suggested that spinal joint fixation that results from subluxation will result in degenerative effects that compromise the spinal joints. A 2004 research team at the ] evaluated changes of the lumbar vertebral column following fixation (immobility) by surgically fusing spinal joints in experimental rats. The fixated joints showed significant degeneration compared to the mobile joints, confirming that surgical fixation results in time-dependent degenerative changes of the ].<ref>{{cite journal |author = Cramer G, Fournier J, Henderson C, Wolcott C |title = Degenerative changes following spinal fixation in a small animal model |journal = J Manipulative Physiol Ther |volume = 27 |issue = 3 |pages = 141–54 |year = 2004 |pmid = 15129196 |doi = 10.1016/j.jmpt.2003.12.025}}</ref> | |||
Some chiropractors have described the disagreements within the profession about the concept, and have written skeptically about BOOP as an antiquated idea. In 1992 one wrote:<ref name="Elder_BOOP">Terry Elder, DC. '']'', March 27, 1992, Vol. 10, Issue 07.</ref><blockquote>The main problem we often run into is the bone out of place (BOOP) concept. It seems we somehow step on toes when we describe the spine as a functioning entity instead of a stack of bones that can be shifted back and forth into the ideal configuration. The BOOP concept will eventually fade, and we are grateful for its contribution to chiropractic. For many decades, it offered a model to work from. This model has been updated by the rest of the healing profession, but chiropractors have been hesitant to let this antiquated model go. Some within our profession hold onto this model with a religious fervor. The chiropractic profession has moved into a new age. The BOOP concept has been updated and science is ever upon us in the 90s. Let's start asking questions again and drive the chiropractic profession kicking and screaming into the 21st century.</blockquote>Chiropractor David Seaman wrote in 1994 about the "brutal civil war":<ref name="Seaman_BOOP_1994">David Seaman, DC, MS, DABCN. . '']'', September 23, 1994, Vol. 12, Issue 20.</ref><blockquote>According to various gossip columnists in chiropractic, our profession appears to be currently enmeshed in a brutal civil war between BOOP (bone-out-of-place) practitioners and low back pain practitioners. It should be known that the BOOPers incorrectly call themselves subluxation-based practitioners. My experience has demonstrated that the BOOPers do not know enough about subluxation to call themselves subluxation-based chiropractors. We would all do well to not be subluxation-based in the BOOP sense. It should also be known that this so-called war is really an over-dramatized skirmish between vocal BOOPers and a theoretical group of anti-chiropractic DCs. I have yet to meet any of these anti-chiropractic DCs. Unfortunately, the BOOPers seem to think that those who do not embrace the totality of BOOP philosophy are merely non-BOOPers who are still very pro-chiropractic and appreciate the philosophy of chiropractic from a contemporary and nondogmatic perspective.</blockquote>In an article written in 2004, Seaman openly disparaged the idea still propounded by "modern-day advocates of this concept":<ref name="Seaman_BOOP_2004">David Seaman, DC, MS, DABCN. . '']'', June 3, 2004, Vol. 22, Issue 12.</ref><blockquote>... it is essentially impossible to have nerve interference. To summarize, nerve interference is described, by modern-day advocates of this concept, as a reduction of neural or mental impulses, which occurs in response to a bone-out-of-place (BOOP) subluxation... Clearly, the BOOP subluxation model fails miserably when considered in the light of basic neuroscience facts... BOOP subluxationists become angry and defensive when the BOOP model of subluxation is criticized... The reactionary nature of certain BOOP subluxationists is to accuse those who don't buy into the BOOP model of being anti-chiropractic—an astonishing leap of ignorance, to say the least. Furthermore, anyone who does not buy into the model is trying to "medicalize chiropractic"—another example of low-IQ thinking. And if tears do not well up in your eyes when you hear the phrase, "The power that made the body, heals the body," you are accused of having no passion for chiropractic—still another example of depressed, frontal-lobe activity. Even worse, if you don't buy into every bizarre, New Age, tree-hugging notion that comes down the pike and is circularly attached to subluxation, you will be accused of being an atheist—an excellent example of the need for psychiatrists and the drugs they prescribe.</blockquote> | |||
] | |||
== Evidence of condition == | |||
Chiropractic also asserts that spinal health and function are directly related to general health and well-being. Preliminary research concerning the intricate functioning of the nervous system suggests that this speculation may have some support. David Seaman, DC, MS reviewed the work of several researchers concerning autonomic nervous system relationship to the somatic tissues of the spine.<ref name=Seaman>{{cite journal |author = Seaman D, Winterstein J |title = Dysafferentation: a novel term for the neuropathophysiological effects of joint complex dysfunction. A look at likely mechanisms of symptom generation |journal = J Manipulative Physiol Ther |volume = 21 |issue = 4 |pages = 267–80 |year = 1998 |pmid = 9608382}}.</ref> He noted that Feinstein ''et al.'' were the first to clearly describe some symptoms associated with noxious irritation of spinal tissues. They injected hypertonic saline into interspinous tissues and paraspinal muscles of normal volunteers for the purpose of characterizing local and referred pain patterns that might develop. His observations included: | |||
{{Too many quotes|date=January 2021|section=yes}} | |||
Believers within the chiropractic tradition assert that spinal health and function are directly related to general health and well-being, including visceral disorders, but the efficacy and validity of spinal manipulation to address visceral disorders systems remains a source of controversy within the chiropractic profession. The usefulness of spinal manipulation for organic disorders is not supported by evidence. Chiropractic professors and researchers, Nansel and Szlazak, found that:<blockquote>the proper differential diagnosis of somatic (musculoskeletal) vs. visceral (organ) dysfunction represents a challenge for both the medical and chiropractic physician. The afferent convergence mechanisms, which can create signs and symptoms that are virtually indistinguishable with respect to their somatic vs. visceral etiologies, suggest it is not unreasonable that this somatic visceral-disease mimicry could very well account for the "cures" of presumed organ disease that have been observed over the years in response to various somatic therapies (e.g., spinal manipulation, acupuncture, Rolfing, Qi Gong, etc.) and may represent a common phenomenon that has led to "holistic" health care claims on the part of such clinical disciplines.<ref name=Nansel>{{cite journal |vauthors=Nansel D, Szlazak M |title=Somatic dysfunction and the phenomenon of visceral disease simulation: a probable explanation for the apparent effectiveness of somatic therapy in patients presumed to be suffering from true visceral disease |journal=J Manipulative Physiol Ther |volume=18 |issue=6 |pages=379–97 |year=1995 |pmid=7595111}}</ref></blockquote> | |||
Considering this phenomenon, Seaman suggests that the chiropractic concept of joint complex (somatic) dysfunction should be incorporated into the differential diagnosis of pain and visceral symptoms because these dysfunctions often generate symptoms similar to those produced by true visceral disease and says that this mimicry leads to unnecessary surgical procedures and medications.<ref name=Seaman>{{cite journal |vauthors=Seaman D, Winterstein J |title=Dysafferentation: a novel term for the neuropathophysiological effects of joint complex dysfunction. A look at likely mechanisms of symptom generation |journal=J Manipulative Physiol Ther |volume=21 |issue=4 |pages=267–80 |year=1998 |pmid=9608382}}.</ref> | |||
: "The pain elicited from muscles was accompanied by a characteristic group of phenomena which indicated involvement of other than segmental somatic mechanisms. . . . The manifestations were pallor, sweating bradycardia, fall in blood pressure, subjective faintness, and nausea, but vomiting was not observed. Syncope occurred in two early procedures in the series of paravertebral injections and was subsequently avoided by quickly depressing the subject's head or by having him lie down at the first sign of faintness. These features were not proportional to the severity of or to the extent of radiation; on the contrary, they seemed to dominate the experience of subjects who complained of little pain, but who were overwhelmed by this distressing complex of symptoms."<ref name=Seaman/> | |||
Feinstein referred to these symptoms as autonomic concomitants. It is likely that these autonomic concomitants were caused by nociceptive stimulation of autonomic centers in the brainstem, particularly the medulla. Feinstein indicated that "this is an example of the ability of deep noxious stimulation to activate generalized autonomic responses independently of the relay of pain to conscious levels." In other words, pain may not be the symptomatic outcome of nociceptive stimulation of spinal structures. Such a conclusion has profound implications for the chiropractic profession. Clearly, patients do not need to be in pain to be candidates for spinal adjustments.<ref name=Seaman/> | |||
The efficacy and validity of spinal manipulation to address visceral disorders systems remains a source of controversy within the chiropractic profession. Although research is ongoing on this topic, conclusions that support the usefulness of spinal manipulation for organic disorders remains to be seen. Additionally, to complicate matters, chiropractic professors and researchers, Nansel and Szlazak, found that: | |||
: "the proper differential diagnosis of somatic (musculoskeletal) vs. visceral (organ) dysfunction represents a challenge for both the medical and chiropractic physician. The afferent convergence mechanisms, which can create signs and symptoms that are virtually indistinguishable with respect to their somatic vs. visceral etiologies, suggest it is not unreasonable that this somatic visceral-disease mimicry could very well account for the "cures" of presumed organ disease that have been observed over the years in response to various somatic therapies (e.g., spinal manipulation, acupuncture, Rolfing, Qi Gong, etc.) and may represent a common phenomenon that has led to "holistic" health care claims on the part of such clinical disciplines."<ref name=Nansel>{{cite journal |author=Nansel D, Szlazak M |title=Somatic dysfunction and the phenomenon of visceral disease simulation: a probable explanation for the apparent effectiveness of somatic therapy in patients presumed to be suffering from true visceral disease |journal=J Manipulative Physiol Ther |volume=18 |issue=6 |pages=379–97 |year=1995 |pmid=7595111 }}</ref> | |||
Considering this phenomenon, Seaman suggests that the chiropractic concept of joint complex (somatic) dysfunction should be incorporated into the differential diagnosis of pain and visceral symptoms because these dysfunctions often generate symptoms similar to those produced by true visceral disease and notes that this mimicry leads to unnecessary surgical procedures and medications.<ref name=Seaman/> | |||
Other chiropractic researchers have also questioned some of the claimed effects of vertebral subluxation: | Other chiropractic researchers have also questioned some of the claimed effects of vertebral subluxation: | ||
<blockquote>The literature supports the existence of somatovisceral and viscerosomatic reflexes, but there is little or no evidence to support the notion that the spinal derangements (often referred to as subluxations by chiropractors) can cause prolonged aberrant discharge of these reflexes. Equally unsupported in the literature is the notion that the prolonged activation of these reflexes will manifest into pathological state of tissues, and most relevantly, that the application of spinal manipulative therapy can alter the prolonged reflex discharge or be associated with a reversal of the pathological degeneration of the affected reflexes or tissues. The evidence that has been amassed is largely anecdotal or case report based and it has attracted much intra disciplinary debate because of its frequent association with certain approaches to management (largely described as being traditional or "philosophical" in nature).<ref name=Hardy>{{cite journal |vauthors=Hardy K, Pollard H |year=2006|title=The organisation of the stress response, and its relevance to chiropractors: a commentary |journal=Chiropractic & Osteopathy |volume=2006 |issue=14|page=25 |doi=10.1186/1746-1340-14-25 |pmid=17044942|pmc=1629015 |doi-access=free }}</ref></blockquote> | |||
Still other chiropractic researchers |
Still other chiropractic researchers stated quite directly:<ref name="Campbell" /> | ||
<blockquote>... early chiropractic philosophy ... considered disease the result of spinal nerve dysfunction caused by misplaced (subluxated) vertebrae. Although rejected by medical science, this concept is still accepted by a minority of chiropractors. ... Indeed, many progressive chiropractors have rejected the historical concept of the chiropractic subluxation in favor of ones that more accurately describe the nature of the complex joint disfunctions they treat.</blockquote> | |||
Professor Philip S. Bolton of the School of Biomedical Sciences at ] writes in '']'', "The traditional chiropractic vertebral subluxation hypothesis proposes that vertebral misalignment cause illness, disease, or both. This hypothesis remains controversial." His objective was, "To briefly review and update experimental evidence concerning reflex effects of vertebral subluxations, particularly concerning peripheral nervous system responses to vertebral subluxations. Data source: Information was obtained from chiropractic or, scientific peer-reviewed literature concerning human or animal studies of neural responses to vertebral subluxation, vertebral displacement or movement, or both." He concluded, "Animal models suggest that vertebral displacements and putative vertebral subluxations may modulate activity in group I to IV afferent nerves. However, it is not clear whether these afferent nerves are modulated during normal day-to-day activities of living and, if so, what segmental or whole-body reflex effects they may have."<ref name="Reflex research">{{cite journal |author=Bolton P |title=Reflex effects of vertebral subluxations: the peripheral nervous system. An update |journal=J Manipulative Physiol Ther |volume=23 |issue=2 |pages=101–3 |year=2000 |pmid=10714535 |doi=10.1016/S0161-4754(00)90075-7}}</ref> | |||
] has stated that the "core concepts of chiropractic, subluxation and spinal manipulation, are not based on sound science."<ref name=Ernst-eval>{{cite journal |journal= ] |year=2008 |volume=35 |issue=5 |pages=544–62 |title=Chiropractic: a critical evaluation |author=Ernst E |doi=10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2007.07.004 |pmid=18280103|doi-access=free}}</ref> | |||
Professor Philip S. Bolton of the School of Biomedical Sciences at ] writes in ], "The traditional chiropractic vertebral subluxation hypothesis proposes that vertebral misalignment cause illness, disease, or both. This hypothesis remains controversial." His objective was, "To briefly review and update experimental evidence concerning reflex effects of vertebral subluxations, particularly concerning peripheral nervous system responses to vertebral subluxations. Data source: Information was obtained from chiropractic or, scientific peer-reviewed literature concerning human or animal studies of neural responses to vertebral subluxation, vertebral displacement or movement, or both." He concluded, "Animal models suggest that vertebral displacements and putative vertebral subluxations may modulate activity in group I to IV afferent nerves. However, it is not clear whether these afferent nerves are modulated during normal day-to-day activities of living and, if so, what segmental or whole-body reflex effects they may have."<ref name = "Reflex research">{{cite journal |author = Bolton P |title = Reflex effects of vertebral subluxations: the peripheral nervous system. An update |journal = J Manipulative Physiol Ther |volume = 23 |issue = 2 |pages = 101–3 |year = 2000 |pmid = 10714535 |doi = 10.1016/S0161-4754(00)90075-7}}</ref> | |||
An area of debate among chiropractors is whether "vertebral subluxation" is a metaphysical concept (as posited in B. J. Palmer's philosophy of chiropractic) or a real phenomenon. In an article on vertebral subluxation, the chiropractic authors wrote: | |||
Conclusions: Monitoring mixed-nerve root discharges in response to spinal manipulative thrusts ''in vivo'' in human subjects undergoing lumbar surgery is feasible. Neurophysiologic responses appeared sensitive to the contact point and applied force vector of the spinal manipulative thrust. Further study of the neurophysiologic mechanisms of spinal manipulation in humans and animals is needed to more precisely identify the mechanisms and neural pathways involved.<ref>{{cite journal |author = Colloca C, Keller T, Gunzburg R, Vandeputte K, Fuhr A |title = Neurophysiologic response to intraoperative lumbosacral spinal manipulation |journal = J Manipulative Physiol Ther |volume = 23 |issue = 7 |pages = 447–57 |year = 2000 |pmid = 11004648 |doi = 10.1067/mmt.2000.108822}}</ref> | |||
{{Blockquote| | |||
Subluxation syndrome is a legitimate, potentially testable, theoretical construct for which there is little experimental evidence. Acceptable as hypothesis, the widespread assertion of the clinical meaningfulness of this notion brings ridicule from the scientific and health care communities and confusion within the chiropractic profession. We believe that an evidence-orientation among chiropractors requires that we distinguish between subluxation dogma vs. subluxation as the potential focus of clinical research. We lament efforts to generate unity within the profession through consensus statements concerning subluxation dogma, and believe that cultural authority will continue to elude us so long as we assert dogma as though it were validated clinical theory.<ref name=Keating-subluxation />}} | |||
Other chiropractors have declared its unproven status as an area that needs reform: | |||
Researchers at the Department of Physiology, University College London studied the effects of compression upon conduction in myelinated axons. Using pneumatic pressure of varying degrees on the sciatic nerves of frog specimens, the study supported the idea of nerve conduction failure as a result of compression.<ref>{{cite journal |author=Fern R, Harrison PJ |title=The effects of compression upon conduction in myelinated axons of the isolated frog sciatic nerve |journal=J. Physiol. (Lond.) |volume=432 |issue= 1|pages=111–22 |year=1991 |month=January |pmid=1886055 |pmc=1181320 |url=http://www.jphysiol.org/cgi/pmidlookup?view=long&pmid=1886055}}</ref> | |||
{{Blockquote| | |||
== Critiques == | |||
Some may suggest that chiropractors should promote themselves as the experts in "correcting vertebral subluxation." However, the scientific literature has failed to demonstrate the very existence of the subluxation. Until and unless sound research published in credible journals demonstrates the existence and reliable identification of vertebral subluxation, and vertebral subluxation is found to be an important public health problem, society at large will not care about its correction. Thus, "subluxation correction" alone is not a viable option for chiropractic's future.<ref name=Gallup_mpacms>Murphy, ''et al.'' "", ''Dynamic Chiropractic'', September 1, 2005, Vol. 23, Issue 18.</ref>}} | |||
A ] article describes the mainstream understanding of vertebral subluxation theory: | |||
] has stated that the "core concepts of chiropractic, subluxation and spinal manipulation, are not based on sound science."<ref name=Ernst-eval>{{cite journal |journal= ] |year=2008 |volume=35 |issue=5 |pages=544–62 |title= Chiropractic: a critical evaluation |author= Ernst E |doi=10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2007.07.004 |pmid=18280103}}</ref> | |||
{{Blockquote| | |||
Since its origin, chiropractic theory has based itself on "subluxations," or vertebrae that have shifted position in the spine. These subluxations are said to impede nerve outflow and cause disease in various organs. A chiropractic treatment is supposed to "put back in" these "popped out" vertebrae. For this reason, it is called an "adjustment." | |||
However, no real evidence has ever been presented showing that a given chiropractic treatment alters the position of any vertebrae. In addition, there is no real evidence that impairment of nerve outflow is a major contributor to common illnesses, or that spinal manipulation changes nerve outflow in such a way as to affect organ function.<ref name=Parnes>Robin Brett Parnes, MS, MPH, "", ].</ref>}} | |||
An area of debate among chiropractors is whether "vertebral subluxation" is a metaphysical concept (as posited in B. J. Palmer's philosophy of chiropractic) or a real phenomenon. | |||
In 2009, four scholarly chiropractors concluded that epidemiologic evidence does not support chiropractic's most fundamental theory. Since its inception, the vast majority of chiropractors have postulated that "subluxations" (misalignments) are the cause or underlying cause of ill health and can be corrected with spinal "adjustments". After searching the scientific literature, the chiropractic authors concluded: | |||
In an article on vertebral subluxation, the chiropractic authors wrote: | |||
{{Blockquote| | |||
: "Subluxation syndrome is a legitimate, potentially testable, theoretical construct for which there is little experimental evidence. Acceptable as hypothesis, the widespread assertion of the clinical meaningfulness of this notion brings ridicule from the scientific and health care communities and confusion within the chiropractic profession. We believe that an evidence-orientation among chiropractors requires that we distinguish between subluxation dogma vs. subluxation as the potential focus of clinical research. We lament efforts to generate unity within the profession through consensus statements concerning subluxation dogma, and believe that cultural authority will continue to elude us so long as we assert dogma as though it were validated clinical theory."<ref name=Keating-subluxation/> | |||
No supportive evidence is found for the chiropractic subluxation being associated with any disease process or of creating suboptimal health conditions requiring intervention. Regardless of popular appeal, this leaves the subluxation construct in the realm of unsupported speculation. This lack of supportive evidence suggests the subluxation construct has no valid clinical applicability.<ref name=Mirtz_et_al>Mirtz TA ''et al''. " '']'' 2009, 17:13, 2009.</ref>}} | |||
In 2005, four leading chiropractic researchers leveled strong critiques of chiropractic dogma: | |||
Since its inception, the concept of ''vertebral subluxation'' has been a source of definitional debate. Tedd Koren, DC offers this explanation as a possible cause of the confusion: | |||
{{Quote| | |||
The vertebral subluxation cannot be precisely defined because it is an abstraction, an intellectual construct used by chiropractors, chiropractic researchers, educators and others to explain the success of the chiropractic adjustment. | |||
{{Blockquote| | |||
This is not a unique state of affairs, abstract entities populate many branches of science... | |||
Lastly, the ACC claims that chiropractors use the 'best available rational and empirical evidence' to detect and correct subluxations. This strikes us as pseudoscience, since the ACC does not offer any evidence for the assertions they make, and since the sum of all the evidence that we are aware of does not permit a conclusion about the clinical meaningfulness of subluxation. To the best of our knowledge, the available literature does not point to any preferred method of subluxation detection and correction, nor to any clinically practical method of quantifying compromised "neural integrity," nor to any health benefit likely to result from subluxation correction.<ref name=Keating-subluxation />}} | |||
In 2015, internationally accredited chiropractic colleges from ], ], ], ], Institut Franco-Européen de Chiropraxie, and ] made an open statement which included: "The teaching of the vertebral subluxation complex as a vitalistic construct that claims that it is the cause of disease is unsupported by evidence. Its inclusion in a modern chiropractic curriculum in anything other than an historic context is therefore inappropriate and unnecessary."<ref name=IFEC>{{cite web|title=Clinical and Professional Chiropractic Education: a Position Statement|url=http://www.ifec.net/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/Institutional-Statements-May-2015.pdf |date=May 2015 |website=Institut Franco-Européen de Chiropraxie |access-date=June 3, 2017 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180224113047/http://www.ifec.net/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/Institutional-Statements-May-2015.pdf |archive-date=February 24, 2018 |quote=Footnote 2: Specifically the form of vitalism as distinct from holism that proclaims ‘If the specific vertebral subluxation is correctly adjusted, interference is released, pressure is eliminated, carrying capacity restored to normal, tissue cell is re‐established, and life and health begin to regrow back to normal. All this is directed, controlled, and performed by INNATE INTELLIGENCE’ (Ref: BJP Fame and Fortune Vol. XXXIII)}}</ref> | |||
Subluxations, genes, gravity, the ego and life are all heuristic devices, "useful fictions" that are used to explain phenomenon that are far larger than our understanding. We use them as long as they work for us and discard or limit their application when they become unwieldy or unable to account for new observations... | |||
Critics of chiropractic have incorrectly assumed that chiropractic is based on the theory or principle that vertebral subluxations cause "pinched" nerves that cause disease. They have it backwards. Chiropractic is based on the success of the spinal adjustment. The theory attempting to explain the success of the adjustment (nerve impingement, disease, subluxations) followed its clinical discovery. | |||
Examples of such erroneous criticisms based on this straw man argument abound in the medical literature. Some examples: "The teachers, research workers and practitioners of medicine reject the so-called principle on which chiropractic is based and correctly and bluntly label it a fraud and hoax on the human race." "The basis of chiropractic is completely unscientific." The theory on which chiropractic is based , namely that a "subluxation" of a spinal vertebra presses on a nerve interfering with the passage of energy down that nerve causing disease to organs supplied by that nerve, and that chiropractic "adjustments" can alleviate the pressure thereby treating or preventing such disease. There is no scientific evidence for the validity of this theory." | |||
To be fair, statements by some chiropractors have tended to perpetuate this misunderstanding: "Pressure on nerves causes irritation and tension with deranged functions as a result." | |||
When chiropractors declare that "pinched nerves" "nerve impingement" "spinal fixations" or others mechanisms of action explain how subluxations affect the person and how chiropractic works they are making the same mistake medical critics make - assuming chiropractic is based on theory. Mechanisms and theories are useful tools, but their limitations should always be kept in mind.<ref name="koren">Tedd Koren, D.C. "" Used here by permission.</ref>}} | |||
Other chiropractors have declared its unproven status as an area that needs reform: | |||
: "Some may suggest that chiropractors should promote themselves as the experts in "correcting vertebral subluxation." However, the scientific literature has failed to demonstrate the very existence of the subluxation. Until and unless sound research published in credible journals demonstrates the existence and reliable identification of vertebral subluxation, and vertebral subluxation is found to be an important public health problem, society at large will not care about its correction. Thus, "subluxation correction" alone is not a viable option for chiropractic's future."<ref name=Gallup_mpacms>Murphy, ''et al.'' "", ''Dynamic Chiropractic'', September 1, 2005, Vol. 23, Issue 18.</ref> | |||
A ] article describes the mainstream understanding of vertebral subluxation theory: | |||
{{Quote| | |||
Since its origin, chiropractic theory has based itself on "subluxations," or vertebrae that have shifted position in the spine. These subluxations are said to impede nerve outflow and cause disease in various organs. A chiropractic treatment is supposed to "put back in" these "popped out" vertebrae. For this reason, it is called an "adjustment." | |||
However, no real evidence has ever been presented showing that a given chiropractic treatment alters the position of any vertebrae. In addition, there is as yet no real evidence that impairment of nerve outflow is a major contributor to common illnesses, or that spinal manipulation changes nerve outflow in such a way as to affect organ function.<ref name=Parnes>Robin Brett Parnes, MS, MPH, "", ].</ref>}} | |||
In 2009, four scholarly chiropractors concluded that epidemiologic evidence does not support chiropractic's most fundamental theory. Since its inception, the vast majority of chiropractors have postulated that "subluxations" (misalignments) are the cause or underlying cause of ill health and can be corrected with spinal "adjustments." After searching the scientific literature, the chiropractic authors concluded: | |||
: "No supportive evidence is found for the chiropractic subluxation being associated with any disease process or of creating suboptimal health conditions requiring intervention. Regardless of popular appeal, this leaves the subluxation construct in the realm of unsupported speculation. This lack of supportive evidence suggests the subluxation construct has no valid clinical applicability."<ref name=Mirtz_et_al>Mirtz TA ''et al''. " '']'' 2009, 17:13, 2009.</ref> | |||
== References == | == References == | ||
{{ |
{{Reflist}} | ||
== External links == | == External links == | ||
* |
* – Council on Chiropractic Practice | ||
* |
* – Christopher Kent, DC | ||
* |
* – Stephen Barrett, M.D. | ||
* |
* – Ronald Carter, DC, MA, Past President, Canadian Chiropractic Association | ||
{{Chiropractic}} | {{Chiropractic}} | ||
{{Pseudoscience}} | |||
{{DEFAULTSORT:Vertebral Subluxation}} | |||
] | ] | ||
] | ] | ||
] | ] | ||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] |
Latest revision as of 21:45, 22 December 2024
This article is about the chiropractic concept. For medical subluxations, see Subluxation. Chiropractic conceptThe neutrality of this article is disputed. Relevant discussion may be found on the talk page. Please do not remove this message until conditions to do so are met. (May 2024) (Learn how and when to remove this message) |
This article may need to be rewritten to comply with Misplaced Pages's quality standards. You can help. The talk page may contain suggestions. (May 2024) |
Vertebral subluxation | |
---|---|
A chiropractor performing a precise vertebral adjustment of the lumbar spine on a patient | |
Alternative therapy | |
NCCIH Classification | Manipulative and body-based |
Legality | differs from country to country |
In chiropractic, a vertebral subluxation means pressure on nerves, abnormal functions creating a lesion in some portion of the body, either in its action or makeup (defined by D.D. Palmer and B.J. Palmer, founders of chiropractic). Chiropractors claim subluxations are not necessarily visible on X-rays.
Straight chiropractors continue to follow Palmer's tradition, claiming that vertebral subluxation has considerable health effects and also adding a visceral component to the definition. Most medical experts and some mixer chiropractors consider these ideas to be pseudoscientific and dispute these claims, as there is no scientific evidence for the existence of chiropractic subluxations or proof they or their treatment have any effects on health.
The use of the word vertebral subluxation should not be confused with the term's precise usage in medicine, which considers only the anatomical relationships.
According to the World Health Organization (WHO), a chiropractic subluxation is a "dysfunction in a joint or motion segment in which alignment, movement integrity and/or physiological function are altered, although contact between joint surfaces remains intact". Chiropractic subluxation should not be confused with a medical subluxation, which is a "significant structural displacement" visible on static imaging studies such as X-rays. Chiropractic is a field of alternative treatment outside scientific mainstream medicine, whose practitioners (chiropractors) are not medical doctors.
History
In 1910, D.D. Palmer, the founder of chiropractic, wrote:
Nerves carry impulses outward and sensations inward. The activity of these nerves, or rather their fibers, may become excited or allayed by impingement, the result being a modification of functionating—too much or not enough action—which is dis-ease.
In 1909, D.D. Palmer's son, B.J. Palmer, incorrectly claimed that chiropractic subluxation caused contagious diseases, writing:
Chiropractors have found in every disease that is supposed to be contagious, a cause in the spine. In the spinal column we will find a subluxation that corresponds to every type of disease. If we had one hundred cases of small-pox, I can prove to you where, in one, you will find a subluxation and you will find the same conditions in the other ninety-nine. I adjust one and return his functions to normal... . There is no contagious disease... . There is no infection... . There is a cause internal to man that makes of his body in a certain spot, more or less a breeding ground . It is a place where they can multiply, propagate, and then because they become so many they are classed as a cause.
Clinical practice
This section contains too many or overly lengthy quotations. Please help summarize the quotations. Consider transferring direct quotations to Wikiquote or excerpts to Wikisource. (January 2021) |
Definitions
Chiropractors use and have used various terms to express this concept: subluxation, vertebral subluxation (VS), vertebral subluxation complex (VSC), "killer subluxations", and the "silent killer".
Chiropractors along with some physical therapists and osteopathic physicians, have also used another term, BOOP, meaning "bone out of place".
The WHO definition of the chiropractic vertebral subluxation is:
A lesion or dysfunction in a joint or motion segment in which alignment, movement integrity and/or physiological function are altered, although contact between joint surfaces remains intact. It is essentially a functional entity, which may influence biomechanical and neural integrity.
The purported displacement is not necessarily visible on static imaging studies, such as X-rays. This is in contrast to the medical definition of spinal subluxation which, according to the WHO, is a "significant structural displacement", and therefore visible on X-rays.
As of 2014, the National Board of Chiropractic Examiners states:
The specific focus of chiropractic practice is known as the chiropractic subluxation or joint dysfunction. A subluxation is a health concern that manifests in the skeletal joints, and, through complex anatomical and physiological relationships, affects the nervous system and may lead to reduced function, disability or illness.
In 1996 an official consensus definition of subluxation was formed. Cooperstein and Gleberzon have described the situation: "... although many in the chiropractic profession reject the concept of "subluxation" and shun the use of this term as a diagnosis, the presidents of at least a dozen chiropractic colleges of the Association of Chiropractic Colleges (ACC) developed a consensus definition of "subluxation" in 1996. It reads:
Chiropractic is concerned with the preservation and restoration of health, and focuses particular attention on the subluxation. A subluxation is a complex of functional and/or structural and/or pathological articular changes that compromise neural integrity and may influence organ system function and general health. A subluxation is evaluated, diagnosed, and managed through the use of chiropractic procedures based on the best available rational and empirical evidence.
In 2001 the World Federation of Chiropractic, representing the national chiropractic associations in 77 countries, adopted this consensus statement which reaffirms belief in the vertebral subluxation.
The ACC paradigm has been criticized by chiropractic authors:
All in all, the ambiguities that permeate the ACC's statements on subluxation render it inadequate as a guide to clinical research... Whether the ACC's subluxation claims have succeeded as a political statement is beyond our concern here. These assertions were published as a priori truths (what many chiropractors have traditionally referred to as "principle"), and are exemplary of scientifically unjustified assertions made in many corners of the profession. It matters not whether unsubstantiated assertions are offered for clinical, political, scientific, educational, marketing or other purposes; when offered without acknowledgment of their tentative character, they amount to dogmatism. We contend that attempts to foster unity (among the schools or in the wider profession) at the expense of scientific integrity is ultimately self-defeating. To be sure, the profession's lack of cultural authority is based in part upon our characteristic disunity. However, attempts to generate unity by adoption of a common dogma can only bring scorn and continued alienation from the wider health care community and the public we all serve.
In May 2010 the General Chiropractic Council, the statutory regulatory body for chiropractors in the United Kingdom, issued guidance for chiropractors stating that the chiropractic vertebral subluxation complex "is an historical concept" and "is not supported by any clinical research evidence that would allow claims to be made that it is the cause of disease or health concerns."
The chiropractic vertebral subluxation complex has been a source of controversy since its inception in 1895 due to the lack of empirical evidence for its existence, its metaphysical origins, and claims of its far reaching effects on health and disease. Although some chiropractic associations and colleges support the concept of subluxation, many in the chiropractic profession reject it and shun the use of this term as a diagnosis. In the United States and in Canada the term nonallopathic lesion may be used in place of subluxation. Other chiropractors consider subluxation as more of an abstract concept rather than a medical condition. Tedd Koren says,
The vertebral subluxation cannot be precisely defined because it is an abstraction, an intellectual construct used by chiropractors, chiropractic researchers, educators and others to explain the success of the chiropractic adjustment.
This is not a unique state of affairs, abstract entities populate many branches of science...
Subluxations, genes, gravity, the ego and life are all heuristic devices, "useful fictions" that are used to explain phenomenon that are far larger than our understanding. We use them as long as they work for us and discard or limit their application when they become unwieldy or unable to account for new observations...
Critics of chiropractic have incorrectly assumed that chiropractic is based on the theory or principle that vertebral subluxations cause "pinched" nerves that cause disease. They have it backwards. Chiropractic is based on the success of the spinal adjustment. The theory attempting to explain the success of the adjustment (nerve impingement, disease, subluxations) followed its clinical discovery.
Examples of such erroneous criticisms based on this straw man argument abound in the medical literature. Some examples: "The teachers, research workers and practitioners of medicine reject the so-called principle on which chiropractic is based and correctly and bluntly label it a fraud and hoax on the human race." "The basis of chiropractic is completely unscientific." The theory on which chiropractic is based , namely that a "subluxation" of a spinal vertebra presses on a nerve interfering with the passage of energy down that nerve causing disease to organs supplied by that nerve, and that chiropractic "adjustments" can alleviate the pressure thereby treating or preventing such disease. There is no scientific evidence for the validity of this theory."
To be fair, statements by some chiropractors have tended to perpetuate this misunderstanding: "Pressure on nerves causes irritation and tension with deranged functions as a result."
When chiropractors declare that "pinched nerves" "nerve impingement" "spinal fixations" or others mechanisms of action explain how subluxations affect the person and how chiropractic works they are making the same mistake medical critics make – assuming chiropractic is based on theory. Mechanisms and theories are useful tools, but their limitations should always be kept in mind.
International Classification of Diseases coding
The differences between a medical subluxation and a chiropractic "vertebral subluxation" create confusion and difficulties when it comes to following official ICD-9 and ICD-10 coding. In a 2014 article in Dynamic Chiropractic by a chiropractor who is a certified professional coder, these difficulties were discussed in detail. He noted that the WHO recognizes the differences between the two types of "subluxations", and also pointed out certain difficulties for chiropractors:
...the official definition of 739 codes is "nonallopathic lesions, not elsewhere classified.... In other words, 739 is a code that does not describe a subluxation. It does not even say what the patient has; it says that there is no code to describe what the patient has.... he elusive "vertebral subluxation complex" I learned about in school has no place in the ICD-9 code set. All we get is 739, which is a code for conditions that do not have a code. ICD-9 has never provided a code that truly describes this and differentiates between the chiropractic subluxation and the allopathic subluxation. Chiropractors have been compelled to try to fit a square peg into a round hole for many years.
At the time of writing (August 2014) it was still uncertain which codes in the newer ICD-10 would be useful for chiropractors and how they would be interpreted.
Components
Traditionally there have been five components that form the chiropractic subluxation.
- Spinal Kinesiopathology
- Neuropathophysiology/Neuropathology
- Myopathology
- Histopathology
- Biochemical changes
Diagnosis
Historically, the detection of spinal misalignment (subluxations) by the chiropractic profession has relied on X-ray findings and physical examination. At least two of the following four physical signs and/or symptoms must be documented to qualify for reimbursement :
- Pain and tenderness
- Asymmetry/misalignment
- Range of motion abnormality
- Tissue/tone changes
Rationale
This section needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources in this section. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (January 2019) (Learn how and when to remove this message) |
It has been proposed that a vertebral subluxation can negatively affect general health by altering the neurological communication between the brain, spinal cord and peripheral nervous system. Although individuals may not always be symptomatic, straight chiropractors believe that the presence of vertebral subluxation is in itself justification for correction via spinal adjustment.
V. Strang, D.C., describes several hypotheses on how a misaligned vertebra may cause interference to the nervous system in his book, Essential Principles of Chiropractic:
- Nerve compression hypothesis: suggests that when the vertebrae are out of alignment, the nerve roots and/or spinal cord can become pinched or irritated. While the most commonly referenced hypothesis, and easiest for a patient to understand, it may be the least likely to occur.
- Proprioceptive insult hypothesis: focuses on articular alterations causing hyperactivity of the sensory nerve fibers.
- Somatosympathetic reflex hypothesis: all the visceral organ functions can be reflexly affected by cutaneous or muscular stimulation.
- Somatosomatic reflex hypothesis: afferent impulses from one part of the body can result in reflex activity in other parts of the body.
- Viscerosomatic reflex hypothesis: visceral afferent fibers cause reflex somatic problems.
- Somatopsychic hypothesis: the effects of a subluxation on the ascending paths of the reticular activating system.
- Neurodystrophic hypothesis: focuses on lowered tissue resistance that results from abnormal innervation.
- Dentate ligament-cord distortion hypothesis: upper cervical misalignment can cause the dentate ligaments to put a stress on the spinal cord.
- Psychogenic hypothesis: emotions, such as stress, causing contraction in skeletal muscles.
The vertebral subluxation has been described as a syndrome with signs and symptoms which include: altered alignment; aberrant motion; palpable soft tissue changes; localized/referred pain; muscle contraction or imbalance; altered physiological function; reversible with adjustment/manipulation; focal tenderness.
Procedure
This section needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources in this section. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (January 2019) (Learn how and when to remove this message) |
Chiropractic treatment of vertebral subluxation focuses on delivering a chiropractic adjustment which is a high velocity low amplitude (HVLA) thrust to the dysfunctional spinal segments to help correct the chiropractic subluxation complex. Spinal adjustment is the primary procedure used by chiropractors in the adjustment.
Disagreement amongst practitioners
The chiropractic subluxation is the heart of the split between "straight" and "mixer" chiropractors. Straight chiropractors continue to follow Palmer's vitalistic tradition, claiming that subluxation has considerable health effects and also adding a visceral component to the definition, while mixers, as exemplified by the United Kingdom's General Chiropractic Council, consider it a historical concept with no evidence identifying it as the cause of disease.
Some chiropractors have described the disagreements within the profession about the concept, and have written skeptically about BOOP as an antiquated idea. In 1992 one wrote:
The main problem we often run into is the bone out of place (BOOP) concept. It seems we somehow step on toes when we describe the spine as a functioning entity instead of a stack of bones that can be shifted back and forth into the ideal configuration. The BOOP concept will eventually fade, and we are grateful for its contribution to chiropractic. For many decades, it offered a model to work from. This model has been updated by the rest of the healing profession, but chiropractors have been hesitant to let this antiquated model go. Some within our profession hold onto this model with a religious fervor. The chiropractic profession has moved into a new age. The BOOP concept has been updated and science is ever upon us in the 90s. Let's start asking questions again and drive the chiropractic profession kicking and screaming into the 21st century.
Chiropractor David Seaman wrote in 1994 about the "brutal civil war":
According to various gossip columnists in chiropractic, our profession appears to be currently enmeshed in a brutal civil war between BOOP (bone-out-of-place) practitioners and low back pain practitioners. It should be known that the BOOPers incorrectly call themselves subluxation-based practitioners. My experience has demonstrated that the BOOPers do not know enough about subluxation to call themselves subluxation-based chiropractors. We would all do well to not be subluxation-based in the BOOP sense. It should also be known that this so-called war is really an over-dramatized skirmish between vocal BOOPers and a theoretical group of anti-chiropractic DCs. I have yet to meet any of these anti-chiropractic DCs. Unfortunately, the BOOPers seem to think that those who do not embrace the totality of BOOP philosophy are merely non-BOOPers who are still very pro-chiropractic and appreciate the philosophy of chiropractic from a contemporary and nondogmatic perspective.
In an article written in 2004, Seaman openly disparaged the idea still propounded by "modern-day advocates of this concept":
... it is essentially impossible to have nerve interference. To summarize, nerve interference is described, by modern-day advocates of this concept, as a reduction of neural or mental impulses, which occurs in response to a bone-out-of-place (BOOP) subluxation... Clearly, the BOOP subluxation model fails miserably when considered in the light of basic neuroscience facts... BOOP subluxationists become angry and defensive when the BOOP model of subluxation is criticized... The reactionary nature of certain BOOP subluxationists is to accuse those who don't buy into the BOOP model of being anti-chiropractic—an astonishing leap of ignorance, to say the least. Furthermore, anyone who does not buy into the model is trying to "medicalize chiropractic"—another example of low-IQ thinking. And if tears do not well up in your eyes when you hear the phrase, "The power that made the body, heals the body," you are accused of having no passion for chiropractic—still another example of depressed, frontal-lobe activity. Even worse, if you don't buy into every bizarre, New Age, tree-hugging notion that comes down the pike and is circularly attached to subluxation, you will be accused of being an atheist—an excellent example of the need for psychiatrists and the drugs they prescribe.
Evidence of condition
This section contains too many or overly lengthy quotations. Please help summarize the quotations. Consider transferring direct quotations to Wikiquote or excerpts to Wikisource. (January 2021) |
Believers within the chiropractic tradition assert that spinal health and function are directly related to general health and well-being, including visceral disorders, but the efficacy and validity of spinal manipulation to address visceral disorders systems remains a source of controversy within the chiropractic profession. The usefulness of spinal manipulation for organic disorders is not supported by evidence. Chiropractic professors and researchers, Nansel and Szlazak, found that:
the proper differential diagnosis of somatic (musculoskeletal) vs. visceral (organ) dysfunction represents a challenge for both the medical and chiropractic physician. The afferent convergence mechanisms, which can create signs and symptoms that are virtually indistinguishable with respect to their somatic vs. visceral etiologies, suggest it is not unreasonable that this somatic visceral-disease mimicry could very well account for the "cures" of presumed organ disease that have been observed over the years in response to various somatic therapies (e.g., spinal manipulation, acupuncture, Rolfing, Qi Gong, etc.) and may represent a common phenomenon that has led to "holistic" health care claims on the part of such clinical disciplines.
Considering this phenomenon, Seaman suggests that the chiropractic concept of joint complex (somatic) dysfunction should be incorporated into the differential diagnosis of pain and visceral symptoms because these dysfunctions often generate symptoms similar to those produced by true visceral disease and says that this mimicry leads to unnecessary surgical procedures and medications.
Other chiropractic researchers have also questioned some of the claimed effects of vertebral subluxation:
The literature supports the existence of somatovisceral and viscerosomatic reflexes, but there is little or no evidence to support the notion that the spinal derangements (often referred to as subluxations by chiropractors) can cause prolonged aberrant discharge of these reflexes. Equally unsupported in the literature is the notion that the prolonged activation of these reflexes will manifest into pathological state of tissues, and most relevantly, that the application of spinal manipulative therapy can alter the prolonged reflex discharge or be associated with a reversal of the pathological degeneration of the affected reflexes or tissues. The evidence that has been amassed is largely anecdotal or case report based and it has attracted much intra disciplinary debate because of its frequent association with certain approaches to management (largely described as being traditional or "philosophical" in nature).
Still other chiropractic researchers stated quite directly:
... early chiropractic philosophy ... considered disease the result of spinal nerve dysfunction caused by misplaced (subluxated) vertebrae. Although rejected by medical science, this concept is still accepted by a minority of chiropractors. ... Indeed, many progressive chiropractors have rejected the historical concept of the chiropractic subluxation in favor of ones that more accurately describe the nature of the complex joint disfunctions they treat.
Professor Philip S. Bolton of the School of Biomedical Sciences at University of Newcastle, Australia writes in Journal of Manipulative and Physiological Therapeutics, "The traditional chiropractic vertebral subluxation hypothesis proposes that vertebral misalignment cause illness, disease, or both. This hypothesis remains controversial." His objective was, "To briefly review and update experimental evidence concerning reflex effects of vertebral subluxations, particularly concerning peripheral nervous system responses to vertebral subluxations. Data source: Information was obtained from chiropractic or, scientific peer-reviewed literature concerning human or animal studies of neural responses to vertebral subluxation, vertebral displacement or movement, or both." He concluded, "Animal models suggest that vertebral displacements and putative vertebral subluxations may modulate activity in group I to IV afferent nerves. However, it is not clear whether these afferent nerves are modulated during normal day-to-day activities of living and, if so, what segmental or whole-body reflex effects they may have."
Edzard Ernst has stated that the "core concepts of chiropractic, subluxation and spinal manipulation, are not based on sound science."
An area of debate among chiropractors is whether "vertebral subluxation" is a metaphysical concept (as posited in B. J. Palmer's philosophy of chiropractic) or a real phenomenon. In an article on vertebral subluxation, the chiropractic authors wrote:
Subluxation syndrome is a legitimate, potentially testable, theoretical construct for which there is little experimental evidence. Acceptable as hypothesis, the widespread assertion of the clinical meaningfulness of this notion brings ridicule from the scientific and health care communities and confusion within the chiropractic profession. We believe that an evidence-orientation among chiropractors requires that we distinguish between subluxation dogma vs. subluxation as the potential focus of clinical research. We lament efforts to generate unity within the profession through consensus statements concerning subluxation dogma, and believe that cultural authority will continue to elude us so long as we assert dogma as though it were validated clinical theory.
Other chiropractors have declared its unproven status as an area that needs reform:
Some may suggest that chiropractors should promote themselves as the experts in "correcting vertebral subluxation." However, the scientific literature has failed to demonstrate the very existence of the subluxation. Until and unless sound research published in credible journals demonstrates the existence and reliable identification of vertebral subluxation, and vertebral subluxation is found to be an important public health problem, society at large will not care about its correction. Thus, "subluxation correction" alone is not a viable option for chiropractic's future.
A Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center article describes the mainstream understanding of vertebral subluxation theory:
Since its origin, chiropractic theory has based itself on "subluxations," or vertebrae that have shifted position in the spine. These subluxations are said to impede nerve outflow and cause disease in various organs. A chiropractic treatment is supposed to "put back in" these "popped out" vertebrae. For this reason, it is called an "adjustment."
However, no real evidence has ever been presented showing that a given chiropractic treatment alters the position of any vertebrae. In addition, there is no real evidence that impairment of nerve outflow is a major contributor to common illnesses, or that spinal manipulation changes nerve outflow in such a way as to affect organ function.
In 2009, four scholarly chiropractors concluded that epidemiologic evidence does not support chiropractic's most fundamental theory. Since its inception, the vast majority of chiropractors have postulated that "subluxations" (misalignments) are the cause or underlying cause of ill health and can be corrected with spinal "adjustments". After searching the scientific literature, the chiropractic authors concluded:
No supportive evidence is found for the chiropractic subluxation being associated with any disease process or of creating suboptimal health conditions requiring intervention. Regardless of popular appeal, this leaves the subluxation construct in the realm of unsupported speculation. This lack of supportive evidence suggests the subluxation construct has no valid clinical applicability.
In 2005, four leading chiropractic researchers leveled strong critiques of chiropractic dogma:
Lastly, the ACC claims that chiropractors use the 'best available rational and empirical evidence' to detect and correct subluxations. This strikes us as pseudoscience, since the ACC does not offer any evidence for the assertions they make, and since the sum of all the evidence that we are aware of does not permit a conclusion about the clinical meaningfulness of subluxation. To the best of our knowledge, the available literature does not point to any preferred method of subluxation detection and correction, nor to any clinically practical method of quantifying compromised "neural integrity," nor to any health benefit likely to result from subluxation correction.
In 2015, internationally accredited chiropractic colleges from Bournemouth University, University of South Wales, University of Southern Denmark, University of Zürich, Institut Franco-Européen de Chiropraxie, and University of Johannesburg made an open statement which included: "The teaching of the vertebral subluxation complex as a vitalistic construct that claims that it is the cause of disease is unsupported by evidence. Its inclusion in a modern chiropractic curriculum in anything other than an historic context is therefore inappropriate and unnecessary."
References
- Joseph C. Keating Jr.; Cleveland CS III; Menke M (2005). "Chiropractic history: a primer" (PDF). Association for the History of Chiropractic. Archived from the original (PDF) on 19 June 2013. Retrieved 2008-06-16.
A significant and continuing barrier to scientific progress within chiropractic are the anti-scientific and pseudo-scientific ideas (Keating 1997b) which have sustained the profession throughout a century of intense struggle with political medicine. Chiropractors' tendency to assert the meaningfulness of various theories and methods as a counterpoint to allopathic charges of quackery has created a defensiveness which can make critical examination of chiropractic concepts difficult (Keating and Mootz 1989). One example of this conundrum is the continuing controversy about the presumptive target of DCs' adjustive interventions: subluxation (Gatterman 1995; Leach 1994).
- ^ Keating JC Jr; Charlton KH; Grod JP; Perle SM; Sikorski D; Winterstein JF (2005). "Subluxation: dogma or science?". Chiropr Osteopat. 13 (1): 17. doi:10.1186/1746-1340-13-17. PMC 1208927. PMID 16092955.
- Joseph C. Keating Jr. (1997). "Chiropractic: science and antiscience and pseudoscience side by side". Skeptical Inquirer. 21 (4): 37–43.
- Phillips RB (2005). "The evolution of vitalism and materialism and its impact on philosophy". In Haldeman S, Dagenais S, Budgell B, et al. (eds.). Principles and Practice of Chiropractic (3rd ed.). McGraw-Hill. pp. 65–76. ISBN 978-0-07-137534-4.
- Reggars JW (2011). "Chiropractic at the crossroads or are we just going around in circles?". Chiropractic & Manual Therapies. 19: 11. doi:10.1186/2045-709X-19-11. PMC 3119029. PMID 21599991.
- Suter E, Vanderheyden LC, Trojan LS, Verhoef MJ, Armitage GD (February 2007). "How important is research-based practice to chiropractors and massage therapists?". Journal of Manipulative and Physiological Therapeutics. 30 (2): 109–15. doi:10.1016/j.jmpt.2006.12.013. PMID 17320731.
- Haldeman, Chapman-Smith, Petersen. Guidelines for chiropractic quality assurance and practice parameters p. 103.
- ^ WHO guidelines on basic training and safety in chiropractic, p. 4, including footnote.
- Palmer DD (1910) The Science, Art and Philosophy of Chiropractic Portland, Oregon: Portland Printing House Company p. 20.
- ^ Campbell JB, Busse JW, Injeyan HS (2000). "Chiropractors and vaccination: a historical perspective". Pediatrics. 105 (4): e43. doi:10.1542/peds.105.4.e43. PMID 10742364.
... considered disease the result of spinal nerve dysfunction caused by misplaced (subluxated) vertebrae. Although rejected by medical science, this concept is still accepted by a minority of chiropractors.
- Joseph M. Flesia, Jr., D.C. The Vertebral Subluxation Complex: An Integrative Perspective. Archived September 25, 2006, at the Wayback Machine ICA International Review of Chiropractic 1992 (Mar): 25-27
- World Chiropractic Alliance. Position paper on caring for asymptomatic patients Archived September 11, 2006, at the Wayback Machine.
- Spinal Injury Foundation. "Bone Out of Place – Boop". Archived from the original on 17 March 2008.
- Robert A. Leach. The chiropractic theories. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, 2003, ISBN 0-683-30747-9, ISBN 978-0-683-30747-4, 463 pages. Book search with numerous mentions of BOOP's history.
- NBCE (2014), About Chiropractic, National Board of Chiropractic Examiners, archived from the original on June 19, 2015, retrieved February 1, 2015
- ^ Robert Cooperstein, Brian J. Gleberzon. Technique systems in chiropractic. Elsevier Health Sciences, 2004, ISBN 0-443-07413-5, ISBN 978-0-443-07413-4, 387 pages.
- ^ Donald M. Petersen Jr. WFC Lays Foundation for Worldwide Chiropractic Unity. Dynamic Chiropractic, July 2, 2001, Vol. 19, Issue 14.
- "Guidance on claims made for the chiropractic vertebral subluxation complex" (PDF). General Chiropractic Council. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2011-04-16. Retrieved 2010-11-04.
- Robert D. Mootz, DC; Paul G. Shekelle, MD, PhD. Chiropractic in the United States: Training, Practice, and Research
- Koren, Tedd. "Does the Vertebral Subluxation Exist?". Retrieved January 22, 2019.
- ^ Gwilliam, Evan (15 August 2014), "Coding for the Subluxation: ICD-9 vs. ICD-10", Dynamic Chiropractic, vol. 32, no. 16, retrieved 12 August 2014
- Kent, Chris. "Models of Vertebral Subluxation:A Review" (PDF). Journal of Vertebral Subluxation Research. 1 (1). Retrieved January 22, 2019.
- "ACA CMS Clinical Documentation Guidelines" (PDF). American Chiropractic Association. Retrieved 2008-05-06.
- Strang, V (1984) Essential Principles of Chiropractic Davenport : Palmer College of Chiropractic, OCLC 12102972.
- M.I. Gatterman, M.A., D.C. One Step Further: The Vertebral Subluxation Syndrome. Dynamic Chiropractic, March 27, 1992, Volume 10, Issue 07.
- Terry Elder, DC. Does Chiropractic Have All the Answers? Dynamic Chiropractic, March 27, 1992, Vol. 10, Issue 07.
- David Seaman, DC, MS, DABCN. Nociception and Subluxation. Dynamic Chiropractic, September 23, 1994, Vol. 12, Issue 20.
- David Seaman, DC, MS, DABCN. If Not Nerve Interference, Then What? Mechanical Low Back and Neck Pain? Not Good Choices. Dynamic Chiropractic, June 3, 2004, Vol. 22, Issue 12.
- Nansel D, Szlazak M (1995). "Somatic dysfunction and the phenomenon of visceral disease simulation: a probable explanation for the apparent effectiveness of somatic therapy in patients presumed to be suffering from true visceral disease". J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 18 (6): 379–97. PMID 7595111.
- Seaman D, Winterstein J (1998). "Dysafferentation: a novel term for the neuropathophysiological effects of joint complex dysfunction. A look at likely mechanisms of symptom generation". J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 21 (4): 267–80. PMID 9608382.Full text online.
- Hardy K, Pollard H (2006). "The organisation of the stress response, and its relevance to chiropractors: a commentary". Chiropractic & Osteopathy. 2006 (14): 25. doi:10.1186/1746-1340-14-25. PMC 1629015. PMID 17044942.
- Bolton P (2000). "Reflex effects of vertebral subluxations: the peripheral nervous system. An update". J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 23 (2): 101–3. doi:10.1016/S0161-4754(00)90075-7. PMID 10714535.
- Ernst E (2008). "Chiropractic: a critical evaluation". J Pain Symptom Manage. 35 (5): 544–62. doi:10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2007.07.004. PMID 18280103.
- Murphy, et al. "Bringing Chiropractic Into the Mainstream in the 21st Century – Part II", Dynamic Chiropractic, September 1, 2005, Vol. 23, Issue 18.
- Robin Brett Parnes, MS, MPH, "Chiropractic Treatment: What You Should Know", Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center.
- Mirtz TA et al. An epidemiological examination of the subluxation construct using Hill's criteria of causation." Chiropractic & Osteopathy 2009, 17:13, 2009.
- "Clinical and Professional Chiropractic Education: a Position Statement" (PDF). Institut Franco-Européen de Chiropraxie. May 2015. Archived from the original (PDF) on February 24, 2018. Retrieved June 3, 2017.
Footnote 2: Specifically the form of vitalism as distinct from holism that proclaims 'If the specific vertebral subluxation is correctly adjusted, interference is released, pressure is eliminated, carrying capacity restored to normal, tissue cell is re‐established, and life and health begin to regrow back to normal. All this is directed, controlled, and performed by INNATE INTELLIGENCE' (Ref: BJP Fame and Fortune Vol. XXXIII)
External links
- Vertebral Subluxation in Chiropractic Practice – Council on Chiropractic Practice
- Models of Vertebral Subluxation: A Review – Christopher Kent, DC
- Chiropractic's Elusive Subluxation – Stephen Barrett, M.D.
- Subluxation – The Silent Killer – Ronald Carter, DC, MA, Past President, Canadian Chiropractic Association
Chiropractic | |
---|---|
Chiropractic | |
Techniques | |
Education | |
Accrediting bodies | |
International organizations | |
People | |