Sunday, November 6, 2011

Fever Increases Immune System Defense, Study Shows

Fever Increases Immune System Defense, Study Shows

Fever Immune System
The Huffington Post   Posted: 11/3/11 06:05 PM ET
A new study adds more reason to why our bodies employ fevers as a defense against sickness.
Researchers from Roswell Park Cancer Institute found that a higher body temperature can help our immune systems to work better and harder against infected cells. The finding was published in the Journal of Leukocyte Biology.
"Having a fever might be uncomfortable, ... but this research report and several others are showing that having a fever is part of an effective immune response," John Wherry, Ph.D., deputy editor of the Journal of Leukocyte Biology, said in a statement.
Before, researchers thought that fevers worked by hindering dangerous microbes from multiplying, Wherry said.
But "this new work also suggests that the immune system might be temporarily enhanced functionally when our temperatures rise with fever," he said in the statement, though he noted that the finding should only prompt people to reconsider how they treat mild fevers, and not fevers that are dangerously high.
The secret is in a kind of immune cell, or lymphocyte, called a CD8+ cytotoxic T-cell. This kind of lymphocyte is able to destroy cells infected with viruses and even tumor cells, researchers said. Researchers found that a higher body temperature (like one achieved in a fever) raises the number of these CD8+ cytotoxic T-cells, which means a greater body response against infection.
To find this, researchers injected mice with an antigen and saw how the CD8+ cytotoxic T-cells activated to react to the antigen. Then, they raised the body temperatures of half the mice by 2 degrees centigrade, while leaving the temperatures of the other = mice alone. They found that the mice whose body temperatures were raised had more of the CD8+ cytotoxic T-cells than the mice without raised body temps.
The rise in mouse's body temperature is "similar to that that happens in fever," study researcher Elizabeth Repasky told the Toronto Star.
University of Pittsburgh Medical Center clinical associate professor Dr. Amesh A. Adalja, who wasn't involved with the study, told MSNBC that the finding shouldn't mean a fever should never be treated because too-high fevers can lead to brain cell damage. Parents should still take care to lower fevers in children, particularly if the fever is above 102 degrees Fahrenheit, since high fever can lead to seizures, Adalja told MSNBC.
MSNBC reports:
Adalja also warns it"s also not worth the risk to your own health if you have heart disease, have suffered a stroke or endure other medical complications. "This is not a blanket recommendation," he says. "Secondary consequences to the fever can cause other conditions in the patient to occur or worsen. If someone has a persistent fever of 104, it's a sign of infection, and it"s not just some viral thing you are going to get over."
This is certainly not the first research to suggest that fevers ramp up our body's immune responses. Discover magazine reported in 2007 on another Roswell Park Cancer Institute mouse study, which showed that mice that were heated up produced more immune cells to fight disease than mice that weren't heated.

Thursday, November 3, 2011

Arthritis Prevention and Chiropractic

Arthritis Prevention and Chiropractic
Chiropractic prevents arthritis in accident victims, the elderly and the sedentary
By Mark Studin DC, FASBE(C), DAAPM, DAAMLP
 
According to the Arthritis Foundation (2007), "Forty-six million [46,000,000] Americans are currently living with arthritis, the nation's leading cause of disability, and we are all paying a high price for it. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) announced that the annual cost of arthritis to the United States economy was $128 billion in 2003 and increased by $20 billion between 1997 and 2003.

CDC attributes the dramatic increase to the aging of the population, predominantly baby boomers, and increased prevalence of arthritis. CDC also estimates an additional 8 million new cases of arthritis will be diagnosed in the next decade" (
http://www.arthritis.org/cost-arthritis.php
).

Arthritis, A.D.A.M., Inc. (2010, February 5), "...is inflammation of one or more joints, which results in pain, swelling, stiffness, and limited movement. There are over 100 different types of arthritis...
Causes, incidence, and risk factors
Arthritis involves the breakdown of cartilage. Cartilage normally protects the joint, allowing for smooth movement. Cartilage also absorbs shock when pressure is placed on the joint, like when you walk. Without the usual amount of cartilage, the bones rub together, causing pain, swelling (inflammation), and stiffness.
You may have joint inflammation for a variety of reasons, including:

- An autoimmune disease (the body attacks itself because the body immune system believes a body part is foreign)
- Broken bone
- General wear and tear
- Infection (usually cause by bacteria or viruses)... 

With some injuries and diseases, the inflammation does not go away or destruction results in long-term pain and deformity. When this happens, you have chronic arthritis. Osteoarthritis is the most common type and is more likely to occur as you age. You may feel it in any of your joints, but most commonly in your hips, knees or fingers. Risk factors for osteoarthritis include:

- Being overweight
- Previously injuring the affected joint
- Using the affected joint in a repetitive action that puts stress on the joint (baseball players, ballet dancers and construction workers are all at risk)

Arthritis can occur in men and women of all ages. About 37 million people in America have arthritis of some kind, which is almost 1 out of every 7 people" (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmedhealth/PMH0002223). With hypomobility (less mobility or movement), adhesions occur in a joint (the region where 2 bones connect).
According to A.D.A.M., Inc. (2010, March 30), "Adhesions are bands of scar-like tissue that form between two surfaces inside the body and cause them to stick together. As the body moves, tissues or organs inside are normally able to shift around each other. This is because these tissues have slippery surfaces.
Causes, incidence, and risk factors
Inflammation (swelling), surgery, or injury can cause adhesions to form almost anywhere in the body...Once they form, adhesions can become larger or tighter over time. Symptoms or other problems may occur if the adhesions cause an organ or body part to twist, pull out of position, or be unable to move as well.
Adhesions may form around joints such as the shoulder...or ankles, or in ligaments and tendons. This problem may happen:

- After surgery or trauma
- With certain types of arthritis
- With overuse of a joint or tendon

Symptoms
Adhesions in joints, tendons, or ligaments make it harder to move the joint and may cause pain...Adhesions in the pelvis may cause chronic or long-term pelvic pain.
Signs and tests
Most of the time, the adhesions cannot be seen using x-rays or imaging tests" (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmedhealth/PMH0002462).
Over time, with a sedentary lifestyle as seen in many portions of the population and increasingly with the elderly, joints become hypomobile. Hypomobility is also seen in trauma-related cases and repetitive use injuries, such as reading while looking down for extended periods, carrying heavy items, holding the phone between one's shoulder and ear, prolonged use of hands, wrists, back and neck, excessive use of computers, etc. As time progresses, internal scar tissue or adhesions continue to develop and further increases the loss of mobility.
Cramer, Henderson, Little, Daley and Grieve (2010), cite previous studies that have shown that adhesions have been found in numerous hypomobile (loss of normal movement) joints and that spinal adjusting separates the articular surfaces of the joint. The researchers inquired as to whether connective tissue adhesion developed in lumbar articular joints as a consequence to intervertebral hypomobility and utilized animal studies.  They concluded that "...hypomobility results in time-dependent [adhesions]..." (Cramer et al., 2010, p. 508). In other words, internal scar tissue (arthritis) developed within the joints over time.

Cramer et al. (2010) sited previous studies that found the spinal adjustment separates the joints which could break up intra-articular adhesions. In other words, in their animal studies, spinal adjustments/manipulation increased the "Z gap" or spacing between the joints/bones and the mobility of the joints. If this applied in humans, the adjustments would then prevent further development of adhesions and degeneration and osteophytes, which is how the arthritic process progresses.

While arthritis affects approximately 1 in 7 Americans, the prevention of and/or correction of arthritis would relieve a great strain on our economy. While not all arthritis is a result of hypomobility, much of it is. If every person was under chiropractic care, we could not only positively affect the lives of every American, we could potentially rescue the economy of the United States and every other country and insurer in the world that assumes risk for an aging and hypomobile society.
 

 
References:
1. Arthritis Foundation. (2007, January 17). Cost of arthritis increases to $128 billion annually. Retrieved from http://www.arthritis.org/cost-arthritis.php
2. A.D.A.M., Inc. (2010, February 5). Arthritis. Retrieved from http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmedhealth/PMH0002223
3. A.D.A.M., Inc. (2010, March 30). Adhesion. Retrieved from http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmedhealth/PMH0002462
4. Cramer, G. D., Henderson, C. N. R., Little, J. W., Daley, C., & Grieve, T. J. (2010). Zygapophyseal joint adhesions after induced hypomobility. Journal of Manipulative and Physiological Therapeutics, 33(7), 508-518.

Scoliosis and Chiropractic Care



The average reduction of thoraco-lumbar scoliosis was 17.2° and was maintained for 24 months.
Function improved 70% and pain was reduced by 60%.

BY Mark Studin DC, FASBE(C), DAAPM, DAAMLP
According to the Mayo Clinic (2009), " Scoliosis is a sideways curvature of the spine that occurs most often during the growth spurt just before puberty. While scoliosis can be caused by conditions such as cerebral palsy and muscular dystrophy, the cause of most scoliosis is unknown. Most cases of scoliosis are mild, but severe scoliosis can be disabling. An especially severe spinal curve can reduce the amount of space within the chest, making it difficult for the lungs to function properly. Children who have mild scoliosis are monitored closely, usually with X-rays, to see if the curve is getting worse. In many cases, no treatment is necessary. Some children will need to wear a brace to stop the curve from worsening. Others may need surgery to straighten severe cases of scoliosis" (http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/scoliosis/DS00194). They go on to say that signs and symptoms of scoliosis may include, uneven shoulders, "Signs and symptoms of scoliosis may include: uneven shoulders, one shoulder blade that appears more prominent than the other, uneven waist, [and] one hip higher than the other" (Mayo Clinic Staff, 2009, http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/scoliosis/ DS00194/ DSECTION=symptoms).

"If a scoliosis curve gets worse, the spine will also rotate or twist, in addition to curving side to side. This causes the ribs on one side of the body to stick out farther than on the other side. Severe scoliosis can cause back pain and difficulty breathing. Go to your doctor if you notice signs or symptoms of scoliosis in your child. Mild curves can develop without the parent or child knowing it because they appear gradually and usually don't cause pain" (Mayo Clinic Staff, 2009, http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/ scoliosis/DS00194/ DSECTION=symptoms).

According to Lou et al. in 2010, three-dimensional lateral curvatures of the spine affect 2-3% of the adolescent population. According to ACT Youth who utilizes the 2000 US Census Bureau statistics, the number of adolescents in the United States is 41,747, 962. Averaging 2.5% of all adolescents having scoliosis equates to 1,043, 699 children facing issues as result of scoliosis. Lou et al. (2010) continue, "Brace (orthotic) treatment is recommended for growing children with curves of 25–45° Cobb angle. Surgery is the final treatment option for curves greater than 45° and its goals are to obtain safe correction, to produce a solid spinal fusion of the curve region, and to bring the spine and body into a more balanced position (p. 292). However, they conclude, " Although brace treatment for scoliosis has been used for more than fifty years, its effectiveness is still debatable... Most studies used the amount of curve progression (as measured by the Cobb angle) to determine the effectiveness of brace treatment. Some defined success as 5° or less curve progression" (Lou et al., 2010, p. 292).

While allopathic medicine is still entrenched in the debatable practice of bracing and eventually surgery with the eventual progression of scoliosis, there are proven solutions. Morningstar concluded in 2011 that as a result of chiropractic spinal adjusting and chiropractic spinal manipulation, a thoracolumbar curvature (scoliosis) averaged a 17.2° reduction that was maintained for 24 months, the length of the study. Across all spinal groups, an average of 10° reduction was realized that persisted for 24 months, again the length of the study. Morningstar also concluded that pain scales reduced by 60% at 24 months and function improved by 70% while respiratory capacity increased 7%. Although this was a limited study with 28 patients, it is the first scientific conclusion that documents and reflects the results of what chiropractors have been realizing in their offices for over a 100 years.

The real issue is that if adolescents have their curvatures reduced by 10°-17.2°, then bracing and surgery are not an option because they will not be indicated. As bracing has been deemed "highly questionable" in the literature and now the literature reflects chiropractic as a highly effective modality, the standard of care across professions should be chiropractic care for scoliosis as first line treatment and should be standardized in every discipline.


REFERENCES
3. Lou, E., Hill, D., Hedden, D., Mahood, J., Moreau, M., Raso, J., (2010). An objective measurement of brace usage for the treatment of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. Medical Engineering and Physics, 33(3), 290-294.
5. Morningstar, M. (2011). Outcomes for adult scoliosis patients receiving chiropractic rehabilitation: A 24-month retrospective analysis. Journal of Chiropractic Medicine, 10(3), 179-184.

Friday, October 28, 2011

Headaches and Migraines: Chiropractic Saves Federal and Private Insurers $13,680,000,000

A great article published by a friend of mine...

Headaches and Migraines:
Chiropractic Saves Federal and Private Insurers $13,680,000,000
and Resolves Many Issues Facing Emergency Rooms Today
by Mark Studin DC, FASBE(C), DAAPM, DAAMLP
Published in Dynamic Chiropractic, Volume 29, Issue 22
It was reported by Doheny in 2006 that migraine headaches cost U.S. employers more than $24 billion annually, including direct health care costs and indirect expenses such as absenteeism. Doheny goes on to report that according to Michael Staufacker, director of program development for StayWell Health Management in St. Paul, Minnesota, "The programs are so few and far between because many companies ‘don't perceive it as a priority’" (p. 10).
Much of the public perceive headaches and migraines as normal occurrences. For example, a patient will enter a doctor's office and report they get normal headaches, not realizing that pain is never a normal occurrence. Symons, Shinde and Gilles (2008) highlighted a statement from http://www.iasp-pain.org saying that pain is "'an unpleasant sensory and emotional experience associated with actual or potential tissue damage, or described in terms of such damage'" (p. 277). As a result of the public not taking many types of headaches as potential serious problems, they let the condition linger and that can lead to negative sequella.
According to Munakata, Hazard, Serrano, Klingman, Rupnow, Tierce, Reed and Lipton (2009) "...neuroimaging studies have provided compelling evidence that suggests progressive brain changes in persons with migraines...migraine frequency is associated with posterior circulation infarcts and diffuse white-matter lesions...Welch et al. showed that impairments in iron homeostasis in periaqueductal grey areas that were associated with migraine duration and chronic daily headache" (Munakata et al., 2009, p. 499).
Munakata et al. also reported that the economic impact of migraines in both direct healthcare costs and indirect costs of absenteeism is a huge economic burden. The direct cost of migraines ranges from $127 to $7,089 per and the indirect cost due to absenteeism ranges from $709 to $4,453 per victim, making migraines an economic burden to the individual, the insurer, the employer with absenteeism and increased benefits paid and local, state and federal entities who will experience a lowered tax base from lost wages. It was also reported that between 2005 and 2006 there were 1,729,555 physician office visits, 186,603 advanced imaging procedures, 59,589 other diagnostic procedures, and 22,168 hospital days with a primary diagnosis of migraine or headache; all of which are paid by private or public insurers or out of the pockets of individuals. In short, the costs are staggering and a burden to the economy.
Friedman, Feldon, Holloway and Fisher (2009) reported that acute headaches account for 5% of emergency department (ED) visits in hospitals. In addition, they also reported that "…the ED environment that may also contribute to unsatisfactory treatment response include limited physician contact time that may preclude a detailed history, overuse of ED by patients with substance abuse problems, the need for rapid triage, the competing distraction of patients with life-threatening conditions, and directives (or lack thereof) for care dictated by the referring physician…Thus, the treatment of migraine patients in the ED appears to be suboptimal and the high rate of recurrent headache may be attributed to underutilization of relatively ‘migraine specific’ treatment" (Friedman et al., 2009, p. 1164).
Nelson, Suter, Casha, du Plessis and Hurlbert (1998) reported on randomized clinical trials that took place over an 8-week course. The results showed there was minor statistical differences in outcomes for improvement during the trial period for chiropractic care and for amatriptyline and over-the-counter medications for treating migraine headaches. It was also reported that there was no statistical benefit in combining therapies. However, the major factor is that in the post-treatment follow-up period, chiropractic was 57% more effective in the reduction of headaches than drug therapy. In addition, it was reported that, with the drug group, "...58% experienced medication side effects important enough to report them. In the amatriptyline group, 10% of the subjects had to withdraw from the study because of intolerable side effects. Side effects in the SMT (Spinal Manipulative Therapy) group were much more benign, infrequent, mild and transitory. None required withdrawal from the study (Nelson et al., 1998, p. 511). Although this study was conducted 13 years ago, a more current study by Chaibi, Tuchin and Russell (2011) reported that that massage therapy, physiotherapy, relaxation and chiropractic spinal manipulative therapy might be equally effective as propranolol and topiramate in the prophylactic management of migraine, supporting the previous findings. Although more research is desperately needed, the above conclusions give the public clear directions with migraines and headaches.
Using the 57% increased effectiveness that chiropractic has over drug therapy (leaving out the overlap that chiropractic could help without drugs) and the $24,000,000,000 ($24 billion) Americans pay for headaches and migraines, the savings would result in $13,680,000,000. back in the insurers, the public's and the government's pockets. In addition, if chiropractic reduced the necessity for emergency room visits by 57%, then the ED doctors could focus on what their primary purpose is, to save lives in urgent scenarios.
Chiropractic offers solutions to the federal government, local government, public and private insurance companies, eases the burden on emergency rooms and prevents unnecessary side effects of drugs that are not clinically indicated, with a more viable and proven drugless solution. Although much more research is desperately needed to explore the benefits of chiropractic with migraines and headaches, the research that is available clearly reports that chiropractic offers immediate solutions. These solutions will add to the economy of local, state and federal governments by increasing the tax base and productivity in the marketplace as a result of keeping workers at work and circulating money into local economies with increased paychecks at the end of the year and productivity avoiding absenteeism. The research is conclusive and chiropractic has solutions to many of the economic and societal problems in the United States and worldwide.
References:
1. Doheny, K. (2006). Recognizing the financial pain of migraines. Workforce Management, 85(16), 10-12.
2. Symons, F. J., Shinde, S. K., & Gilles, E. (2008). Perspectives on pain and intellectual disability. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research, 52(Pt 4), 275-286.
3. Munakata, J., Hazard, E., Serrano, D., Klingman, D., Rupnow, M. F. T., Tierce, J., Reed, M., & Lipton, R. (2009). Economic burden of transformed migraine: Results from the American Migraine Prevalence and Prevention (AMPP) Study. Headache, 49(4), 498-508.
4. Friedman, D., Feldon, S., Holloway, R., & Fisher, S. (2009). Utilization, diagnosis, treatment and cost of migraine treatment in the emergency department. Headache, 49(8),1163-1173.
5. Nelson, C. F., Bronfort, G., Evans, R., Boline, P., Goldsmith, C., & Anderson, A. V. (1998). The efficacy of spinal manipulation, amitriptyline and the combination of both therapies for the prophylaxis of migraine headache. Journal of Manipulative & Physiological Therapeutics, 21(8), 511-519.
6. Chaibi, A., Tuchin, P. J., & Russell, M.B. (2011). Manual therapies for migraine: A systematic review. The Journal of Headache and Pain, 12(2), 127-133.

Tuesday, August 23, 2011

his research indicates that chiropractic is 457% more effective than medicine for chronic low back pain.

Low Back Pain:
Chiropractic Adjustments vs. Muscle Relaxants

by Mark Studin DC, FASBE(C), DAAPM, DAAMLP
 
Chiropractic had a better outcome in 24% of the patients
 
Low back pain is one of the most common maladies among the general population and the incidence of occurrence was reported by Ghaffari, Alipour, Farshad, Yensen, and Vingard (2006) to be between 15% and 45% yearly. Hoiriis et al. (2004) reported it to be between 75% and 85% over an adult lifetime in the United States. Chou (2010) writes that, "Back pain is also the fifth most common reason for office visits in the US, and the second most common symptomatic reason..." (p. 388). Historically and based upon this authors 3+ decades of treating low back pain with treatment options that range from heating pads, ice packs, over-the-counter drugs, prescription drugs, surgery, acupuncture and beyond, the most important questions are, "What works? What's proven and what has the best results with the least side effects allowing the patient to regain a normal lifestyle as quickly as possible."
Muscle relaxers are a common drug that has been prescribed by medical doctors for years for nonspecific low back pain. According to Chou (2010), " The term ‘skeletal muscle relaxants’ refers to a diverse collection of pharmacologically unrelated medications, grouped together because they are approved by regulatory agencies for treatment of spasticity or for musculoskeletal conditions such as tension headache or back pain." They are drugs that has been long studied and the effects and side effects have been well documented. Van Tudlar, Touray, Furlan, Solway, and Bouter (2003) concluded that, "Muscle relaxants are effective in the management of nonspecific low back pain, but the adverse effects require that they be used with caution"(p. 1978).
Chou (2010) also stated that, "Skeletal muscle relaxants are an option for acute nonspecific low back pain, although not recommended as first-line therapy because of a high prevalence of adverse effects" (p. 397). He reported that muscle relaxants had a moderate success rate defined by a 1-2 decrease in pain scales rated out of 10. Simply put, if a patient had a pain scale of 9, one could expect the muscle relaxers prescribed to bring the pain to an 8 or 7 at best and include all of the side effects. According to Drugs.com, side effects of muscle relaxants include:
More common
Blurred or double vision or any change in vision; dizziness or lightheadedness; drowsiness
Less common
Fainting; fast heartbeat; fever; hive-like swellings (large) on face, eyelids, mouth, lips, and/or tongue; mental depression; shortness of breath, troubled breathing, tightness in chest, and/or wheezing; skin rash, hives, itching, or redness; slow heartbeat (methocarbamol injection only); stinging or burning of eyes; stuffy nose and red or bloodshot eyes
Less common or rare
Abdominal or stomach cramps or pain; clumsiness or unsteadiness; confusion; constipation; diarrhea; excitement, nervousness, restlessness, or irritability; flushing or redness of face; headache; heartburn; hiccups; muscle weakness; nausea or vomiting; pain or peeling of skin at place of injection (methocarbamol only); trembling; trouble in sleeping; uncontrolled movements of eyes (methocarbamol injection only)
Rare
Blood in urine; bloody or black, tarry stools; convulsions (seizures) (methocarbamol injection only); cough or hoarseness; fast or irregular breathing; lower back or side pain; muscle cramps or pain (not present before treatment or more painful than before treatment); painful or difficult urination; pain, tenderness, heat, redness, or swelling over a blood vessel (vein) in arm or leg (methocarbamol injection only); pinpoint red spots on skin; puffiness or swelling of the eyelids or around the eyes; sores, ulcers, or white spots on lips or in mouth; sore throat and fever with or without chills; swollen and/or painful glands; unusual bruising or bleeding; unusual tiredness or weakness; vomiting of blood or material that looks like coffee grounds; yellow eyes or skin.(http://www.drugs.com/cons/skeletal-muscle-relaxants.html)
 
When comparing chiropractic spinal adjustments to muscle relaxants for low back pain, it first must be clarified that we are not discussing physical therapy or osteopathic manipulation. While different specialists render tremendous benefits to patients specific to various diagnoses, this research review is limited to a chiropractic spinal adjustment.
Wilkey, Gregory, Byfield, & McCarthy (2008) studied randomized clinical trials comparing chiropractic care to medical care in a pain clinic. "The treatment regimens employed by the pain clinic in this study consisted of standard pharmaceutical therapy (nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, analgesics, and gabapentin), facet joint injection, and soft-tissue injection. Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) machines were also employed. These modalities were used in isolation or in combination with any of the other treatments. Chiropractic group subjects followed an equally unrestricted and normal clinical treatment regimens for the treatment of [chronic low back pain] were followed. All techniques that were employed are recognized within the chiropractic profession as methods used for the treatment of [low back pain]. Many of the methods used are common to other manual therapy professions" (p. 466-467).

After 8 weeks of treatment, the 95% confidence intervals based on the raw scores showed improvement was 1.99 for medicine and 9.03 for the chiropractic group. This research indicates that chiropractic is 457% more effective than medicine for chronic low back pain.

Within that group of 457% falls patients cared for by muscle relaxants.
Hoiriis et al. (2004) reported in their raw data that the chiropractic groups responded 24% better in reducing pain and concluded that, "Statistically, the chiropractic group responded significantly better than the control group with respect to a decrease in pain scores" (p. 396). This was done in "blinded, randomized clinical trials [which] are considered the gold standard of experimental design" (Hoiriis et al., 2004, p. 396).
 
REFERENCES
1. Ghaffari, M., Alipour, A., Farshad, A. A., Yensen, I., & Vingard, E.(2006).Incidence and recurrence of disabling low back pain and neck-shoulder pain. Spine, 31(21), 2500-2506.
2. Hoiriis, K. T., Pfleger, B., McDuffie, F. C., Cotsonis, G., Elsangak, O., Hinson, R., & Verzosa, G. T. (2004). A randomized clinical trial comparing chiropractic adjustments to muscle relaxants for subacute low back pain. Journal of Manipulative and Physiological Therapeutics, 27(6), 388-398.
3. Chou, R. (2010). Pharmacological management of low back pain. Drugs, 70(4) 387-402.
4. van Tudlar, M. W., Touray, T., Furlan, A. D., Solway, S., & Bouter, L. M. (2003). Muscle relaxants for nonspecific low back pain: A systematic review within the framework of the cochrane collaboration. Spine, 28(17), 1978-1992.
5. Drugs.com, (2004). Skeletal muscle relaxants (systemic). Retrieved from http://www.drugs.com/cons/skeletal-muscle-relaxants.html
6. Wilkey, A., Gregory M., Byfield, D., & McCarthy, P. W. (2008). A comparison between chiropractic management and pain clinic management for chronic low-back pain in a national health service outpatient clinic. The Journal of Alternative and Complementary Medicine, 14(5), 465-473.

Monday, August 22, 2011

Chiropractic Care Saves Money

Work Related Injuries, Recurring Low Back Pain, Chronic Care and Chiropractic Treatment:
A Proven Solution to Save Federal, State and Private Insurers $2,871,485,223
 
by Mark Studin DC, FASBE(C), DAAPM, DAAMLP

Published in Dynamic Chiropractic 8/26/2011 
 
Low back pain and its treatment are a worldwide epidemic in human suffering and as a result, an economic burden to federal, state, public and self-insured risk takers who insure the injured. In 2009, Russo, Weir and Elixhauser reported that hospital stays for low back pain were 3.9 out of every 1000 people aged 55-64 years. That was rated as the #8 reason for hospital stays and fell closely behind cardiac conditions and degenerative arthritis. While low back pain has been well chronicled, recurring low back pain and the necessity for chronic care is now beginning to realize results that necessitate the proper approach to mitigate its frequency, duration and economic impact as sequella.
A very significant component of low back patient is its recurrence after initial care has been rendered as well as complications that ensue. Wasiak, Kim and Pransky reported in 2006 that, "Recent studies suggest that acute low back pain evolves into a chronic or recurrent condition more often than previously suspected" (p. 220). They went on to report that 40% of individuals with recurring low back pain sought additional care when the pain recurred and 42.9% of those had continued care and work disability lasting more than 201 days, underscoring the significance of the problem.
According to Dagenais, Caro and Haldeman in 2007, "The economic burden of a disease is the sum of all costs associated with that condition which would not otherwise be incurred if that disease did not exist. Given the many categories of costs that must be considered, it can be challenging to fully estimate the economic burden of an illness as data are often unavailable. The term 'cost' in health economics refers to the value of the consequences of using a particular good or service rather than its price...Despite this example, it should be made clear that estimating the economic burden of a disease is not simply a matter of tabulating the amount reimbursed for all clinician services related to a particular diagnosis. The total cost of illness—or economic burden—has three components: (1) direct (medical and nonmedical) costs; (2) indirect costs; and (3) intangible costs" (p. 9). Although indirect and intangible costs are significant burdens, this paper will focus solely on direct costs.
When considering direct costs for work related claims, studies indicate that non-work related indemnity plans should be included for work related low back injuries. Lipscomb, Dement, Silverstein, Cameron, and Glazner reported in 2009 that, "The private health insurance payment rates for workers with one work-related injury were 40% higher than for those with no history of work injury..." (p. 1188). The reasons are simple; indemnity carriers are victims of many workers' compensation carrier tactics created by the indemnity carriers, as reported by Griffin (2007), to deny, delay and defend. Patients need care and will access any system at their disposal so they can get necessary care and return to a normal, pain free lifestyle, leaving the indemnity carriers to absorb those financial costs. Although this is a significant factor, it is difficult to assign numbers and amounts that are directly tied to work related injuries, although those statistics undoubtedly tally in the billions.
Utilizing the Joint Report to the Governor by New York State Workers’ Compensation Board in 2009 as a reference, in 2004 the total number of claims in New York was 143,667 and out of those claims, 19.3% were low back related. The total costs for treating low back was $579,675,476.96, calculated for inflation to 2011 (Tom's Inflation Calculator, 1997-2011, http://www.halfhill.com/inflation.html). This equates to $29.88 per resident to treat work related low back pain. Nationally, this equates to $9,262,855,559 based upon US Census statistics.
Cifuentes, Willets and Wasiak (2011) compared the treatment of recurrent or chronic low back pain. They considered any condition recurrent or chronic if there was a recurrent disability after a 15 day absence and return to disability. Anyone with less than a 15 day absence was excluded from the study.
The study concluded that chiropractic care during the health maintenance care period resulted in:
16% Decrease in disability duration of first episode compared to physical therapy
240% Decrease in disability duration of first episode compared to medical physician's care
6.6% Decrease in opioid (narcotic) use during maintenance care compared to physical therapy care
17.2% Decrease in opioid (narcotic) use during maintenance care compared medical physician's care
32% Decrease in average weekly cost of medical expenses during disability episode compared to physical therapy care
21% Decrease in average weekly cost of medical expenses during disability episode compared to medical physician's care
The study concluded that chiropractic care during the disability episode resulted in:
24% Decrease in disability duration of first episode compared to physical therapy
250% Decrease in disability duration of first episode compared to medical physician's care
5.9% Decrease in opioid (narcotic) use during maintenance care compared to physical therapy care
30.3% Decrease in opioid (narcotic) use during maintenance care compared medical physician's care
19% Decrease in average weekly cost of medical expenses during disability episode compared to physical therapy care
43% Decrease in average weekly cost of medical expenses during disability episode compared to medical physician's care
Based upon the Joint Report to the Governor (2009) and the statistics rendered by Cifuentes et al. (2011), the savings with chiropractic care utilized exclusive from medicine and physical therapy ranges from $1,759,942,556 with physical therapy to $3,983,027,890 with medicine. Understanding that most medical physicians utilize physical therapy as a primary tool for back related pain, we will average the savings to $2,871,485,223 by utilizing chiropractic care.
Cifuentes et. al (2011) started by stating, "Given chiropractors are proponents of health maintenance care...patients with work related Low back pain who are treated by chiropractors would have a lower risk of recurrent disability because that specific approach would be used (p. 396). They concluded by stating, " After controlling for demographic factors and multiple severity indicators, patients suffering nonspecific work-related LBP who received health services mostly or only from a chiropractor had a lower risk of recurrent disability than the risk of any other provider type (Cifuentes et. al, 2011, p. 404).
References
1. Russo, A., Wier, L. M., & Elixhauser, A. (2009, September). Hospital utilization among near-elderly adults, ages 55 to 64 years, 2007. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, Retrieved from http://www.hcup-us.ahrq.gov/reports/statbriefs/sb79.jsp
2. Wasiak, R., Kim, J., & Pransky, G. (2006). Work disability and costs caused by recurrence of low back pain: Longer and more costly than in first episodes. Spine, 31(2), 219-225.
3. Dagenais, S., Caro, J., & Haldeman, S. (2008). A systematic review of low back pain cost of illness studies in the United States and internationally. Spine, 8(1), 8-20.
4. Lipscomb, H., Dement, J., Silverstein, B., Cameron, W., & Glazner J. (2009). Who is paying the bills? Health care costs for musculoskeletal back disorders, Washington State Union Carpenters, 1989-2003. Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, 51(10), 1185-1192.
5. Griffin, D. (2007, February 7). Insurance companies fight paying billions in claims. Anderson Cooper Blog 360°, Retrieved from http://www.cnn.com/CNN/Programs/anderson.cooper.360/blog/2007/02/ insurance-companies-fight-paying.html
6. New York State Workers’ Compensation Board (2009, March). Joint report to the Governor, From the Superintendant of Insurance and Chair, Workers' Compensation Board, summarizing and benchmarking workers' compensation data and examining progress on prior recommendations for improvement in data collection, Retrieved from http://www.wcb.state.ny.us/content/main/TheBoard/ 2009DataCollectionReport.pdf
7. Halfhill, T. R. (1997-2011). Tom's Inflation Calculator. Retrieved from http://www.halfhill.com/ inflation.html
8. U.S. Census Bureau (2010, December 22). U.S. POPClock Projection, Retrieved from http:// www.census.gov/population/www/popclockus.html
9. Cifuentes, M., Willets, J., & Wasiak, R. (2011). Health maintenance care in work-related low back pain and its association with disability recurrence. Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, 53(4), 396-404.
 

Wednesday, July 20, 2011

Can I borrow $25?

Can I Borrow $25?

Can I borrow $25?
A man came home from work late, tired and irritated, to find his 5-year old son waiting for him at the door.

SON: 'Daddy, may I ask you a question?'
DAD: 'Yeah sure, what it is?' replied the man.
SON: 'Daddy, how much do you make an hour?'
DAD: 'That's none of your business. Why do you ask such a thing?' the
man said angrily.
SON: 'I just want to know. Please tell me, how much do you make an
hour?'
DAD: 'If you must know, I make $50 an hour.'
SON: 'Oh,' the little boy replied, with his head down.
SON: 'Daddy, may I please borrow $25?'

The father was furious, 'If the only reason you asked that is so you
can borrow some money to buy a silly toy or some other nonsense, then
you march yourself straight to your room and go to bed. Think about why you are being so selfish. I don't work hard everyday for such childish frivolities.' The little boy quietly went to his room and shut the door.

The man sat down and started to get even angrier about the little boy's questions. How dare he ask such questions only to get some money? After about an hour or so, the man had calmed down , and started to think:

Maybe there was something he really needed to buy with that $25.00 and
he really didn't ask for money very often. The man went to the door of
the little boy's room and opened the door. 'Are you asleep, son?' He
asked. 'No daddy, I'm awake,' replied the boy. 'I've been thinking,
maybe I was too hard on you earlier' said the man. 'It's been a long
day and I took out my aggravation on you. Here's the $25 you
asked for.'

The little boy sat straight up, smiling. 'Oh, thank you daddy!'
He yelled. Then, reaching under his pillow he pulled out some crumpled
up bills. The man saw that the boy already had money, started to get
angry again. The little boy slowly counted out his money, and then
looked up at his father. 'Why do you want more money if you already
have some?' the father grumbled. Because I didn't have enough, but now
I do,' the little boy replied. 'Daddy, I have $50 now. Can I buy an
hour of your time? Please come home early tomorrow. I would like to
have dinner with you.'

The father was crushed. He put his arms around his little son, and he
begged for his forgiveness. It's just a short reminder to all of you
working so hard in life. We should not let time slip through our
fingers without having spent some time with those who really matter to
us, those close to our hearts. Do remember to share that $50 worth of
your time with someone you love.

If we die tomorrow, the company that we are working for could easily
replace us in a matter of hours. But the family & friends we leave
behind will feel the loss for the rest of their lives.

Can I Borrow $25?

Friday, June 3, 2011

Why your desk job is killing you?


Why your desk job is slowly killing you
Even if you exercise, the more hours a day you sit, the greater your risk of early death
 
 
By Maria Masters, Men's Health
Mens Health
updated 10/26/2010 8:38:01 AM ET 2010-10-26T12:38:01
Do you lead an active lifestyle or a sedentary one? The question is simple, but the answer may not be as obvious as you think. Let's say, for example, you're a busy guy who works 60 hours a week at a desk job but who still manages to find time for five 45-minute bouts of exercise. Most experts would label you as active. (Put your body to the test: 10 standards to assess your fitness level.) But Marc Hamilton, Ph.D., has another name for you: couch potato. Perhaps "exercising couch potato" would be more accurate, but Hamilton, a physiologist and professor at the Pennington Biomedical Research Center , in Baton Rouge , Louisiana , would still classify you as sedentary. "People tend to view physical activity on a single continuum," he says. "On the far side, you have a person who exercises a lot; on the other, a person who doesn't exercise at all. However, they're not necessarily polar opposites."
Hamilton's take, which is supported by a growing body of research, is that the amount of time you exercise and the amount of time you spend on your butt are completely separate factors for heart-disease risk. New evidence suggests, in fact, that the more hours a day you sit, the greater your likelihood of dying an earlier death regardless of how much you exercise or how lean you are. That's right: Even a sculpted six-pack can't protect you from your chair.
But it's not just your heart that's at risk from too much sitting; your hips, spine, and shoulders could also suffer. In fact, it's not a leap to say that a chair-potato lifestyle can ruin you from head to toe.
Statistically speaking, we're working out as much as we were 30 years ago. It's just that we're leading more sedentary lives overall. A 2006 University of Minnesota study found that from 1980 to 2000, the percentage of people who reported exercising regularly remained the same—but the amount of time people spent sitting rose by 8 percent.
Now consider how much we sit today compared with, say, 160 years ago. In a clever study, Dutch researchers created a sort of historical theme park and recruited actors to play 1850s Australian settlers for a week. The men did everything from chop wood to forage for food, and the scientists compared their activity levels with those of modern office workers. The result: The actors did the equivalent of walking 3 to 8 miles more a day than the deskbound men. That kind of activity is perhaps even more needed in today's fast-food nation than it was in the 1800s, but not just because it boosts calorie burn. (Tied to the treadmill? Try these seven ways to burn more fat on the belt.)
A 2010 study in the Journal of Applied Physiology found that when healthy men limited their number of footsteps by 85 percent for 2 weeks, they experienced a 17 percent decrease in insulin sensitivity, raising their diabetes risk. "We've done a lot to keep people alive longer, but that doesn't mean we're healthier," says Hamilton .
Today's death rate is about 43 percent lower than it was in 1960, but back then, less than 1 percent of Americans had diabetes and only 13 percent were obese. Compare that with now, when 6 percent are diagnosed with diabetes and 35 percent are obese.

The definition of an active life
Make no mistake: "Regularly exercising is not the same as being active," says Peter Katzmarzyk, Ph.D., Hamilton 's colleague at Pennington, the nation's leading obesity research center. Katzmarzyk is referring to the difference between official exercise activity, such as running, biking, or lifting weights, and so-called nonexercise activity, like walking to your car, mowing the lawn, or simply standing. "A person may hit the gym every day, but if he's sitting a good deal of the rest of the time, he's probably not leading an overall active life," says Katzmarzyk.
You might dismiss this as scientific semantics, but energy expenditure statistics support Katzmarzyk's notion. In a 2007 report, University of Missouri scientists said that people with the highest levels of nonexercise activity (but little to no actual "exercise") burned significantly more calories a week than those who ran 35 miles a week but accumulated only a moderate amount of nonexercise activity.
"It can be as simple as standing more," Katzmarzyk says. For instance, a "standing" worker—say, a sales clerk at a Banana Republic store—burns about 1,500 calories while on the job; a person behind a desk might expend roughly 1,000 calories. That goes a long way in explaining why people gain 16 pounds, on average, within 8 months of starting sedentary office work, according to a study from the University of North Carolina at Wilmington .
Work your entire body in 15 minutes with these three moves for fast muscle.
Why sitting too much is never a good thing
But calories aren't the only problem. In 2009, Katzmarzyk studied the lifestyle habits of more than 17,000 men and women and found that the people who sat for almost the entire day were 54 percent more likely to end up clutching their chests than those who sat for almost none of the time. That's no surprise, of course, except that it didn't matter how much the sitters weighed or how often they exercised. "The evidence that sitting is associated with heart disease is very strong," says Katzmarzyk. "We see it in people who smoke and people who don't. We see it in people who are regular exercisers and those who aren't. Sitting is an independent risk factor."
This isn't actually a new discovery. In a British study published in 1953, scientists examined two groups of workers: bus drivers and trolley conductors. At first glance, the two occupations appeared to be pretty similar. But while the bus drivers were more likely to sit down for their entire day, the trolley conductors were running up and down the stairs and aisles of the double-decker trolleys. As it turned out, the bus drivers were nearly twice as likely to die of heart disease as the conductors were.
A more recent interpretation of that study, published in 2004, found that none of the participants ever exercised. But the two groups did sit for different amounts of time. The analysis revealed that even after the scientists accounted for differences in waist size—an indicator of belly fat—the bus drivers were still more likely to die before the conductors did. So the bus drivers were at higher risk not simply because their sedentary jobs made them resemble Ralph Kramden, but also because all that sitting truly was making them unhealthy.
Hamilton came to call this area of science "inactivity physiology" while he was conducting studies to determine how exercise affects an enzyme called lipoprotein lipase (LPL). Found in humans as well as mice, LPL's main responsibility is to break down fat in the bloodstream to use as energy. If a mouse (or a man) doesn't have this enzyme, or if the enzyme doesn't work in their leg muscles, the fat is stored instead of burned as fuel.
Hamilton discovered that when the rodents were forced to lie down for most of their waking hours, LPL activity in their leg muscles plummeted. But when they simply stood around most of the time, the gene was 10 times more active. That's when he added an exercise session to the lab-rat routine and found that exercise had no effect on LPL. He believes the finding also applies to people.
"Humans sit too much, so you have to treat the problem specifically," says Hamilton . "The cure for too much sitting isn't more exercise. Exercise is good, of course, but the average person could never do enough to counteract the effect of hours and hours of chair time."
If you're chair-bound, perform these seven easy office stretches every 20 minutes.
"We know there's a gene in the body that causes heart disease, but it doesn't respond to exercise no matter how often or how hard you work out," he says. "And yet the activity of the gene becomes worse from sitting—or rather, the complete and utter lack of contractile activity in your muscles. So the more nonexercise activity you do, the more total time you spend on your feet and out of your chair. That's the real cure."
"Your body adapts to what you do most often," says Bill Hartman, P.T., C.S.C.S., a Men's Health advisor and physical therapist in Indianapolis , Indiana . "So if you sit in a chair all day, you'll essentially become better adapted to sitting in a chair." The trouble is, that makes you less adept at standing, walking, running, and jumping, all of which a truly healthy human should be able to do with proficiency. "Older folks have a harder time moving around than younger people do," says Hartman. "That's not simply because of age; it's because what you do consistently from day to day manifests itself over time, for both good and bad."
Inactivity affects more than the heart
Do you sit all day at a desk? You're courting muscle stiffness, poor balance and mobility, and lower-back, neck, and hip pain. But to understand why, you'll need a quick primer on fascia, a tough connective tissue that covers all your muscles. While fascia is pliable, it tends to "set" in the position your muscles are in most often. So if you sit most of the time, your fascia adapts to that specific position.
Now think about where your hips and thighs are in relation to your torso while you're sitting. They're bent, which causes the muscles on the front of your thighs, known as hip flexors, to contract slightly, or shorten. The more you sit, the more the fascia will keep your hip flexors shortened. "If you've ever seen a guy walk with a forward lean, it's often because of shortened hip flexors," says Hartman. "The muscles don't stretch as they naturally should. As a result, he's not walking tall and straight because his fascia has adapted more to sitting than standing."
This same effect can be seen in other areas of your body. For instance, if you spend a lot of time with your shoulders and upper back slumped over a keyboard, this eventually becomes your normal posture. "That's not just an issue in terms of how you look; it frequently leads to chronic neck and shoulder pain," says Hartman. Also, people who frequently cross their legs a certain way can experience hip imbalances. "This makes your entire lower body less stable, which decreases your agility and athletic performance and increases your risk for injuries," Hartman says. Add all this up, and a person who sits a lot is less efficient not only at exercising, but also at simply moving from, say, the couch to the refrigerator.
There's yet another problem with all that sitting. "If you spend too much time in a chair, your glute muscles will actually 'forget' how to fire," says Hartman. This phenomenon is aptly nicknamed "gluteal amnesia." A basic-anatomy reminder: Your glutes, or butt muscles, are your body's largest muscle group. So if they aren't functioning properly, you won't be able to squat or deadlift as much weight, and you won't burn as much fat. After all, muscles burn calories. And that makes your glutes a powerful furnace for fat—a furnace that's probably been switched off if you spend most of the day on your duff.
It gets worse. Weak glutes as well as tight hip flexors cause your pelvis to tilt forward. This puts stress on your lumbar spine, resulting in lower-back pain. It also pushes your belly out, which gives you a protruding gut even if you don't have an ounce of fat. "The changes to your muscles and posture from sitting are so small that you won't notice them at first. But as you reach your 30s, 40s, 50s, and beyond, they'll gradually become worse," says Hartman, "and a lot harder to fix."
So what's a desk jockey to do? Hamilton 's advice: Think in terms of two spectrums of activity. One represents the activities you do that are considered regular exercise. But another denotes the amount of time you spend sitting versus the time you spend on your feet. "Then every day, make the small choices that will help move you in the right direction on that sitting-versus-standing spectrum," says Hamilton . "Stand while you're talking on the phone. It all adds up, and it all matters."
Of course, there's a problem with all of this: It kills all our lame excuses for not exercising (no time for the gym, fungus on the shower-room floor, a rerun of The Office you haven't seen). Now we have to redefine "workout" to include every waking moment of our days. But there's a big payoff: more of those days to enjoy in the future. So get up off your chair and start nonexercising.
© 2011 Rodale Inc. All rights reserved.