Dataset Information

Effectiveness of chiropractic manipulation versus sham manipulation for recurrent headaches in children aged 7-14 years - a randomised clinical trial.

ABSTRACT:

Background

To investigate the effectiveness of chiropractic spinal manipulation versus sham manipulation in children aged 7-14 with recurrent headaches.

Methods

Design: A two-arm, single-blind, superiority randomised controlled trial.

Setting

One chiropractic clinic and one paediatric specialty practice in Denmark, November 2015 to August 2020.

Participants

199 children aged 7 to 14?years, with at least one episode of headache per week for the previous 6?months and at least one musculoskeletal dysfunction identified.

Interventions

All participants received standard oral and written advice to reduce headaches. In addition, children in the active treatment group received chiropractic spinal manipulation and children in the control group received sham manipulation for a period of 4?months. Number and frequency of treatments were based on the chiropractor's individual evaluation in the active treatment group; the children in the control group received approximately eight visits during the treatment period.

Primary outcome measures

'Number of days with headache', 'pain intensity' and 'medication' were reported weekly by text messages, and global perceived effect by text message after 4?months. A planned fixed sequence strategy based on an initial outcome data analysis was used to prioritize outcomes. 'Number of days with headache' and 'pain intensity' were chosen as equally important outcomes of highest priority, followed by global perceived effect and medication. The significance level for the first two outcomes was fixed to 0.025 to take multiplicity into account.

Results

Chiropractic spinal manipulation resulted in significantly fewer days with headaches (reduction of 0.81 vs. 0.41, p?=?0.019, NNT?=?7 for 20% improvement) and better global perceived effect (dichotomized into improved/not improved, OR?=?2.8 (95% CI: 1.5-5.3), NNT?=?5) compared with a sham manipulation procedure. There was no difference between groups for pain intensity during headache episodes. Due to methodological shortcomings, no conclusions could be drawn about medication use.

Conclusions

Chiropractic spinal manipulation resulted in fewer headaches and higher global perceived effect, with only minor side effects. It did not lower the intensity of the headaches. Since the treatment is easily applicable, of low cost and minor side effects, chiropractic spinal manipulation might be considered as a valuable treatment option for children with recurrent headaches.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov, identifier NCT02684916 , registered 02/18/2016 - retrospectively registered.

SUBMITTER: Lynge S

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7792176 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Jan

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Effectiveness of chiropractic manipulation versus sham manipulation for recurrent headaches in children aged 7-14 years - a randomised clinical trial.

Lynge Susanne S Dissing Kristina Boe KB Vach Werner W Christensen Henrik Wulff HW Hestbaek Lise L

Chiropractic & manual therapies 20210107 1

<h4>Background</h4>To investigate the effectiveness of chiropractic spinal manipulation versus sham manipulation in children aged 7-14 with recurrent headaches.<h4>Methods</h4>Design: A two-arm, single-blind, superiority randomised controlled trial.<h4>Setting</h4>One chiropractic clinic and one paediatric specialty practice in Denmark, November 2015 to August 2020.<h4>Participants</h4>199 children aged 7 to 14 years, with at least one episode of headache per week for the previous 6 months and a ...[more]

PMID: 33413519

Similar Datasets

Project description:Background:Headache is one of the most common pain symptoms in childhood having a negative impact on many aspects of the lives of affected children, both short-term and long-term. Therefore, it is important to document safe and effective treatment options. Chiropractic spinal manipulation is a commonly used treatment option for these patients, although there are no randomized clinical trials documenting the effectiveness of this in pediatric headache. However, there is moderate evidence for effectiveness of spinal manipulation for adults with tension-type and cervicogenic headaches.This paper describes the protocol for a two-armed randomized superiority clinical trial aiming to investigate the effectiveness of chiropractic manipulation versus sham manipulation in the treatment of recurrent headache in children aged 7-14. Methods:Children with weekly headaches for at least six months will be included if they have indications for chiropractic manipulation. The participants will be randomized to either chiropractic manipulation or sham manipulation. Both children and parents will be blinded for allocation. There will be 100 children in each arm and they will answer weekly text messages four weeks prior to treatment and during a four months treatment period. Potential primary outcomes are weekly number of headaches, intensity of headache, medication use and global perceived effect. Secondary outcomes include side-effects and headache status after one year.An initial outcome data analysis will be performed to inform the choice of primary outcome (adaptive design). Intervention effects will be reported as the difference in mean values between the two treatment arms, Cohen's effect size and numbers needed to treat. Discussion:A major strength of this study is its pragmatic nature, where the active treatment group receives chiropractic manipulation according to their individual needs, while both groups continue their use of medication for headache according to their pre-trial habits. Other strengths include an elaborate sham procedure and the weekly outcome reports, reducing recall bias.If it is possible to develop effective treatment for headache in children, a life course of recurring problems may be altered with potential positive implications for both individuals and society. Trial registration:ClinicalTrials.gov, identifier NCT02684916.

Project description:BackgroundA recent randomized controlled trial (RCT) investigating the effect of chiropractic manipulation in 199 children aged 7-14 years with recurrent headaches demonstrated a significant reduction of number of days with headache and a better global perceived effect (GPE) in the chiropractic manipulation group compared to a sham manipulation group. However, potential modifiers for the effectiveness of chiropractic manipulation of children with recurrent headaches have never been identified. The present study is a secondary analysis of data from that RCT and will investigate potential effect modifiers for the benefit of chiropractic manipulation for children with headache.MethodsSixteen potential effect modifiers were identified from the literature and a summary index was prespecified based on clinical experience. Relevant variables were extracted from baseline questionnaires, and outcomes were obtained by means of short text messages. The modifying effect of the candidate variables was assessed by fitting interaction models to the data of the RCT. In addition, an attempt to define a new summary index was made.ResultsThe prespecified index showed no modifying effect. Four single variables demonstrated a treatment effect difference of more than 1 day with headache per week between the lower and the upper end of the spectrum: intensity of headache (p = 0.122), Frequency of headache (p = 0.031), sleep duration (p = 0.243), and Socioeconomic status (p = 0.082). Five variables had a treatment effect difference of more than 0.7 points on the GPE scale between the lower and the upper end of the spectrum: Frequency of headache (p = 0.056), Sport activity (p = 0.110), Sleep duration (p = 0.080), History of neck pain (p = 0.011), and Headache in the family (0.050). A new summary index could be constructed giving highest weight to History of neck pain and Headache in the family and Frequency of headache. The index suggests a difference of about 1 point in GPE between low and high values of the index.ConclusionChiropractic manipulation offers a moderate benefit for a broad spectrum of children. However, it cannot be excluded that specific headache characteristics, family factors, or a history of neck pain may modify the effect. This question must be addressed in future studies.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov (Albers et al in Curr Pain Headache Rep 19:3-4, 2015), identifier NCT02684916, registered 02/18/2016-retrospectively registered.

Project description:IntroductionAdolescent physical activity promotion is rarely effective, despite adolescence being critical for preventing physical activity decline. Low adolescent physical activity is likely to last into adulthood, increasing health risks. The Get Others Active (GoActive) intervention is evidence-based and was developed iteratively with adolescents and teachers. This intervention aims to increase physical activity through increased peer support, self-efficacy, group cohesion, self-esteem and friendship quality, and is implemented using a tiered-leadership system. We previously established feasibility in one school and conducted a pilot randomised controlled trial (RCT) in three schools.Methods and analysisWe will conduct a school-based cluster RCT (CRCT) in 16 secondary schools targeting all year 9 students (n=2400). In eight schools, GoActive will run for two terms: weekly facilitation support from a council-funded intervention facilitator will be offered in term 1, with more distant support in term 2. Tutor groups choose two weekly activities, encouraged by older adolescent mentors and weekly peer leaders. Students gain points for trying new activities; points are entered into a between-class competition. Outcomes will be assessed at baseline, interim (week 6), postintervention (week 14-16) and 10-month follow-up (main outcome). The primary outcome will be change from baseline in daily accelerometer-assessed moderate-to-vigorous physical activity. Secondary outcomes include accelerometer-assessed activity intensities on weekdays/weekends; self-reported physical activity and psychosocial outcomes; cost-effectiveness and cost-utility analyses; mixed-methods process evaluation integrating information from focus groups and participation logs/questionnaires.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval for the conduct of the study was gained from the University of Cambridge Psychology Research Ethics Committee. Given the lack of rigorously evaluated interventions, and the inclusion of objective measurement of physical activity, long-term follow-up and testing of causal pathways, the results of a CRCT of the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of GoActive are expected to add substantially to the limited evidence on adolescent physical activity promotion. Workshops will be held with key stakeholders including students, parents, teachers, school governors and government representatives to discuss plans for wider dissemination of the intervention.Trial registration numberISRCTN31583496.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Chiropractic care is a popular alternative for back and neck pain, with efficacy comparable to usual care in randomized trials. However, the effectiveness of chiropractic care as delivered through conventional care settings remains largely unexplored. OBJECTIVE:To evaluate the comparative effectiveness of usual care with or without chiropractic care for patients with chronic recurrent musculoskeletal back and neck pain. STUDY DESIGN:Prospective cohort study using propensity score-matched controls. PARTICIPANTS:Using retrospective electronic health record data, we developed a propensity score model predicting likelihood of chiropractic referral. Eligible patients with back or neck pain were then contacted upon referral for chiropractic care and enrolled in a prospective study. For each referred patient, two propensity score-matched non-referred patients were contacted and enrolled. We followed the participants prospectively for 6 months. MAIN MEASURES:Main outcomes included pain severity, interference, and symptom bothersomeness. Secondary outcomes included expenditures for pain-related health care. KEY RESULTS:Both groups' (N = 70 referred, 139 non-referred) pain scores improved significantly over the first 3 months, with less change between months 3 and 6. No significant between-group difference was observed. (severity - 0.10 (95% CI - 0.30, 0.10), interference - 0.07 (- 0.31, 0.16), bothersomeness - 0.1 (- 0.39, 0.19)). After controlling for variances in baseline costs, total costs during the 6-month post-enrollment follow-up were significantly higher on average in the non-referred versus referred group ($1996 [SD = 3874] vs $1086 [SD = 1212], p = .034). Adjusting for differences in age, gender, and Charlson comorbidity index attenuated this finding, which was no longer statistically significant (p = .072). CONCLUSIONS:We found no statistically significant difference between the two groups in either patient-reported or economic outcomes. As clinical outcomes were similar, and the provision of chiropractic care did not increase costs, making chiropractic services available provided an additional viable option for patients who prefer this type of care, at no additional expense.

Dataset Information

Effectiveness of chiropractic manipulation versus sham manipulation for recurrent headaches in children aged 7-14 years - a randomised clinical trial.

Background

Methods

Setting

Participants

Interventions

Primary outcome measures

Results

Conclusions

Trial registration

Publications

Effectiveness of chiropractic manipulation versus sham manipulation for recurrent headaches in children aged 7-14 years - a randomised clinical trial.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets