2019 Vic Govt Safer Review chiropractic care are report response by 27,000 parents finds ‘Parents are positive with chiropractic care for their babies and kids!!!’ We can help kids! All the good stuff is listed in the report you can access online.

This is in regard to a Chiropractic party as a new business in Margate advertising ‘as us’ for 5 months until we challenged. This is there response:-

And their response to being named they are not happy at that. Upon request of Sung Do Lawyers 20th March 2018 representing the party who used our name:- …“we have been instructed to report you to the relevant regulatory bodies if you do not remove the article immediately”, of the party who used our registered business name ‘Redcliffe Family Chiropractor’, states their client used it unintentionally to build his business, and is an innocent mistake,

however the Lawyers client will not be providing me with an apology letter, on behalf of their client Sung Do Lawyers state, “our client has sincerely apologized for their mistake and strongly asserts that they did not intend to cause any harm to your business“.

And as such, we shall refrain.

Following our flyer

Redcliffe Wellness
19 years of helping people
with their Stiffness Aches & Pains

AMA Validates Chiropractic?
By Donald M. Petersen Jr., BS, HCD(hc), FICC(h), Publisher Dynamic Chiropractic 11/07/17
Under the heading of, “I never thought I’d see the day when…” comes a study recently published in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA).1 The goal of the study was to “systematically review studies of the effectiveness and harms of SMT (spinal manipulative therapy) for acute (6 weeks) low back pain.” Paige, et al., identified 26 randomized clinical trials (RCTs) to measure improvements in pain and function, and assess any harm.
Important Findings
Fifteen RCTs comprising a total of 1,711 patients “provided moderate-quality evidence that SMT has a statistically significant association with improvements in pain.”
Twelve RCTs comprising 1,381 patients “produced moderate-quality evidence that SMT has a statistically significant association with improvements in function.”
“No RCT reported any serious adverse event.”
The authors concluded that SMT provides “modest improvements” in both pain and function for up to six weeks. While this might seem like faint praise, the most recent studies on drug alternatives to chiropractic care have demonstrated the following:
“Paracetamol [acetaminophen] is ineffective in the treatment of low back pain and provides minimal short term benefit for people with osteoarthritis. These results support the reconsideration of recommendations to use paracetamol for patients with low back pain and osteoarthritis of the hip or knee in clinical practice guidelines.”2
“[C]ompared with placebo, NSAIDs do not provide a clinically important effect on spinal pain, and six patients must be treated with NSAIDs for one patient to achieve a clinically important benefit in the short-term.”3
“[W]hen this result is taken together with those from recent reviews on paracetamol [acetaminophen/Tylenol] and opioids, it is now clear that the three most widely used, and guideline-recommended medicines for spinal pain do not provide clinically important effects over placebo.”3
An MD in Our Corner?
Published in the same issue with the Paige, et al., study is an editorial by Richard A. Deyo, MD, MPH.4 Dr. Deyo has dedicated several decades to the study of spine care. The list of papers he has participated on is extensive. (His work has been referenced 92 times in Dynamic Chiropractic alone.) In his editorial, Dr. Deyo makes many important points including:
Thirty percent of patients with back or neck pain seek chiropractic care.5
Fifty-nine percent of consumers surveyed by Consumer Reports were highly satisfied with chiropractic care compared to 55 percent for PTs and 34 percent for primary MDs.6
Serious complications for low-back SMT are very rare, while NSAIDs users commonly see renal and gastrointestinal adverse effects.7-8
Looking at the cost of drugs, surgery and their complications, chiropractic back pain patients “did not incur higher overall treatment costs compared with those who received only conventional care.”5
Progress at Last?
All of the above reinforces our understanding that drugs (and certainly surgery) are not the answer. As established by the AHCPR in Acute Low Back Problems in Adults: Assessment and Treatment some 23 years ago, spinal manipulation (chiropractic,according to the definition used by the panel) “is safe and effective for patients in the first month of acute low back symptoms without radiculopathy.”9
On Sept. 25 of this year, we will be celebrating the 30th anniversary of Judge Getzendanner’s decision that the AMA violated the Sherman Act in its attempt to restrain trade through a conspiracy “to contain and eliminate the chiropractic profession.”10 How fitting it is that the AMA’s primary journal has finally published a study, with an editorial, demonstrating the value of chiropractic after all these years.
The AMA as an organization hasn’t really validated chiropractic, but its flagship journal has published two articles that will speak loudly to AMA members and the world about one of the benefits of chiropractic care.
Author’s Note: The Paige, et al., study completes a circle that required decades of work by many. We have seen the tide change from an open effort to destroy chiropractic to publishing a study to demonstrate our value. This is hopefully just the beginning.

References
1. Paige NM, Miake-Lye IM, Booth MS, et al. Association of spinal manipulative therapy with clinical benefit and harm for acute low back pain: systematic review and meta-analysis. JAMA, 2017;317(14):1451-1460.
2. Machado GC, et al. Efficacy and safety of paracetamol for spinal pain and osteoarthritis: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized placebo controlled trials. BMJ, 2015;350:h1225.
3. Machado GC, et al. Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs for spinal pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ann Rheum Disease; e-pub ahead of print, Feb. 2, 2017.
4. Deyo RA. “The Role of Spinal Manipulation in the Treatment of Low Back Pain.” (Editorial) JAMA, 2017;317(14):1418-1419. (Please note that Dr. Deyo’s editorial is less than two pages long without references. You can read the entire first page free by clicking on the link in the article where I discuss Dr. Deyo.)
5. Martin BI, Gerkovich MM, Deyo RA, et al. The association of complementary and alternative medicine use and health care expenditures for back and neck problems. Med Care, 2012;50(12):1029-1036.
6. “Relief for Your Aching Back: What Worked for Our Readers.” Consumer Reports, 2013.
7. Whelton A, Hamilton CW. Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs: effects on kidney function. J Clin Pharmacol, 1991;31(7):588-598.
8. Vonkeman HE, van de Laar MAFJ. Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs: adverse effects and their prevention. Semin Arthritis Rheum, 2010;39(4):294-312.
9. Bigos S, Bowyer O, Braen G, et al. Acute Low Back Problems in Adults. Clinical Practice Guideline No. 14. AHCPR Publication No. 95-0642. Rockville, MD: Agency for Health Care Policy and Research, Public Health Service, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, December 1994.
10. “U.S. Judge Finds Medical Group Conspired Against Chiropractors.” The New York Times, Aug. 29, 1987.

Published by  Spinal Research at  April 20, 2017

We’ve all heard the scaremongers proclaim a link between chiropractic care and stroke. It’s easy to dismiss with a few well-referenced rebuttals and easier still to reject with a roll of the eye. Recently, a group of researchers took the issue of Cervical Artery Dissection, a key cause of strokes, and put it through the rigors of academia in a systematic review and meta-analysis.

The result: they found no evidence for causation. Here are the details on a contentious issue.

The authors of the study all hailed from the neurosurgery departments of either Penn State Hershey Medical Centre, Loma Linda University Medical Center or Pennsylvania State University. They undertook to examine the case reports and case control studies that suggested an association between chiropractic neck manipulation and cervical artery dissection by means of a systemic review and meta analysis [1].

They used a GRADE rating to establish the quality of the evidence[2,3,4]. This starts by examining the study design, before looking sequentially at features with potential to enhance or diminish confidence. The eventual rating took into consideration potential for bias given the controversial nature of the topic and the legal ramifications of the study’s findings. This is where it gets interesting.

The search took them through some 253 articles with just two eligible class II and four class III studies among the number. Though the meta-analysis seemed to reveal a small association between chiropractic care and dissection, the authors of the study deemed the evidence to be of ‘very low’ quality according to the GRADE rating.

This lead the authors to reason that the relationship (between chiropractic care and CAD) may be explained by “the high risk of bias and confounding in the available studies, and in particular by the known association of neck pain with CAD [cervical artery dissection] and with chiropractic manipulation and CAD. Belief in a causal link may have significant negative consequences such as numerous episodes of litigation [1].”

Once again, it appears that the truth may be getting in the way of a good story when it comes to so-called ‘risks’ tied up with chiropractic. The existing literature pointing to a correlation between spinal manipulative therapy and CAD is, according to the researchers, very low quality and potentially loaded with bias.

“While this study controlled for possible confounders such as neck pain, there were several limitations. Head and neck pain as well as chiropractor visit were assessed in a retrospective fashion by mail survey, very possibly introducing both recall and survivor bias. The reason for reporting to the chiropractor (e.g., trauma) was not assessed. Further, there was significant variability among diagnostic procedures, which may reflect increased motivation by physicians to rule out dissection in patients with a history of SMT. Such motivation could result in interviewer bias,” they wrote [1].

This isn’t just a study that failed to dig up any evidence. It’s a study that points to a potentially serious misconception. The authors wrote:

“There is no convincing evidence to support a causal link, and unfounded belief in causation may have dire consequences [1].”

So there you have it. Chiropractic care and cervical artery dissection, at this point in time, there is no evidence for causation.

References

[1] Church E, Sieg E, Zalatimo O, Hussain N, Glantz M, Harbaugh R (2016) “Chiropractic Care and Cervical Artery Dissection: No Evidence for Causation,” Penn State Neurosurgery Channel, http://www.cureus.com/articles/4155-systematic-review-and-meta-analysis-of-chiropractic-care-and-cervical-artery-dissection-no-evidence-for-causation retrieved 29 March 2017

[2] Guyatt G, Oxman AD, Akl EA, et al.: GRADE guidelines: 1. Introduction-GRADE evidence profiles and summary of findings tables. J Clin Epidemiol. 2011, 64:383–394. 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2010.04.026

[3] Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Kunz R, et al.: GRADE guidelines: 2. Framing the question and deciding on important outcomes. J Clin Epidemiol. 2011, 64:395–400. 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2010.09.012

[4] Balshem H, Helfand M, Schünemann HJ, et al.: GRADE guidelines: 3. Rating the quality of evidence. J Clin Epidemiol. 2011, 64:401–406. 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2010.07.015

Spinal Disc Decompression Therapy 

Spinal Disc Decompression Therapy is available from 11 April 2016 at Redcliffe Wellness Centre, 17 Silvyn Street REDCLIFFE QLD

This is the latest Cutting Edge Therapy that is

• Non-Surgical
• Non-Chiropractic
• Pain-Free

It suits people who would like to get up and be able to move pain-less in their low back and neck, despite having a severe problem, their is no manipulation, no need to stop care with your current health care providers.

We accept patients for this procedure who have chronic or sub-acute conditions that would be inclusive of:

• Herniated Discs
• Chronic Back Pain
• Leg Pain
• Sciatica
• Arm Pain
• Neck Pain
• Spinal Stenosis

We prefer MRI/CT be brought in for an assessment and we prefer recent spinal x-rays or arrange to get them for a New Patient Assessment. You do not need referral from your Doctor, Chiropractor, Physiotherapist or Dentist.

Feel free to call, email or make an appointment on (07) 3284-2065, [email protected]