Fig 4 - uploaded by Kevin Rose
Content may be subject to copyright.
Source publication
Objective:
The purpose of this study was to test the feasibility of a randomized clinical trial on the effectiveness of combining spinal manipulation (SM) with standard tobacco cessation counseling.
Methods:
A randomized clinical trial was conducted. Participants in the intervention group received 2 months of counseling plus SM delivered by doct...
Contexts in source publication
Context 1
... urinary cotinine level also started somewhat higher in the counseling group (median = 1230, IQR = 2497 vs median = 980, IQR = 1847). Levels dropped by the 60-day end point in both groups (Fig 4), more so in the treatment group (median = 305.5, IQR = 1594.5 vs median = 746, IQR = 2620.5). There appeared to be good congruence between the tobacco diary and urine cotinine measures (Fig ...
Similar publications
Background
Cigarette smoking is one of the major preventable causes of death and diseases in Qatar. The study objective was to test the effect of a structured smoking cessation program delivered by trained pharmacists on smoking cessation rates in Qatar. MethodsA prospective randomized controlled trial was conducted in eight ambulatory pharmacies i...
Purpose:
To evaluate the awareness of cigarette smoking as a risk factor for chronic periodontitis in patients either undergoing active periodontal treatment (APT) or enrolled in supportive periodontal therapy (SPT).
Materials and methods:
Comprehensive tobacco use history was collected with a questionnaire in 50 patients before and after APT (t...
Citations
Objectives
To describe if there has been a change in the reporting of adverse events associated with spinal manipulation in randomised clinical trials (RCTs) since 2016.
Design
A systematic literature review.
Data sources
Databases were searched from March 2016 to May 2022: MEDLINE (Ovid), Embase, CINAHL, ICL, PEDro and Cochrane Library. The following search terms and their derivatives were adapted for each platform: spinal manipulation; chiropractic; osteopathy; physiotherapy; naprapathy; medical manipulation and clinical trial.
Methods
Domains of interest (pertaining to adverse events) included: completeness and location of reporting; nomenclature and description; spinal location and practitioner delivering manipulation; methodological quality of the studies and details of the publishing journal. Frequencies and proportions of studies reporting on each of these domains were calculated. Univariable and multivariable logistic regression models were fitted to examine the effect of potential predictors on the likelihood of studies reporting on adverse events.
Results
There were 5399 records identified by the electronic searches, of which 154 (2.9%) were included in the analysis. Of these, 94 (61.0%) reported on adverse events with only 23.4% providing an explicit description of what constituted an adverse event. Reporting of adverse events in the abstract has increased (n=29, 30.9%) while reporting in the results section has decreased (n=83, 88.3%) over the past 6 years. Spinal manipulation was delivered to 7518 participants in the included studies. No serious adverse events were reported in any of these studies.
Conclusions
While the current level of reporting of adverse events associated with spinal manipulation in RCTs has increased since our 2016 publication on the same topic, the level remains low and inconsistent with established standards. As such, it is imperative for authors, journal editors and administrators of clinical trial registries to ensure there is more balanced reporting of both benefits and harms in RCTs involving spinal manipulation.
