Allied Health Research Unit, University of Central Lancashire, Preston, UK.
Health Sciences, Doornfontein Campus, University of Johannesburg, Johannesburg, South Africa.
Chiropr Man Therap. 2024 Sep 11;32(1):28. doi: 10.1186/s12998-024-00549-w.
Spinal manipulation (SM) has been claimed to change anatomy, either in structure or position, and that these changes may be the cause of clinical improvements. The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate and synthesise the peer-reviewed literature on the current evidence of anatomical changes in response to SM.
The review was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42022304971) and reporting was guided by the standards of the PRISMA Statement. We searched Medline, Embase, CINAHL, AMED, Cochrane Library all databases, PEDro, and the Index to Chiropractic Literature from inception to 11 March 2022 and updated on 06 June 2023. Search terms included manipulation, adjustment, chiropractic, osteopathy, spine and spine-related structures. We included primary research studies that compared outcomes with and without SM regardless of study design. Manipulation was defined as high-velocity, low-amplitude thrust delivered by hand to the spine or directly related joints. Included studies objectively measured a potential change in an anatomical structure or in position. We developed a novel list of methodological quality items in addition to a short, customized list of risk of bias (RoB) items. We used quality and RoB items together to determine whether an article was credible or not credible. We sought differences in outcomes between SM and control groups for randomised controlled trials and crossover studies, and between pre- and post-SM outcomes for other study designs. We reported, in narrative form, whether there was a change or not.
The search retrieved 19,572 articles and 20 of those were included for review. Study topics included vertebral position (n = 3) facet joint space (n = 5), spinal stiffness (n = 3), resting muscle thickness (n = 6), intervertebral disc pressure (n = 1), myofascial hysteresis (n = 1), and further damage to already damaged arteries (n = 1). Eight articles were considered credible. The credible articles indicated that lumbar facet joint space increased and spinal stiffness decreased but that the resting muscle thickness did not change.
We found few studies on this topic. However, there are two promising areas for future study: facet joint space and spinal stiffness. A research strategy should be developed with funding for high quality research centres.
脊柱推拿(SM)被认为可以改变解剖结构,无论是结构还是位置,并且这些变化可能是临床改善的原因。本系统评价的目的是评估和综合当前关于 SM 引起的解剖学变化的同行评审文献。
本研究已在 PROSPERO(CRD42022304971)上注册,报告符合 PRISMA 声明的标准。我们检索了 Medline、Embase、CINAHL、AMED、Cochrane 图书馆、PEDro 和 Chiropractic 文献索引,检索时间从建库至 2022 年 3 月 11 日,并于 2023 年 6 月 6 日更新。检索词包括推拿、调整、脊椎按摩、整骨、脊柱和脊柱相关结构。我们纳入了比较有无 SM 治疗的研究结果的原始研究,无论研究设计如何。推拿定义为通过手向脊柱或直接相关关节施加高速、低幅度的推力。纳入的研究客观测量了解剖结构或位置的潜在变化。除了简短的、定制的偏倚风险(RoB)项目清单外,我们还开发了一套新的方法学质量项目清单。我们使用质量和 RoB 项目来确定文章是否可信。我们为随机对照试验和交叉研究报告了 SM 和对照组之间的结果差异,以及其他研究设计中 SM 前后的结果差异。我们以叙述的形式报告是否有变化。
检索到 19572 篇文章,其中 20 篇进行了综述。研究主题包括椎体位置(n=3)、小关节间隙(n=5)、脊柱刚度(n=3)、静息肌肉厚度(n=6)、椎间盘压力(n=1)、肌筋膜滞后性(n=1)和已经受损的动脉进一步受损(n=1)。8 篇文章被认为是可信的。可信文章表明,腰椎小关节间隙增大,脊柱刚度降低,但静息肌肉厚度不变。
我们发现关于这个主题的研究很少。然而,有两个有前途的研究领域:小关节间隙和脊柱刚度。应该制定一个研究策略,并为高质量的研究中心提供资金。