Review conclusions by Ernst and Canter regarding spinal manipulation refuted

In the April 2006 issue of the Journal of Royal Society of Medicine, Ernst and Canter authored a review of the most recent systematic reviews on the effectiveness of spinal manipulation for any condition. The authors concluded that, except for back pain, spinal manipulation is not an effective intervention for any condition and, because of potential side effects, cannot be recommended for use at all in clinical practice. Based on a critical appraisal of their review, the authors of this commentary seriously challenge the conclusions by Ernst and Canter, who did not adhere to standard systematic review methodology, thus threatening the validity of their conclusions. There was no systematic assessment of the literature pertaining to the hazards of manipulation, including comparison to other therapies. Hence, their claim that the risks of manipulation outweigh the benefits, and thus spinal manipulation cannot be recommended as treatment for any condition, was not supported by the data analyzed. Their conclusions are misleading and not based on evidence that allow discrediting of a large body of professionals using spinal manipulation

Twenty-five years with the biopsychosocial model of low back pain-is it time to celebrate?:A report from the twelfth international forum for primary care research on low back pain

Study Design: An integrated review of current knowledge about the biopsychosocial model of back pain for understanding etiology, prognosis, and interventions, as presented at the plenary sessions of the XII International Forum on LBP Research in Primary Care (Denmark; October 17–19, 2012). Objective: To evaluate the utility of the model in reference to rising rates of back pain-related disability, by identifying (a) the most promising avenues for future research in biological, psychological, and social approaches, (b) promising combinations of all 3 approaches, and (c) obstacles to effective implementation of biopsychosocial-based research and clinical practice. Summary of Background Data: The biopsychosocial model of back pain has become a dominant model in the conceptualization of the etiology and prognosis of back pain, and has led to the development and testing of many interventions. Despite this back pain remains a leading source of disability worldwide. Methods: The review is a synthesis based on the plenary sessions and discussions at the XII International Forum on LBP Research in Primary Care. The presentations included evidence-based reviews of the current state of knowledge in each of the 3 areas (biological, psychological, and social), identification of obstacles to effective implementation and missed opportunities, and identification of the most promising paths for future research. Results: Although there is good evidence for the role of biological, psychological, and social factors in the etiology and prognosis of back pain, synthesis of the 3 in research and clinical practice has been suboptimal. Conclusion: The utility of the biopsychosocial framework cannot be fully assessed until we truly adopt and apply it in research and clinical practice