Re: McKenzie therapy vs manipulation

[Guest guest]

Likewise , the pairing of rehab and manipulation has been shown to be more effective than either alone in other studies. Good for all of us to have an excellent set of rehab tools to send patients home with to help minimize rather than maximize the need for treatment. W. Snell,

D.C. Director, Solutions Sports & Spine, Inc at Hawthorne Wellness Center

3942 SE Hawthorne Blvd. Portland, OR 97214 Ph. 503-235-5484 Fax 503-235-3956

www.fixyourownback.comMember,

American College of Sports MedicineMember, International Society of Clinical Rehabilitation SpecialistsDate: Fri, 4 Mar 2011 09:20:43 -0800Subject: Re: McKenzie therapy vs manipulationFrom: mealeydc1@...To: drpsnell@...Hi ,Thanks for posting the study. I've been using McKenzie protocols and exercises for a while and found it to be a wonderful complement to chiropractic manipulation and other manual therapies for lumbar and cervical disc patients. sen, DC one of the co-authors noted in the study is a great resource and I think the first D.C. certified in McKenzie.

Mealey, DC On Fri, Mar 4, 2011 at 7:12 AM, Snell <drpsnell@...> wrote:

The McKenzie method compared with manipulation when used adjunctive to information and advice in low back pain patients presenting with centralization or peripheralization. A randomized controlled trial.

Spine - Vol Publish Ahead of Print February 27, 2011DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e318201ee8esen, Tom PT, PhD 1; Larsen, Kristian PT, PhD 2; Nordsteen, Jan DC, MPH 1; Olsen, Steen PT 1; Fournier, Gilles MD, DC, BSc 1; sen,

Soren MD, DrMsci 3AB Study design. Randomized controlled trial. Objective. To compare the effects of the McKenzie-method performed by certified therapists with spinal manipulation performed by chiropractors when used adjunctive to

information and advice. Summary of Background Data. Recent guidelines recommend a structured exercise programme tailored to the individual patient as well as manual therapy for the treatment of persistent low

back pain. There is presently insufficient evidence to recommend the use of specific decision methods tailoring specific therapies to clinical subgroups of patients in primary care. Methods. A total of 350 patients

suffering from low back pain with a duration of more than 6 weeks who presented with centralization or peripheralization of symptoms with or without signs of nerve root involvement, were enrolled in the trial.

Main outcome was number of patients with treatment success defined as a reduction of at least 5 points or an absolute score below 5 points on the Roland Questionnaire. Secondary outcomes were reduction in

disability and pain, global perceived effect, general health, mental health, lost work time, and medical care utilization. Results. Both treatment groups showed clinically meaningful improvements in this study. At two months follow-up, the McKenzie treatment was superior to

manipulation with respect to the number of patients who reported success following treatment (71% and 59% respectively) (odds ratio 0.58, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.36 to 0.91, P = 0.018). The number needed to

treat with the McKenzie-method was 7 (95% CI 4 to 47). The McKenzie group showed improvement in level of disability compared to the manipulation group reaching a statistical significance at two and twelve months follow-up (mean difference 1.5, 95% CI 0.2 to 2.8, P = 0.022 and

1.5, 95% CI 0.2 to 2.9, P = 0.030 respectively). There was also a significant difference of 13% in number of patients reporting global perceived effect at end of treatment (P = 0.016). None of the other secondary outcomes showed statically significant differences.

Conclusion. In patients with low back pain for more than six weeks presenting with centralization or peripheralization of symptoms, we found the McKenzie method to be slightly more effective than manipulation when used adjunctive to information and advice

W. Snell,

D.C. Director, Solutions Sports & Spine, Inc at Hawthorne Wellness Center

3942 SE Hawthorne Blvd. Portland, OR 97214 Ph. 503-235-5484 Fax 503-235-3956

www.fixyourownback.comMember,

American College of Sports MedicineMember, International Society of Clinical Rehabilitation Specialists

[Guest guest]

And if you haven't seen 's great website with rehab videos, check'em out. I refer my patients that need low back stabilization exercises to him, and he doesn't even know it!

Rod

Rodney G. , DCTillamook Natural Health Center309 Laurel Ave.Tillamook, OR 97141503-842-6532

Re: McKenzie therapy vs manipulationFrom: mealeydc1@...To: drpsnell@...Hi ,Thanks for posting the study. I've been using McKenzie protocols and exercises for a while and found it to be a wonderful complement to chiropractic manipulation and other manual therapies for lumbar and cervical disc patients. sen, DC one of the co-authors noted in the study is a great resource and I think the first D.C. certified in McKenzie. Mealey, DC

On Fri, Mar 4, 2011 at 7:12 AM, Snell <drpsnell@...> wrote:

The McKenzie method compared with manipulation when used adjunctive to information and advice in low back pain patients presenting with centralization or peripheralization. A randomized controlled trial.Spine - Vol Publish Ahead of Print February 27, 2011DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e318201ee8esen, Tom PT, PhD 1; Larsen, Kristian PT, PhD 2; Nordsteen, Jan DC, MPH 1; Olsen, Steen PT 1; Fournier, Gilles MD, DC, BSc 1; sen, Soren MD, DrMsci 3AB Study design. Randomized controlled trial. Objective. To compare the effects of the McKenzie-method performed by certified therapists with spinal manipulation performed by chiropractors when used adjunctive to information and advice. Summary of Background Data. Recent guidelines recommend a structured exercise programme tailored to the individual patient as well as manual therapy for the treatment of persistent low back pain. There is presently insufficient evidence to recommend the use of specific decision methods tailoring specific therapies to clinical subgroups of patients in primary care. Methods. A total of 350 patients suffering from low back pain with a duration of more than 6 weeks who presented with centralization or peripheralization of symptoms with or without signs of nerve root involvement, were enrolled in the trial. Main outcome was number of patients with treatment success defined as a reduction of at least 5 points or an absolute score below 5 points on the Roland Questionnaire. Secondary outcomes were reduction in disability and pain, global perceived effect, general health, mental health, lost work time, and medical care utilization. Results. Both treatment groups showed clinically meaningful improvements in this study. At two months follow-up, the McKenzie treatment was superior to manipulation with respect to the number of patients who reported success following treatment (71% and 59% respectively) (odds ratio 0.58, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.36 to 0.91, P = 0.018). The number needed to treat with the McKenzie-method was 7 (95% CI 4 to 47). The McKenzie group showed improvement in level of disability compared to the manipulation group reaching a statistical significance at two and twelve months follow-up (mean difference 1.5, 95% CI 0.2 to 2.8, P = 0.022 and 1.5, 95% CI 0.2 to 2.9, P = 0.030 respectively). There was also a significant difference of 13% in number of patients reporting global perceived effect at end of treatment (P = 0.016). None of the other secondary outcomes showed statically significant differences. Conclusion. In patients with low back pain for more than six weeks presenting with centralization or peripheralization of symptoms, we found the McKenzie method to be slightly more effective than manipulation when used adjunctive to information and advice W. Snell, D.C. Director, Solutions Sports & Spine, Inc at Hawthorne Wellness Center 3942 SE Hawthorne Blvd. Portland, OR 97214 Ph. 503-235-5484 Fax 503-235-3956 www.fixyourownback.comMember, American College of Sports MedicineMember, International Society of Clinical Rehabilitation Specialists

[Guest guest]

Other than Dr Cha and Dr Freeman is there anyone out there that utilizes Chiropractic for things other than pain control?

Thanks

Danno

Re: McKenzie therapy vs manipulationFrom: mealeydc1@...To: drpsnell@...Hi ,Thanks for posting the study. I've been using McKenzie protocols and exercises for a while and found it to be a wonderful complement to chiropractic manipulation and other manual therapies for lumbar and cervical disc patients. sen, DC one of the co-authors noted in the study is a great resource and I think the first D.C. certified in McKenzie. Mealey, DC

On Fri, Mar 4, 2011 at 7:12 AM, Snell <drpsnell@...> wrote:

The McKenzie method compared with manipulation when used adjunctive to information and advice in low back pain patients presenting with centralization or peripheralization. A randomized controlled trial.Spine - Vol Publish Ahead of Print February 27, 2011DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e318201ee8esen, Tom PT, PhD 1; Larsen, Kristian PT, PhD 2; Nordsteen, Jan DC, MPH 1; Olsen, Steen PT 1; Fournier, Gilles MD, DC, BSc 1; sen, Soren MD, DrMsci 3AB Study design. Randomized controlled trial. Objective. To compare the effects of the McKenzie-method performed by certified therapists with spinal manipulation performed by chiropractors when used adjunctive to information and advice. Summary of Background Data. Recent guidelines recommend a structured exercise programme tailored to the individual patient as well as manual therapy for the treatment of persistent low back pain. There is presently insufficient evidence to recommend the use of specific decision methods tailoring specific therapies to clinical subgroups of patients in primary care. Methods. A total of 350 patients suffering from low back pain with a duration of more than 6 weeks who presented with centralization or peripheralization of symptoms with or without signs of nerve root involvement, were enrolled in the trial. Main outcome was number of patients with treatment success defined as a reduction of at least 5 points or an absolute score below 5 points on the Roland Questionnaire. Secondary outcomes were reduction in disability and pain, global perceived effect, general health, mental health, lost work time, and medical care utilization. Results. Both treatment groups showed clinically meaningful improvements in this study. At two months follow-up, the McKenzie treatment was superior to manipulation with respect to the number of patients who reported success following treatment (71% and 59% respectively) (odds ratio 0.58, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.36 to 0.91, P = 0.018). The number needed to treat with the McKenzie-method was 7 (95% CI 4 to 47). The McKenzie group showed improvement in level of disability compared to the manipulation group reaching a statistical significance at two and twelve months follow-up (mean difference 1.5, 95% CI 0.2 to 2.8, P = 0.022 and 1.5, 95% CI 0.2 to 2.9, P = 0.030 respectively). There was also a significant difference of 13% in number of patients reporting global perceived effect at end of treatment (P = 0.016). None of the other secondary outcomes showed statically significant differences. Conclusion. In patients with low back pain for more than six weeks presenting with centralization or peripheralization of symptoms, we found the McKenzie method to be slightly more effective than manipulation when used adjunctive to information and advice W. Snell, D.C. Director, Solutions Sports & Spine, Inc at Hawthorne Wellness Center 3942 SE Hawthorne Blvd. Portland, OR 97214 Ph. 503-235-5484 Fax 503-235-3956 www.fixyourownback.comMember, American College of Sports MedicineMember, International Society of Clinical Rehabilitation Specialists

[Guest guest]

yea, I use it for chronic postural adaptations, preventative wellness and motion , athletic training and balance and of course rehabilitation (even in pain free recovery stages).

ph Medlin D.C.

From: D Beebe, D.C.

Sent: Friday, March 04, 2011 9:47 AM

oregon dc listserve ; Snell ; Rodney G. , DC

Subject: Re: McKenzie therapy vs manipulation

Other than Dr Cha and Dr Freeman is there anyone out there that utilizes Chiropractic for things other than pain control?

Thanks

Danno

Re: McKenzie therapy vs manipulationFrom: mealeydc1@...To: drpsnell@...Hi ,Thanks for posting the study. I've been using McKenzie protocols and exercises for a while and found it to be a wonderful complement to chiropractic manipulation and other manual therapies for lumbar and cervical disc patients. sen, DC one of the co-authors noted in the study is a great resource and I think the first D.C. certified in McKenzie. Mealey, DC

On Fri, Mar 4, 2011 at 7:12 AM, Snell <drpsnell@...> wrote:

The McKenzie method compared with manipulation when used adjunctive to information and advice in low back pain patients presenting with centralization or peripheralization. A randomized controlled trial.Spine - Vol Publish Ahead of Print February 27, 2011DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e318201ee8esen, Tom PT, PhD 1; Larsen, Kristian PT, PhD 2; Nordsteen, Jan DC, MPH 1; Olsen, Steen PT 1; Fournier, Gilles MD, DC, BSc 1; sen, Soren MD, DrMsci 3AB Study design. Randomized controlled trial. Objective. To compare the effects of the McKenzie-method performed by certified therapists with spinal manipulation performed by chiropractors when used adjunctive to information and advice. Summary of Background Data. Recent guidelines recommend a structured exercise programme tailored to the individual patient as well as manual therapy for the treatment of persistent low back pain. There is presently insufficient evidence to recommend the use of specific decision methods tailoring specific therapies to clinical subgroups of patients in primary care. Methods. A total of 350 patients suffering from low back pain with a duration of more than 6 weeks who presented with centralization or peripheralization of symptoms with or without signs of nerve root involvement, were enrolled in the trial. Main outcome was number of patients with treatment success defined as a reduction of at least 5 points or an absolute score below 5 points on the Roland Questionnaire. Secondary outcomes were reduction in disability and pain, global perceived effect, general health, mental health, lost work time, and medical care utilization. Results. Both treatment groups showed clinically meaningful improvements in this study. At two months follow-up, the McKenzie treatment was superior to manipulation with respect to the number of patients who reported success following treatment (71% and 59% respectively) (odds ratio 0.58, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.36 to 0.91, P = 0.018). The number needed to treat with the McKenzie-method was 7 (95% CI 4 to 47). The McKenzie group showed improvement in level of disability compared to the manipulation group reaching a statistical significance at two and twelve months follow-up (mean difference 1.5, 95% CI 0.2 to 2.8, P = 0.022 and 1.5, 95% CI 0.2 to 2.9, P = 0.030 respectively). There was also a significant difference of 13% in number of patients reporting global perceived effect at end of treatment (P = 0.016). None of the other secondary outcomes showed statically significant differences. Conclusion. In patients with low back pain for more than six weeks presenting with centralization or peripheralization of symptoms, we found the McKenzie method to be slightly more effective than manipulation when used adjunctive to information and advice W. Snell, D.C. Director, Solutions Sports & Spine, Inc at Hawthorne Wellness Center 3942 SE Hawthorne Blvd. Portland, OR 97214 Ph. 503-235-5484 Fax 503-235-3956 www.fixyourownback.comMember, American College of Sports MedicineMember, International Society of Clinical Rehabilitation Specialists

[Guest guest]

Let's face it Danno we are living in the era of the Medipractor and are witnessing a profession that is in it's waning years. You start to feel like Ben Kenobe in episode one of Star Wars, the last remnant of a once noble philosophy and lifestyle.

Re: McKenzie therapy vs manipulationFrom: mealeydc1@...To: drpsnell@...Hi ,Thanks for posting the study. I've been using McKenzie protocols and exercises for a while and found it to be a wonderful complement to chiropractic manipulation and other manual therapies for lumbar and cervical disc patients. sen, DC one of the co-authors noted in the study is a great resource and I think the first D.C. certified in McKenzie. Mealey, DC

On Fri, Mar 4, 2011 at 7:12 AM, Snell <drpsnell@...> wrote:

The McKenzie method compared with manipulation when used adjunctive to information and advice in low back pain patients presenting with centralization or peripheralization. A randomized controlled trial.Spine - Vol Publish Ahead of Print February 27, 2011DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e318201ee8esen, Tom PT, PhD 1; Larsen, Kristian PT, PhD 2; Nordsteen, Jan DC, MPH 1; Olsen, Steen PT 1; Fournier, Gilles MD, DC, BSc 1; sen, Soren MD, DrMsci 3AB Study design. Randomized controlled trial. Objective. To compare the effects of the McKenzie-method performed by certified therapists with spinal manipulation performed by chiropractors when used adjunctive to information and advice. Summary of Background Data. Recent guidelines recommend a structured exercise programme tailored to the individual patient as well as manual therapy for the treatment of persistent low back pain. There is presently insufficient evidence to recommend the use of specific decision methods tailoring specific therapies to clinical subgroups of patients in primary care. Methods. A total of 350 patients suffering from low back pain with a duration of more than 6 weeks who presented with centralization or peripheralization of symptoms with or without signs of nerve root involvement, were enrolled in the trial. Main outcome was number of patients with treatment success defined as a reduction of at least 5 points or an absolute score below 5 points on the Roland Questionnaire. Secondary outcomes were reduction in disability and pain, global perceived effect, general health, mental health, lost work time, and medical care utilization. Results. Both treatment groups showed clinically meaningful improvements in this study. At two months follow-up, the McKenzie treatment was superior to manipulation with respect to the number of patients who reported success following treatment (71% and 59% respectively) (odds ratio 0.58, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.36 to 0.91, P = 0.018). The number needed to treat with the McKenzie-method was 7 (95% CI 4 to 47). The McKenzie group showed improvement in level of disability compared to the manipulation group reaching a statistical significance at two and twelve months follow-up (mean difference 1.5, 95% CI 0.2 to 2.8, P = 0.022 and 1.5, 95% CI 0.2 to 2.9, P = 0.030 respectively). There was also a significant difference of 13% in number of patients reporting global perceived effect at end of treatment (P = 0.016). None of the other secondary outcomes showed statically significant differences. Conclusion. In patients with low back pain for more than six weeks presenting with centralization or peripheralization of symptoms, we found the McKenzie method to be slightly more effective than manipulation when used adjunctive to information and advice W. Snell, D.C. Director, Solutions Sports & Spine, Inc at Hawthorne Wellness Center 3942 SE Hawthorne Blvd. Portland, OR 97214 Ph. 503-235-5484 Fax 503-235-3956 www.fixyourownback.comMember, American College of Sports MedicineMember, International Society of Clinical Rehabilitation Specialists

[Guest guest]

Add my name to the list of docs who treat to turn on the life force and thus enhance every organ/ tissue in the body.  The force is strong here Herb.   I use CBP and other techniques to turn that force on again in as  many folks as I can get my hands on.  I saw the power of this adjustment thing when I helped save my first and only son from the clutches of ADHD by correcting his posture with CBP adjusting.   I have never forgotten the wonder of seeing my son return to normal with the adjusting of his spine

[Guest guest]

I'd like to ask that on this listserve we do not diss other Chiropractors for not doing the same technique that we are

Thank you

Lonnie DC

Oregondcs From: hbf4747@...Date: Fri, 4 Mar 2011 10:04:50 -0800Subject: Re: McKenzie therapy vs manipulation

Let's face it Danno we are living in the era of the Medipractor and are witnessing a profession that is in it's waning years. You start to feel like Ben Kenobe in episode one of Star Wars, the last remnant of a once noble philosophy and lifestyle.

Re: McKenzie therapy vs manipulationFrom: mealeydc1@...To: drpsnell@...Hi ,Thanks for posting the study. I've been using McKenzie protocols and exercises for a while and found it to be a wonderful complement to chiropractic manipulation and other manual therapies for lumbar and cervical disc patients. sen, DC one of the co-authors noted in the study is a great resource and I think the first D.C. certified in McKenzie. Mealey, DC

On Fri, Mar 4, 2011 at 7:12 AM, Snell <drpsnell@...> wrote:

The McKenzie method compared with manipulation when used adjunctive to information and advice in low back pain patients presenting with centralization or peripheralization. A randomized controlled trial.Spine - Vol Publish Ahead of Print February 27, 2011DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e318201ee8esen, Tom PT, PhD 1; Larsen, Kristian PT, PhD 2; Nordsteen, Jan DC, MPH 1; Olsen, Steen PT 1; Fournier, Gilles MD, DC, BSc 1; sen, Soren MD, DrMsci 3AB Study design. Randomized controlled trial. Objective. To compare the effects of the McKenzie-method performed by certified therapists with spinal manipulation performed by chiropractors when used adjunctive to information and advice. Summary of Background Data. Recent guidelines recommend a structured exercise programme tailored to the individual patient as well as manual therapy for the treatment of persistent low back pain. There is presently insufficient evidence to recommend the use of specific decision methods tailoring specific therapies to clinical subgroups of patients in primary care. Methods. A total of 350 patients suffering from low back pain with a duration of more than 6 weeks who presented with centralization or peripheralization of symptoms with or without signs of nerve root involvement, were enrolled in the trial. Main outcome was number of patients with treatment success defined as a reduction of at least 5 points or an absolute score below 5 points on the Roland Questionnaire. Secondary outcomes were reduction in disability and pain, global perceived effect, general health, mental health, lost work time, and medical care utilization. Results. Both treatment groups showed clinically meaningful improvements in this study. At two months follow-up, the McKenzie treatment was superior to manipulation with respect to the number of patients who reported success following treatment (71% and 59% respectively) (odds ratio 0.58, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.36 to 0.91, P = 0.018). The number needed to treat with the McKenzie-method was 7 (95% CI 4 to 47). The McKenzie group showed improvement in level of disability compared to the manipulation group reaching a statistical significance at two and twelve months follow-up (mean difference 1.5, 95% CI 0.2 to 2.8, P = 0.022 and 1.5, 95% CI 0.2 to 2.9, P = 0.030 respectively). There was also a significant difference of 13% in number of patients reporting global perceived effect at end of treatment (P = 0.016). None of the other secondary outcomes showed statically significant differences. Conclusion. In patients with low back pain for more than six weeks presenting with centralization or peripheralization of symptoms, we found the McKenzie method to be slightly more effective than manipulation when used adjunctive to information and advice W. Snell, D.C. Director, Solutions Sports & Spine, Inc at Hawthorne Wellness Center 3942 SE Hawthorne Blvd. Portland, OR 97214 Ph. 503-235-5484 Fax 503-235-3956 www.fixyourownback.comMember, American College of Sports MedicineMember, International Society of Clinical Rehabilitation Specialists

[Guest guest]

As with all in life, there is evolution. The way I practice now is very different from when I started. As an art and science it will change and adapt. Religions stay the sameSent from I-phoneTed Forcum, DC, DACBSPOn Mar 4, 2011, at 10:04 AM, "BERNICE FREEMAN" <hbf4747@...> wrote: Let's face it Danno we are living in the era of the Medipractor and are witnessing a profession that is in it's waning years. You start to feel like Ben Kenobe in episode one of Star Wars, the last remnant of a once noble philosophy and lifestyle. Re: McKenzie therapy vs manipulationFrom: mealeydc1@...To: drpsnell@...Hi ,Thanks for posting the study. I've been using McKenzie protocols and exercises for a while and found it to be a wonderful complement to chiropractic manipulation and other manual therapies for lumbar and cervical disc patients. sen, DC one of the co-authors noted in the study is a great resource and I think the first D.C. certified in McKenzie. Mealey, DC On Fri, Mar 4, 2011 at 7:12 AM, Snell <drpsnell@...> wrote: The McKenzie method compared with manipulation when used adjunctive to information and advice in low back pain patients presenting with centralization or peripheralization. A randomized controlled trial.Spine - Vol Publish Ahead of Print February 27, 2011DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e318201ee8esen, Tom PT, PhD 1; Larsen, Kristian PT, PhD 2; Nordsteen, Jan DC, MPH 1; Olsen, Steen PT 1; Fournier, Gilles MD, DC, BSc 1; sen, Soren MD, DrMsci 3AB Study design. Randomized controlled trial. Objective. To compare the effects of the McKenzie-method performed by certified therapists with spinal manipulation performed by chiropractors when used adjunctive to information and advice. Summary of Background Data. Recent guidelines recommend a structured exercise programme tailored to the individual patient as well as manual therapy for the treatment of persistent low back pain. There is presently insufficient evidence to recommend the use of specific decision methods tailoring specific therapies to clinical subgroups of patients in primary care. Methods. A total of 350 patients suffering from low back pain with a duration of more than 6 weeks who presented with centralization or peripheralization of symptoms with or without signs of nerve root involvement, were enrolled in the trial. Main outcome was number of patients with treatment success defined as a reduction of at least 5 points or an absolute score below 5 points on the Roland Questionnaire. Secondary outcomes were reduction in disability and pain, global perceived effect, general health, mental health, lost work time, and medical care utilization. Results. Both treatment groups showed clinically meaningful improvements in this study. At two months follow-up, the McKenzie treatment was superior to manipulation with respect to the number of patients who reported success following treatment (71% and 59% respectively) (odds ratio 0.58, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.36 to 0.91, P = 0.018). The number needed to treat with the McKenzie-method was 7 (95% CI 4 to 47). The McKenzie group showed improvement in level of disability compared to the manipulation group reaching a statistical significance at two and twelve months follow-up (mean difference 1.5, 95% CI 0.2 to 2.8, P = 0.022 and 1.5, 95% CI 0.2 to 2.9, P = 0.030 respectively). There was also a significant difference of 13% in number of patients reporting global perceived effect at end of treatment (P = 0.016). None of the other secondary outcomes showed statically significant differences. Conclusion. In patients with low back pain for more than six weeks presenting with centralization or peripheralization of symptoms, we found the McKenzie method to be slightly more effective than manipulation when used adjunctive to information and advice W. Snell, D.C. Director, Solutions Sports & Spine, Inc at Hawthorne Wellness Center 3942 SE Hawthorne Blvd. Portland, OR 97214 Ph. 503-235-5484 Fax 503-235-3956 www.fixyourownback.comMember, American College of Sports MedicineMember, International Society of Clinical Rehabilitation Specialists

[Guest guest]

Excellent point Lonnie! If we complain about what others are or are not doing, we will be in our waning years.We need to embrace our differences rather than denigrate each other. Cluen, DCFrom: Lonnie <1lobogris@...>hbf4747@...; Sent: Fri, March 4, 2011 10:34:55

AMSubject: RE: McKenzie therapy vs manipulation

I'd like to ask that on this listserve we do not diss other Chiropractors for not doing the same technique that we are

Thank you

Lonnie DC

Oregondcs From: hbf4747@...Date: Fri, 4 Mar 2011 10:04:50 -0800Subject: Re: McKenzie therapy vs manipulation

Let's face it Danno we are living in the era of the Medipractor and are witnessing a profession that is in it's waning years. You start to feel like Ben Kenobe in episode one of Star Wars, the last remnant of a once noble philosophy and lifestyle.

Re: McKenzie therapy vs manipulationFrom: mealeydc1@...To: drpsnell@...Hi ,Thanks for posting the study. I've been using McKenzie protocols and exercises for a while and found it to be a wonderful complement to chiropractic manipulation and other manual therapies for lumbar and cervical disc patients. sen, DC one of the co-authors noted in the study is a great resource and I think the first D.C. certified in McKenzie. Mealey, DC

On Fri, Mar 4, 2011 at 7:12 AM, Snell <drpsnell@...> wrote:

The McKenzie method compared with manipulation when used adjunctive to information and advice in low back pain patients presenting with centralization or peripheralization. A randomized controlled trial.Spine - Vol Publish Ahead of Print February 27, 2011DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e318201ee8esen, Tom PT, PhD 1; Larsen, Kristian PT, PhD 2; Nordsteen, Jan DC, MPH 1; Olsen, Steen PT 1; Fournier, Gilles MD, DC, BSc 1; sen, Soren MD, DrMsci 3AB Study design. Randomized controlled trial. Objective. To compare the effects of the McKenzie-method performed by certified therapists with spinal manipulation performed by chiropractors when used adjunctive to information and advice. Summary of Background Data. Recent guidelines recommend a structured exercise programme tailored to the

individual patient as well as manual therapy for the treatment of persistent low back pain. There is presently insufficient evidence to recommend the use of specific decision methods tailoring specific therapies to clinical subgroups of patients in primary care. Methods. A total of 350 patients suffering from low back pain with a duration of more than 6 weeks who presented with centralization or peripheralization of symptoms with or without signs of nerve root involvement, were enrolled in the trial. Main outcome was number of patients with treatment success defined as a reduction of at least 5 points or an absolute score below 5 points on the Roland Questionnaire. Secondary outcomes were reduction in disability and pain, global perceived effect, general health, mental health, lost work time, and medical care utilization. Results.

Both treatment groups showed clinically meaningful improvements in this study. At two months follow-up, the McKenzie treatment was superior to manipulation with respect to the number of patients who reported success following treatment (71% and 59% respectively) (odds ratio 0.58, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.36 to 0.91, P = 0.018). The number needed to treat with the McKenzie-method was 7 (95% CI 4 to 47). The McKenzie group showed improvement in level of disability compared to the manipulation group reaching a statistical significance at two and twelve months follow-up (mean difference 1.5, 95% CI 0.2 to 2.8, P = 0.022 and 1.5, 95% CI 0.2 to 2.9, P = 0.030 respectively). There was also a significant difference of 13% in number of patients reporting global perceived effect at end of treatment (P = 0.016). None of the other secondary

outcomes showed statically significant differences. Conclusion. In patients with low back pain for more than six weeks presenting with centralization or peripheralization of symptoms, we found the McKenzie method to be slightly more effective than manipulation when used adjunctive to information and advice W. Snell, D.C. Director, Solutions Sports & Spine, Inc at Hawthorne Wellness Center 3942 SE Hawthorne Blvd. Portland, OR 97214 Ph. 503-235-5484 Fax 503-235-3956 www.fixyourownback.comMember, American College of Sports MedicineMember, International Society of Clinical Rehabilitation

Specialists

[Guest guest]

Well...the "whole body benefit" of pain control is that it decreases facilitation of the Anutonomic Nervous System (i.e. reduction in cortisol levels and thus BP, etc, etc,etc...).

Calming of the ANS prevents exhaustion of the GAS (general adaptive syndrome--see Hans Selye, M.D.'s book the stress of life). Exhaustion of the GAS can lead to ANY disease (i.e. genetic or environmental).

So...if we're all on their toes here...using chiropractic for "pain control" is in fact using chiropractic for "other things."

I would offer that if we CANNOT get our patients out of pain...and KEEP them out of pain, they will never prevent the "diseases of adaptation." (;-)

M. s, D.C.

Re: McKenzie therapy vs manipulationFrom: mealeydc1@...To: drpsnell@...Hi ,Thanks for posting the study. I've been using McKenzie protocols and exercises for a while and found it to be a wonderful complement to chiropractic manipulation and other manual therapies for lumbar and cervical disc patients. sen, DC one of the co-authors noted in the study is a great resource and I think the first D.C. certified in McKenzie. Mealey, DC

On Fri, Mar 4, 2011 at 7:12 AM, Snell <drpsnell@...> wrote:

The McKenzie method compared with manipulation when used adjunctive to information and advice in low back pain patients presenting with centralization or peripheralization. A randomized controlled trial.Spine - Vol Publish Ahead of Print February 27, 2011DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e318201ee8esen, Tom PT, PhD 1; Larsen, Kristian PT, PhD 2; Nordsteen, Jan DC, MPH 1; Olsen, Steen PT 1; Fournier, Gilles MD, DC, BSc 1; sen, Soren MD, DrMsci 3AB Study design. Randomized controlled trial. Objective. To compare the effects of the McKenzie-method performed by certified therapists with spinal manipulation performed by chiropractors when used adjunctive to information and advice. Summary of Background Data. Recent guidelines recommend a structured exercise programme tailored to the individual patient as well as manual therapy for the treatment of persistent low back pain. There is presently insufficient evidence to recommend the use of specific decision methods tailoring specific therapies to clinical subgroups of patients in primary care. Methods. A total of 350 patients suffering from low back pain with a duration of more than 6 weeks who presented with centralization or peripheralization of symptoms with or without signs of nerve root involvement, were enrolled in the trial. Main outcome was number of patients with treatment success defined as a reduction of at least 5 points or an absolute score below 5 points on the Roland Questionnaire. Secondary outcomes were reduction in disability and pain, global perceived effect, general health, mental health, lost work time, and medical care utilization. Results. Both treatment groups showed clinically meaningful improvements in this study. At two months follow-up, the McKenzie treatment was superior to manipulation with respect to the number of patients who reported success following treatment (71% and 59% respectively) (odds ratio 0.58, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.36 to 0.91, P = 0.018). The number needed to treat with the McKenzie-method was 7 (95% CI 4 to 47). The McKenzie group showed improvement in level of disability compared to the manipulation group reaching a statistical significance at two and twelve months follow-up (mean difference 1.5, 95% CI 0.2 to 2.8, P = 0.022 and 1.5, 95% CI 0.2 to 2.9, P = 0.030 respectively). There was also a significant difference of 13% in number of patients reporting global perceived effect at end of treatment (P = 0.016). None of the other secondary outcomes showed statically significant differences. Conclusion. In patients with low back pain for more than six weeks presenting with centralization or peripheralization of symptoms, we found the McKenzie method to be slightly more effective than manipulation when used adjunctive to information and advice W. Snell, D.C. Director, Solutions Sports & Spine, Inc at Hawthorne Wellness Center 3942 SE Hawthorne Blvd. Portland, OR 97214 Ph. 503-235-5484 Fax 503-235-3956 www.fixyourownback.comMember, American College of Sports MedicineMember, International Society of Clinical Rehabilitation Specialists

[Guest guest]

"Although I do treat inflammation and acute injury, I don't treat pain but tell my patients that through restoration of normal joint function through adjusting, focal soft tissue work and other manual techniques, coupled with appropriate home care and exercise there pain will abate."

Isn't this pretty much how all of us who do treat pain, do it? How can you treat inflammation and acute injury but not pain.? Pain is inflammation and acute injury.

I mean, theres A LOT of semantics. We ALL treat pain. Those who say you don't ask yourself this: When a patient comes in the door complaining of upper back pain due to a fall, do you work on that area?

If you do you treat pain. If you don't, then you're ignoring your patients complaints and won't be in business very long.

ph Medlin D.C.

From: BRIAN SEITZ

Sent: Friday, March 04, 2011 11:55 AM

oregon DCs

Subject: RE: McKenzie therapy vs manipulation

Although I do treat inflammation and acute injury, I don't treat pain but tell my patients that through restoration of normal joint function through adjusting, focal soft tissue work and other manual techniques, coupled with appropriate home care and exercise there pain will abate. I feel I support homeostasis through the restoration of proper body function via manual care and counsel on diet, nutrition and lifestyle. If you want to call it the innate communicating with the universal go right ahead. It is a vitalistic philosophy I have.

Seitz, DC Tuality Physicians 730-D SE Oak St Hillsboro, OR 97123 (503)640-3724

; drpsnell@...; rjacksondc@...From: daniel.beebe@...Date: Fri, 4 Mar 2011 09:47:42 -0800Subject: Re: McKenzie therapy vs manipulation

Other than Dr Cha and Dr Freeman is there anyone out there that utilizes Chiropractic for things other than pain control?

Thanks

Danno

Re: McKenzie therapy vs manipulationFrom: mealeydc1@...To: drpsnell@...Hi ,Thanks for posting the study. I've been using McKenzie protocols and exercises for a while and found it to be a wonderful complement to chiropractic manipulation and other manual therapies for lumbar and cervical disc patients. sen, DC one of the co-authors noted in the study is a great resource and I think the first D.C. certified in McKenzie. Mealey, DC

On Fri, Mar 4, 2011 at 7:12 AM, Snell <drpsnell@...> wrote:

The McKenzie method compared with manipulation when used adjunctive to information and advice in low back pain patients presenting with centralization or peripheralization. A randomized controlled trial.Spine - Vol Publish Ahead of Print February 27, 2011DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e318201ee8esen, Tom PT, PhD 1; Larsen, Kristian PT, PhD 2; Nordsteen, Jan DC, MPH 1; Olsen, Steen PT 1; Fournier, Gilles MD, DC, BSc 1; sen, Soren MD, DrMsci 3AB Study design. Randomized controlled trial. Objective. To compare the effects of the McKenzie-method performed by certified therapists with spinal manipulation performed by chiropractors when used adjunctive to information and advice. Summary of Background Data. Recent guidelines recommend a structured exercise programme tailored to the individual patient as well as manual therapy for the treatment of persistent low back pain. There is presently insufficient evidence to recommend the use of specific decision methods tailoring specific therapies to clinical subgroups of patients in primary care. Methods. A total of 350 patients suffering from low back pain with a duration of more than 6 weeks who presented with centralization or peripheralization of symptoms with or without signs of nerve root involvement, were enrolled in the trial. Main outcome was number of patients with treatment success defined as a reduction of at least 5 points or an absolute score below 5 points on the Roland Questionnaire. Secondary outcomes were reduction in disability and pain, global perceived effect, general health, mental health, lost work time, and medical care utilization. Results. Both treatment groups showed clinically meaningful improvements in this study. At two months follow-up, the McKenzie treatment was superior to manipulation with respect to the number of patients who reported success following treatment (71% and 59% respectively) (odds ratio 0.58, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.36 to 0.91, P = 0.018). The number needed to treat with the McKenzie-method was 7 (95% CI 4 to 47). The McKenzie group showed improvement in level of disability compared to the manipulation group reaching a statistical significance at two and twelve months follow-up (mean difference 1.5, 95% CI 0.2 to 2.8, P = 0.022 and 1.5, 95% CI 0.2 to 2.9, P = 0.030 respectively). There was also a significant difference of 13% in number of patients reporting global perceived effect at end of treatment (P = 0.016). None of the other secondary outcomes showed statically significant differences. Conclusion. In patients with low back pain for more than six weeks presenting with centralization or peripheralization of symptoms, we found the McKenzie method to be slightly more effective than manipulation when used adjunctive to information and advice W. Snell, D.C. Director, Solutions Sports & Spine, Inc at Hawthorne Wellness Center 3942 SE Hawthorne Blvd. Portland, OR 97214 Ph. 503-235-5484 Fax 503-235-3956 www.fixyourownback.comMember, American College of Sports MedicineMember, International Society of Clinical Rehabilitation Specialists

[Guest guest]

Yes!!! I do. So sad to see that many DCs apparently do not know the power of chiropractic care, because they lack training and experience.

Janet L Rueger, DCcertified in CraniopathyCertified BodyTalk Practitioner149 Clear Creek Dr., # 105Ashland, OR, 97520541-690-6799bodytalk@...

On Mar 4, 2011, at 9:47 AM, D Beebe, D.C. wrote:

Other than Dr Cha and Dr Freeman is there anyone out there that utilizes Chiropractic for things other than pain control?

Thanks

Danno

Re: McKenzie therapy vs manipulationFrom: mealeydc1@...To: drpsnell@...Hi ,Thanks for posting the study. I've been using McKenzie protocols and exercises for a while and found it to be a wonderful complement to chiropractic manipulation and other manual therapies for lumbar and cervical disc patients. sen, DC one of the co-authors noted in the study is a great resource and I think the first D.C. certified in McKenzie. Mealey, DC

On Fri, Mar 4, 2011 at 7:12 AM, Snell <drpsnell@...> wrote:

The McKenzie method compared with manipulation when used adjunctive to information and advice in low back pain patients presenting with centralization or peripheralization. A randomized controlled trial.Spine - Vol Publish Ahead of Print February 27, 2011DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e318201ee8esen, Tom PT, PhD 1; Larsen, Kristian PT, PhD 2; Nordsteen, Jan DC, MPH 1; Olsen, Steen PT 1; Fournier, Gilles MD, DC, BSc 1; sen, Soren MD, DrMsci 3AB Study design. Randomized controlled trial. Objective. To compare the effects of the McKenzie-method performed by certified therapists with spinal manipulation performed by chiropractors when used adjunctive to information and advice. Summary of Background Data. Recent guidelines recommend a structured exercise programme tailored to the individual patient as well as manual therapy for the treatment of persistent low back pain. There is presently insufficient evidence to recommend the use of specific decision methods tailoring specific therapies to clinical subgroups of patients in primary care. Methods. A total of 350 patients suffering from low back pain with a duration of more than 6 weeks who presented with centralization or peripheralization of symptoms with or without signs of nerve root involvement, were enrolled in the trial. Main outcome was number of patients with treatment success defined as a reduction of at least 5 points or an absolute score below 5 points on the Roland Questionnaire. Secondary outcomes were reduction in disability and pain, global perceived effect, general health, mental health, lost work time, and medical care utilization. Results. Both treatment groups showed clinically meaningful improvements in this study. At two months follow-up, the McKenzie treatment was superior to manipulation with respect to the number of patients who reported success following treatment (71% and 59% respectively) (odds ratio 0.58, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.36 to 0.91, P = 0.018). The number needed to treat with the McKenzie-method was 7 (95% CI 4 to 47). The McKenzie group showed improvement in level of disability compared to the manipulation group reaching a statistical significance at two and twelve months follow-up (mean difference 1.5, 95% CI 0.2 to 2.8, P = 0.022 and 1.5, 95% CI 0.2 to 2.9, P = 0.030 respectively). There was also a significant difference of 13% in number of patients reporting global perceived effect at end of treatment (P = 0.016). None of the other secondary outcomes showed statically significant differences. Conclusion. In patients with low back pain for more than six weeks presenting with centralization or peripheralization of symptoms, we found the McKenzie method to be slightly more effective than manipulation when used adjunctive to information and advice W. Snell, D.C. Director, Solutions Sports & Spine, Inc at Hawthorne Wellness Center 3942 SE Hawthorne Blvd. Portland, OR 97214 Ph. 503-235-5484 Fax 503-235-3956 www.fixyourownback.comMember, American College of Sports MedicineMember, International Society of Clinical Rehabilitation Specialists

[Guest guest]

Nah.....it just means we all get to keep teaching the public......seems to me they are 'getting it'! The people coming in to see me/us these days seem much more interested in staying healthy.

Stiff upper lip, guys....keep on keeping on .... we ARE winning!

Sunny

Sunny Kierstyn, RN DC Fibromyalgia Care Center of Oregon 2677 Willakenzie Road, 7CEugene, Oregon, 97401541- 654-0850; Fx; 541- 654-0834www.drsunnykierstyn.com

Oregondcs From: hbf4747@...Date: Fri, 4 Mar 2011 10:04:50 -0800Subject: Re: McKenzie therapy vs manipulation

Let's face it Danno we are living in the era of the Medipractor and are witnessing a profession that is in it's waning years. You start to feel like Ben Kenobe in episode one of Star Wars, the last remnant of a once noble philosophy and lifestyle.

Re: McKenzie therapy vs manipulationFrom: mealeydc1@...To: drpsnell@...Hi ,Thanks for posting the study. I've been using McKenzie protocols and exercises for a while and found it to be a wonderful complement to chiropractic manipulation and other manual therapies for lumbar and cervical disc patients. sen, DC one of the co-authors noted in the study is a great resource and I think the first D.C. certified in McKenzie. Mealey, DC

On Fri, Mar 4, 2011 at 7:12 AM, Snell <drpsnell@...> wrote:

The McKenzie method compared with manipulation when used adjunctive to information and advice in low back pain patients presenting with centralization or peripheralization. A randomized controlled trial.Spine - Vol Publish Ahead of Print February 27, 2011DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e318201ee8esen, Tom PT, PhD 1; Larsen, Kristian PT, PhD 2; Nordsteen, Jan DC, MPH 1; Olsen, Steen PT 1; Fournier, Gilles MD, DC, BSc 1; sen, Soren MD, DrMsci 3AB Study design. Randomized controlled trial. Objective. To compare the effects of the McKenzie-method performed by certified therapists with spinal manipulation performed by chiropractors when used adjunctive to information and advice. Summary of Background Data. Recent guidelines recommend a structured exercise programme tailored to the individual patient as well as manual therapy for the treatment of persistent low back pain. There is presently insufficient evidence to recommend the use of specific decision methods tailoring specific therapies to clinical subgroups of patients in primary care. Methods. A total of 350 patients suffering from low back pain with a duration of more than 6 weeks who presented with centralization or peripheralization of symptoms with or without signs of nerve root involvement, were enrolled in the trial. Main outcome was number of patients with treatment success defined as a reduction of at least 5 points or an absolute score below 5 points on the Roland Questionnaire. Secondary outcomes were reduction in disability and pain, global perceived effect, general health, mental health, lost work time, and medical care utilization. Results. Both treatment groups showed clinically meaningful improvements in this study. At two months follow-up, the McKenzie treatment was superior to manipulation with respect to the number of patients who reported success following treatment (71% and 59% respectively) (odds ratio 0.58, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.36 to 0.91, P = 0.018). The number needed to treat with the McKenzie-method was 7 (95% CI 4 to 47). The McKenzie group showed improvement in level of disability compared to the manipulation group reaching a statistical significance at two and twelve months follow-up (mean difference 1.5, 95% CI 0.2 to 2.8, P = 0.022 and 1.5, 95% CI 0.2 to 2.9, P = 0.030 respectively). There was also a significant difference of 13% in number of patients reporting global perceived effect at end of treatment (P = 0.016). None of the other secondary outcomes showed statically significant differences. Conclusion. In patients with low back pain for more than six weeks presenting with centralization or peripheralization of symptoms, we found the McKenzie method to be slightly more effective than manipulation when used adjunctive to information and advice W. Snell, D.C. Director, Solutions Sports & Spine, Inc at Hawthorne Wellness Center 3942 SE Hawthorne Blvd. Portland, OR 97214 Ph. 503-235-5484 Fax 503-235-3956 www.fixyourownback.comMember, American College of Sports MedicineMember, International Society of Clinical Rehabilitation Specialists

[Guest guest]

Just curious. How has Einstein and Pasteur change religion?Sent from I-phoneTed Forcum, DC, DACBSPOn Mar 4, 2011, at 2:23 PM, "BERNICE FREEMAN" <hbf4747@...> wrote: Au Contraire Dr. Forcum, religions do change and have been changing because of the discoveries of men like Copernicus, Newton, Pasteur, and Einstein to mention just a few of the great scientists who have altered our view of the world and the universe we live in. Herb Freeman D.C. Re: McKenzie therapy vs manipulationFrom: mealeydc1@...To: drpsnell@...Hi ,Thanks for posting the study. I've been using McKenzie protocols and exercises for a while and found it to be a wonderful complement to chiropractic manipulation and other manual therapies for lumbar and cervical disc patients. sen, DC one of the co-authors noted in the study is a great resource and I think the first D.C. certified in McKenzie. Mealey, DC On Fri, Mar 4, 2011 at 7:12 AM, Snell <drpsnell@...> wrote: The McKenzie method compared with manipulation when used adjunctive to information and advice in low back pain patients presenting with centralization or peripheralization. A randomized controlled trial.Spine - Vol Publish Ahead of Print February 27, 2011DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e318201ee8esen, Tom PT, PhD 1; Larsen, Kristian PT, PhD 2; Nordsteen, Jan DC, MPH 1; Olsen, Steen PT 1; Fournier, Gilles MD, DC, BSc 1; sen, Soren MD, DrMsci 3AB Study design. Randomized controlled trial. Objective. To compare the effects of the McKenzie-method performed by certified therapists with spinal manipulation performed by chiropractors when used adjunctive to information and advice. Summary of Background Data. Recent guidelines recommend a structured exercise programme tailored to the individual patient as well as manual therapy for the treatment of persistent low back pain. There is presently insufficient evidence to recommend the use of specific decision methods tailoring specific therapies to clinical subgroups of patients in primary care. Methods. A total of 350 patients suffering from low back pain with a duration of more than 6 weeks who presented with centralization or peripheralization of symptoms with or without signs of nerve root involvement, were enrolled in the trial. Main outcome was number of patients with treatment success defined as a reduction of at least 5 points or an absolute score below 5 points on the Roland Questionnaire. Secondary outcomes were reduction in disability and pain, global perceived effect, general health, mental health, lost work time, and medical care utilization. Results. Both treatment groups showed clinically meaningful improvements in this study. At two months follow-up, the McKenzie treatment was superior to manipulation with respect to the number of patients who reported success following treatment (71% and 59% respectively) (odds ratio 0.58, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.36 to 0.91, P = 0.018). The number needed to treat with the McKenzie-method was 7 (95% CI 4 to 47). The McKenzie group showed improvement in level of disability compared to the manipulation group reaching a statistical significance at two and twelve months follow-up (mean difference 1.5, 95% CI 0.2 to 2.8, P = 0.022 and 1.5, 95% CI 0.2 to 2.9, P = 0.030 respectively). There was also a significant difference of 13% in number of patients reporting global perceived effect at end of treatment (P = 0.016). None of the other secondary outcomes showed statically significant differences. Conclusion. In patients with low back pain for more than six weeks presenting with centralization or peripheralization of symptoms, we found the McKenzie method to be slightly more effective than manipulation when used adjunctive to information and advice W. Snell, D.C. Director, Solutions Sports & Spine, Inc at Hawthorne Wellness Center 3942 SE Hawthorne Blvd. Portland, OR 97214 Ph. 503-235-5484 Fax 503-235-3956 www.fixyourownback.comMember, American College of Sports MedicineMember, International Society of Clinical Rehabilitation Specialists

[Guest guest]

Wow, as I have interns cycle through my office it seems the DC training is improving across the country. It could just be my limited experience and limited education that I have enjoyed see patients feel better and perform at higher levels by mirror luck. I would suggest that it is egocentric to suggest that most all DC's help people have a better life.Sent from I-phoneTed Forcum, DC, DACBSPOn Mar 4, 2011, at 3:58 PM, "Janet L Rueger, DC" <bodytalk@...> wrote: Yes!!! I do. So sad to see that many DCs apparently do not know the power of chiropractic care, because they lack training and experience.Janet L Rueger, DCcertified in CraniopathyCertified BodyTalk Practitioner149 Clear Creek Dr., # 105Ashland, OR, 97520541-690-6799bodytalk@...On Mar 4, 2011, at 9:47 AM, D Beebe, D.C. wrote: Other than Dr Cha and Dr Freeman is there anyone out there that utilizes Chiropractic for things other than pain control? Thanks Danno Re: McKenzie therapy vs manipulationFrom: mealeydc1@...To: drpsnell@...Hi ,Thanks for posting the study. I've been using McKenzie protocols and exercises for a while and found it to be a wonderful complement to chiropractic manipulation and other manual therapies for lumbar and cervical disc patients. sen, DC one of the co-authors noted in the study is a great resource and I think the first D.C. certified in McKenzie. Mealey, DC On Fri, Mar 4, 2011 at 7:12 AM, Snell <drpsnell@...> wrote: The McKenzie method compared with manipulation when used adjunctive to information and advice in low back pain patients presenting with centralization or peripheralization. A randomized controlled trial.Spine - Vol Publish Ahead of Print February 27, 2011DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e318201ee8esen, Tom PT, PhD 1; Larsen, Kristian PT, PhD 2; Nordsteen, Jan DC, MPH 1; Olsen, Steen PT 1; Fournier, Gilles MD, DC, BSc 1; sen, Soren MD, DrMsci 3AB Study design. Randomized controlled trial. Objective. To compare the effects of the McKenzie-method performed by certified therapists with spinal manipulation performed by chiropractors when used adjunctive to information and advice. Summary of Background Data. Recent guidelines recommend a structured exercise programme tailored to the individual patient as well as manual therapy for the treatment of persistent low back pain. There is presently insufficient evidence to recommend the use of specific decision methods tailoring specific therapies to clinical subgroups of patients in primary care. Methods. A total of 350 patients suffering from low back pain with a duration of more than 6 weeks who presented with centralization or peripheralization of symptoms with or without signs of nerve root involvement, were enrolled in the trial. Main outcome was number of patients with treatment success defined as a reduction of at least 5 points or an absolute score below 5 points on the Roland Questionnaire. Secondary outcomes were reduction in disability and pain, global perceived effect, general health, mental health, lost work time, and medical care utilization. Results. Both treatment groups showed clinically meaningful improvements in this study. At two months follow-up, the McKenzie treatment was superior to manipulation with respect to the number of patients who reported success following treatment (71% and 59% respectively) (odds ratio 0.58, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.36 to 0.91, P = 0.018). The number needed to treat with the McKenzie-method was 7 (95% CI 4 to 47). The McKenzie group showed improvement in level of disability compared to the manipulation group reaching a statistical significance at two and twelve months follow-up (mean difference 1.5, 95% CI 0.2 to 2.8, P = 0.022 and 1.5, 95% CI 0.2 to 2.9, P = 0.030 respectively). There was also a significant difference of 13% in number of patients reporting global perceived effect at end of treatment (P = 0.016). None of the other secondary outcomes showed statically significant differences. Conclusion. In patients with low back pain for more than six weeks presenting with centralization or peripheralization of symptoms, we found the McKenzie method to be slightly more effective than manipulation when used adjunctive to information and advice W. Snell, D.C. Director, Solutions Sports & Spine, Inc at Hawthorne Wellness Center 3942 SE Hawthorne Blvd. Portland, OR 97214 Ph. 503-235-5484 Fax 503-235-3956 www.fixyourownback.comMember, American College of Sports MedicineMember, International Society of Clinical Rehabilitation Specialists

[Guest guest]



It should be obvious Ted disease no longer came from sin but from pathogens and the heavens were not filled with angels but with innumerable solar systems and that our concept of time space and matter were changed forever.

Best regards,

Herb

Re: McKenzie therapy vs manipulationFrom: mealeydc1@...To: drpsnell@...Hi ,Thanks for posting the study. I've been using McKenzie protocols and exercises for a while and found it to be a wonderful complement to chiropractic manipulation and other manual therapies for lumbar and cervical disc patients. sen, DC one of the co-authors noted in the study is a great resource and I think the first D.C. certified in McKenzie. Mealey, DC

On Fri, Mar 4, 2011 at 7:12 AM, Snell <drpsnell@...> wrote:

The McKenzie method compared with manipulation when used adjunctive to information and advice in low back pain patients presenting with centralization or peripheralization. A randomized controlled trial.Spine - Vol Publish Ahead of Print February 27, 2011DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e318201ee8esen, Tom PT, PhD 1; Larsen, Kristian PT, PhD 2; Nordsteen, Jan DC, MPH 1; Olsen, Steen PT 1; Fournier, Gilles MD, DC, BSc 1; sen, Soren MD, DrMsci 3AB Study design. Randomized controlled trial. Objective. To compare the effects of the McKenzie-method performed by certified therapists with spinal manipulation performed by chiropractors when used adjunctive to information and advice. Summary of Background Data. Recent guidelines recommend a structured exercise programme tailored to the individual patient as well as manual therapy for the treatment of persistent low back pain. There is presently insufficient evidence to recommend the use of specific decision methods tailoring specific therapies to clinical subgroups of patients in primary care. Methods. A total of 350 patients suffering from low back pain with a duration of more than 6 weeks who presented with centralization or peripheralization of symptoms with or without signs of nerve root involvement, were enrolled in the trial. Main outcome was number of patients with treatment success defined as a reduction of at least 5 points or an absolute score below 5 points on the Roland Questionnaire. Secondary outcomes were reduction in disability and pain, global perceived effect, general health, mental health, lost work time, and medical care utilization. Results. Both treatment groups showed clinically meaningful improvements in this study. At two months follow-up, the McKenzie treatment was superior to manipulation with respect to the number of patients who reported success following treatment (71% and 59% respectively) (odds ratio 0.58, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.36 to 0.91, P = 0.018). The number needed to treat with the McKenzie-method was 7 (95% CI 4 to 47). The McKenzie group showed improvement in level of disability compared to the manipulation group reaching a statistical significance at two and twelve months follow-up (mean difference 1.5, 95% CI 0.2 to 2.8, P = 0.022 and 1.5, 95% CI 0.2 to 2.9, P = 0.030 respectively). There was also a significant difference of 13% in number of patients reporting global perceived effect at end of treatment (P = 0.016). None of the other secondary outcomes showed statically significant differences. Conclusion. In patients with low back pain for more than six weeks presenting with centralization or peripheralization of symptoms, we found the McKenzie method to be slightly more effective than manipulation when used adjunctive to information and advice W. Snell, D.C. Director, Solutions Sports & Spine, Inc at Hawthorne Wellness Center 3942 SE Hawthorne Blvd. Portland, OR 97214 Ph. 503-235-5484 Fax 503-235-3956 www.fixyourownback.comMember, American College of Sports MedicineMember, International Society of Clinical Rehabilitation Specialists

[Guest guest]



Hi Joe,

As I said in my response to Ted, Bacon, Darwin and a miriad of others were among those that weren't mentioned by name but included in my "many others" comment.

Herb

Re: McKenzie therapy vs manipulationFrom: mealeydc1@...To: drpsnell@...Hi ,Thanks for posting the study. I've been using McKenzie protocols and exercises for a while and found it to be a wonderful complement to chiropractic manipulation and other manual therapies for lumbar and cervical disc patients. sen, DC one of the co-authors noted in the study is a great resource and I think the first D.C. certified in McKenzie. Mealey, DC

On Fri, Mar 4, 2011 at 7:12 AM, Snell <drpsnell@...> wrote:

The McKenzie method compared with manipulation when used adjunctive to information and advice in low back pain patients presenting with centralization or peripheralization. A randomized controlled trial.Spine - Vol Publish Ahead of Print February 27, 2011DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e318201ee8esen, Tom PT, PhD 1; Larsen, Kristian PT, PhD 2; Nordsteen, Jan DC, MPH 1; Olsen, Steen PT 1; Fournier, Gilles MD, DC, BSc 1; sen, Soren MD, DrMsci 3AB Study design. Randomized controlled trial. Objective. To compare the effects of the McKenzie-method performed by certified therapists with spinal manipulation performed by chiropractors when used adjunctive to information and advice. Summary of Background Data. Recent guidelines recommend a structured exercise programme tailored to the individual patient as well as manual therapy for the treatment of persistent low back pain. There is presently insufficient evidence to recommend the use of specific decision methods tailoring specific therapies to clinical subgroups of patients in primary care. Methods. A total of 350 patients suffering from low back pain with a duration of more than 6 weeks who presented with centralization or peripheralization of symptoms with or without signs of nerve root involvement, were enrolled in the trial. Main outcome was number of patients with treatment success defined as a reduction of at least 5 points or an absolute score below 5 points on the Roland Questionnaire. Secondary outcomes were reduction in disability and pain, global perceived effect, general health, mental health, lost work time, and medical care utilization. Results. Both treatment groups showed clinically meaningful improvements in this study. At two months follow-up, the McKenzie treatment was superior to manipulation with respect to the number of patients who reported success following treatment (71% and 59% respectively) (odds ratio 0.58, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.36 to 0.91, P = 0.018). The number needed to treat with the McKenzie-method was 7 (95% CI 4 to 47). The McKenzie group showed improvement in level of disability compared to the manipulation group reaching a statistical significance at two and twelve months follow-up (mean difference 1.5, 95% CI 0.2 to 2.8, P = 0.022 and 1.5, 95% CI 0.2 to 2.9, P = 0.030 respectively). There was also a significant difference of 13% in number of patients reporting global perceived effect at end of treatment (P = 0.016). None of the other secondary outcomes showed statically significant differences. Conclusion. In patients with low back pain for more than six weeks presenting with centralization or peripheralization of symptoms, we found the McKenzie method to be slightly more effective than manipulation when used adjunctive to information and advice W. Snell, D.C. Director, Solutions Sports & Spine, Inc at Hawthorne Wellness Center 3942 SE Hawthorne Blvd. Portland, OR 97214 Ph. 503-235-5484 Fax 503-235-3956 www.fixyourownback.comMember, American College of Sports MedicineMember, International Society of Clinical Rehabilitation Specialists

[Guest guest]

Herb, Where is this change stated in the bible or the Koran? Is there a new testament. I am not up on this so help me out.Sent from I-phoneTed Forcum, DC, DACBSPOn Mar 4, 2011, at 10:11 PM, "BERNICE FREEMAN" <hbf4747@...> wrote: It should be obvious Ted disease no longer came from sin but from pathogens and the heavens were not filled with angels but with innumerable solar systems and that our concept of time space and matter were changed forever. Best regards, Herb Re: McKenzie therapy vs manipulationFrom: mealeydc1@...To: drpsnell@...Hi ,Thanks for posting the study. I've been using McKenzie protocols and exercises for a while and found it to be a wonderful complement to chiropractic manipulation and other manual therapies for lumbar and cervical disc patients. sen, DC one of the co-authors noted in the study is a great resource and I think the first D.C. certified in McKenzie. Mealey, DC On Fri, Mar 4, 2011 at 7:12 AM, Snell <drpsnell@...> wrote: The McKenzie method compared with manipulation when used adjunctive to information and advice in low back pain patients presenting with centralization or peripheralization. A randomized controlled trial.Spine - Vol Publish Ahead of Print February 27, 2011DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e318201ee8esen, Tom PT, PhD 1; Larsen, Kristian PT, PhD 2; Nordsteen, Jan DC, MPH 1; Olsen, Steen PT 1; Fournier, Gilles MD, DC, BSc 1; sen, Soren MD, DrMsci 3AB Study design. Randomized controlled trial. Objective. To compare the effects of the McKenzie-method performed by certified therapists with spinal manipulation performed by chiropractors when used adjunctive to information and advice. Summary of Background Data. Recent guidelines recommend a structured exercise programme tailored to the individual patient as well as manual therapy for the treatment of persistent low back pain. There is presently insufficient evidence to recommend the use of specific decision methods tailoring specific therapies to clinical subgroups of patients in primary care. Methods. A total of 350 patients suffering from low back pain with a duration of more than 6 weeks who presented with centralization or peripheralization of symptoms with or without signs of nerve root involvement, were enrolled in the trial. Main outcome was number of patients with treatment success defined as a reduction of at least 5 points or an absolute score below 5 points on the Roland Questionnaire. Secondary outcomes were reduction in disability and pain, global perceived effect, general health, mental health, lost work time, and medical care utilization. Results. Both treatment groups showed clinically meaningful improvements in this study. At two months follow-up, the McKenzie treatment was superior to manipulation with respect to the number of patients who reported success following treatment (71% and 59% respectively) (odds ratio 0.58, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.36 to 0.91, P = 0.018). The number needed to treat with the McKenzie-method was 7 (95% CI 4 to 47). The McKenzie group showed improvement in level of disability compared to the manipulation group reaching a statistical significance at two and twelve months follow-up (mean difference 1.5, 95% CI 0.2 to 2.8, P = 0.022 and 1.5, 95% CI 0.2 to 2.9, P = 0.030 respectively). There was also a significant difference of 13% in number of patients reporting global perceived effect at end of treatment (P = 0.016). None of the other secondary outcomes showed statically significant differences. Conclusion. In patients with low back pain for more than six weeks presenting with centralization or peripheralization of symptoms, we found the McKenzie method to be slightly more effective than manipulation when used adjunctive to information and advice W. Snell, D.C. Director, Solutions Sports & Spine, Inc at Hawthorne Wellness Center 3942 SE Hawthorne Blvd. Portland, OR 97214 Ph. 503-235-5484 Fax 503-235-3956 www.fixyourownback.comMember, American College of Sports MedicineMember, International Society of Clinical Rehabilitation Specialists

[Guest guest]



Ted ,

May I suggest that you take this matter with your particular holy man for the answers to your questions just as I have. I believe this discussion has gone well beyond the point of being even minimal value to any of us.

Herb

Re: McKenzie therapy vs manipulationFrom: mealeydc1@...To: drpsnell@...Hi ,Thanks for posting the study. I've been using McKenzie protocols and exercises for a while and found it to be a wonderful complement to chiropractic manipulation and other manual therapies for lumbar and cervical disc patients. sen, DC one of the co-authors noted in the study is a great resource and I think the first D.C. certified in McKenzie. Mealey, DC

On Fri, Mar 4, 2011 at 7:12 AM, Snell <drpsnell@...> wrote:

The McKenzie method compared with manipulation when used adjunctive to information and advice in low back pain patients presenting with centralization or peripheralization. A randomized controlled trial.Spine - Vol Publish Ahead of Print February 27, 2011DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e318201ee8esen, Tom PT, PhD 1; Larsen, Kristian PT, PhD 2; Nordsteen, Jan DC, MPH 1; Olsen, Steen PT 1; Fournier, Gilles MD, DC, BSc 1; sen, Soren MD, DrMsci 3AB Study design. Randomized controlled trial. Objective. To compare the effects of the McKenzie-method performed by certified therapists with spinal manipulation performed by chiropractors when used adjunctive to information and advice. Summary of Background Data. Recent guidelines recommend a structured exercise programme tailored to the individual patient as well as manual therapy for the treatment of persistent low back pain. There is presently insufficient evidence to recommend the use of specific decision methods tailoring specific therapies to clinical subgroups of patients in primary care. Methods. A total of 350 patients suffering from low back pain with a duration of more than 6 weeks who presented with centralization or peripheralization of symptoms with or without signs of nerve root involvement, were enrolled in the trial. Main outcome was number of patients with treatment success defined as a reduction of at least 5 points or an absolute score below 5 points on the Roland Questionnaire. Secondary outcomes were reduction in disability and pain, global perceived effect, general health, mental health, lost work time, and medical care utilization. Results. Both treatment groups showed clinically meaningful improvements in this study. At two months follow-up, the McKenzie treatment was superior to manipulation with respect to the number of patients who reported success following treatment (71% and 59% respectively) (odds ratio 0.58, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.36 to 0.91, P = 0.018). The number needed to treat with the McKenzie-method was 7 (95% CI 4 to 47). The McKenzie group showed improvement in level of disability compared to the manipulation group reaching a statistical significance at two and twelve months follow-up (mean difference 1.5, 95% CI 0.2 to 2.8, P = 0.022 and 1.5, 95% CI 0.2 to 2.9, P = 0.030 respectively). There was also a significant difference of 13% in number of patients reporting global perceived effect at end of treatment (P = 0.016). None of the other secondary outcomes showed statically significant differences. Conclusion. In patients with low back pain for more than six weeks presenting with centralization or peripheralization of symptoms, we found the McKenzie method to be slightly more effective than manipulation when used adjunctive to information and advice W. Snell, D.C. Director, Solutions Sports & Spine, Inc at Hawthorne Wellness Center 3942 SE Hawthorne Blvd. Portland, OR 97214 Ph. 503-235-5484 Fax 503-235-3956 www.fixyourownback.comMember, American College of Sports MedicineMember, International Society of Clinical Rehabilitation Specialists