Assessing the risk of stroke from neck manipulation: A systematic review

The University of Western Australia, Crawley, WA, Australia Société Franco-Européenne de Chiropratique (SOFEC), Villemoble, France Institut Franco-Européen de Chiropratique, Paris, France Stroke Unit, Department of Neurology, Royal Perth Hospital, Perth Australia
International Journal of Clinical Practice (Impact Factor: 2.57). 10/2012; 66(10):940-7. DOI: 10.1111/j.1742-1241.2012.03004.x
Source: PubMed


Strokes, typically involving vertebral artery dissection, can follow cervical spinal manipulative therapy, and these types of stroke occur rarely. There is disagreement about whether a strong association between neck manipulation and stroke exists. An earlier systematic review found two relevant studies of association that used controls, which also discussed the limitations of the two papers. Our systematic review updates the earlier review, and aims to determine whether conclusive evidence of a strong association exists.

PRISMA guidelines for systematic reviews were followed, and the literature was searched using a strategy that included the terms ‘neck manipulation’ and ‘stroke’ from the PubMed, Embase, CINAHL Plus and AMED databases. Citations were included if they met criteria such as being case–control studies, and dealt with neck manipulation and/or neck movement/positioning. Papers were scored for their quality, using similar criteria to the earlier review. For individual criteria, each study was assigned a full positive score if the criterion was satisfied completely.

Four case–control studies and one case–control study, which included a case- crossover design, met the selection criteria, but all of them had at least three items in the quality assessment that failed to be completely positive. Two studies were assessed to be the most robustly designed, one indicating a strong association between stroke and various intensities of neck movement, including manipulation, and the other suggesting a much reduced relative association when using primary care practitioners’ visits as controls. However, potential biases and confounders render the results inconclusive.

Conclusive evidence is lacking for a strong association between neck manipulation and stroke, but is also absent for no association. Future studies of association will need to minimise potential biases and confounders, and ideally have sufficient numbers of cases to allow subgroup analysis for different types of neck manipulation and neck movement.

Download full-text


Available from: Graeme J Hankey, Jan 10, 2014
1 Follower
43 Reads
  • Source
    • "The incidence of a stroke event associated with SMT is very rare (Haldeman et al., 2001; Cassidy et al., 2008). Further, caseecontrol studies demonstrate this association primarily in adults under the age of 45 (Haynes et al., 2012), suggesting it is a less relevant risk concern for the elderly. A recent analysis of Medicare data in 1.1 million beneficiaries 65e99 years of age compared the incidence of stroke with visits for chiropractic cervical spine manipulation compared to medical primary care. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background: Adverse events (AEs) associated with spinal manipulative therapy and exercise are common, but generally mild in intensity and duration. Their occurrence in an elderly population is less well understood. Methods: AEs were collected as part of an IRB-approved randomized clinical trial of chronic neck pain in seniors > 65 years old. Participants were assigned to receive spinal manipulation plus home exercise (SMT+HE), supervised rehabilitative exercise plus home exercise (SRE+HE), or home exercise alone (HE). At the beginning of each treatment visit, participants were asked if they experienced any side effects or problems since the last visit. Affirmative answers were probed for detail. A descriptive analysis was conducted on all responses determined to be potentially associated with treatment. Results: Data was collected from 194 of 241 consecutively enrolled study participants (SMT+HE =78, SRE+HE=59, HE=57). Non-serious, expected AEs were reported by 44 individuals (56%) in SMT+HE, 53 (90%) in SRE+HE, and 33 (58%) in the HE group. Most common AEs in all three groups included an aggravation of neck symptoms, muscle soreness, lower and upper extremity joint pain, back pain, and stiffness. One unexpected AE related to treatment was reported in the SRE+HE group: a participant fell and fractured his radius while performing study related exercises during a supervised visit. Conclusion: Many of the seniors in this study experienced non-serious, expected AEs, particularly in the combined SRE+HE group. Of interest, many seniors reported an aggravation of extremity joint pain with prescribed exercises in these programs.
    140st APHA Annual Meeting and Exposition 2012; 10/2012

  • JCCA. Journal of the Canadian Chiropractic Association. Journal de l'Association chiropratique canadienne 12/2013; 57(4):276-278.
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Dissection of the internal carotid artery is a rare cause of stroke overall, but causes 22% of strokes in younger patients. A common clinical presentation is as Claude Bernard Horner syndrome. We report a craniotomy with 30 degrees rotation of the neck (standard position) in a patient with no major risk factors for carotid dissection, who showed a Pourfour du Petit syndrome due to a dissection of the internal carotid artery. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first reported case in which a common surgical position causes an internal carotid artery dissection in a patient without relevant risk factors. The presentation with Pourfour du Petit syndrome is extremely unusual.
    Turkish neurosurgery 01/2014; 25(4). DOI:10.5137/1019-5149.JTN.10155-13.1 · 0.58 Impact Factor
Show more