Narrative: This paper arose from us finding a meaningful contradiction in two papers returned during the preparation by one of us (JI) to write on the topic of whether a carefully conceived adjustment would show physical change in the position of a vertebrae as seen on radiographs.
We discuss the two papers, one a systematic review by Corso et al published as a Rapid Review on commission of the College of Chiropractors of British Columbia and the other was a traditional, well-researched report by Oakley et al. In essence Corso et al ‘found no evidence [for] the use of routine or repeat radiographs to assess the function or structure’ while Oakley et al ‘highlight[ed] current and historical evidence that substantiates that X-rays are not a public health threat’. The two views are in conflict.
Our interest lies in us considering certain radiographs to have high clinical utility to the safe and effective care of the patient, and we use such radiographs as the basis for our ‘companion’ paper on that topic. We also report serial imaging, a practice Corso et al dismisses.
In this paper we conclude that Rapid Reviews are currently weak as indexed in the literature of Chiropractic and should not be relied on to give a definitive perspective.
Author keywords: Chiropractic - Upper cervical - Spine - Radiograph - X-ray - Clinical utility - Adjustment
This abstract is reproduced with the permission of the publisher; click on the above link for free full text. Online access only.
|
