Conservative Chiropractic Management of Recalcitrant Foot Pain After Fasciotomy: A Retrospective Case Review

Manipulative Therapy for Lower Extremity Conditions: Update of a Literature Review

“…1,163,164 Unfortunately, this means that interesting and informative studies such as an RCT of osteopathic manipulative treatment immediately after knee and/or hip arthroplasty and an RCT of chiropractic MT just before hip arthroplasty manipulative management of foot pain due to an os peroneum and accessory navicular, spinal MT for a hamstring injury (without clear peripheral injury and diagnosis) and chiropractic management of injuries sustained during Brazilian capoeira (art that fuses dance, sport, and martial arts) were unfortunately not included. 71, Arguably, the RCT of Thorman et al 167 demonstrating statistically significant pain relief and functional improvement for patients with hip OA awaiting arthroplasty and information and data from other studies should have been …”

“…In comparing against many peerreviewed, published RCTs, with high levels of inadequate, erroneous, and/or incorrect report of per protocol or ITT analysis as well as disagreement, lack of consensus, or standards regarding blinding and blind assessment, there is a sufficient justification and rationale for inclusion of these RCTs and CTs. 1,21,38,[69][70][71][72][73][74][75][76][77][78][79][80] The retrospective requirement of ITT levied on all previous studies, including some otherwise methodological improved smaller trials, can, at times, result in completely discounting evidence that should be considered on some level of the hierarchical ladder. 55,75,76 Furthermore, in many studies with ITT, particularly in systematic reviews of ITT, it is evident that many authors have significant and serious objections to ITT being a sole or the sole arbiter of a valid or legitimate trial (SIGN without modification simply rejects studies that do not use ITT).…”

Manipulative Therapy for Lower Extremity Conditions: Expansion of Literature Review

“…In comparing against many peerreviewed published RCTs, with high levels of inadequate, erroneous, and/or incorrect report of per protocol (PP) or ITA as well as disagreement and lack of consensus or standards regarding blinding and blind assessment, there are sufficient justification and rational for inclusion of these RCTs and CTs. 1,16,32,[50][51][52][53][54][55][56][57][58][59][60][61] Intention to treat analysis can be a useful tool in interpreting study data. For example, when data from subjects who drop out of a study secondary to adverse effects are excluded, this certainly constitutes a potential bias in interpreting findings that would benefit from the addition of ITA.…”

Les témoignages des patients peuvent-ils servir de preuves scientifiques? L’aponévrosite plantaire – 2e partie

“…Selon ma réussite récente en tant que patiente, j'ai exécuté une recherche PubMed rapide en utilisant les termes « aponévrosite plantaire ET mobilisation articulaire » et ensuite « aponévrosite plantaire ET manipulation articulaire ». Les résultats de la première recherche n'ont révélé qu'un seul article, une série de cas rétrospec-tive de 2006 à propos de 15 patients qui avaient tous subi une intervention chirurgicale, c.-à.-d., fasciotomie plantaire, pour le traitement de leur douleur latérale au pied avant de recevoir une mobilisation ou une manipulation du pied ou de la cheville par un chiropraticien pour une douleur récalcitrante 5 7 . Avec du recul, si ma propre physiothérapeute m'avait demandé de me soumettre à une première EVA avant ma série de traitements puis à une autre à la conclusion des traitements, nous aurions eu des preuves scientifiques objectives et axées sur le client de la réussite du traitement.…”