Review of methods used by chiropractors to determine the site for applying manipulation

Background: With the development of increasing evidence for the use of manipulation in the management of musculoskeletal conditions, there is growing interest in identifying the appropriate indications for care. Recently, attempts have been made to develop clinical prediction rules, however the validity of these clinical prediction rules remains unclear and their impact on care delivery has yet to be established. The current study was designed to evaluate the literature on the validity and reliability of the more common methods used by doctors of chiropractic to inform the choice of the site at which to apply spinal manipulation. Methods: Structured searches were conducted in Medline, PubMed, CINAHL and ICL, supported by hand searches of archives, to identify studies of the diagnostic reliability and validity of common methods used to identify the site of treatment application. To be included, studies were to present original data from studies of human subjects and be designed to address the region or location of care delivery. Only English language manuscripts from peer-reviewed journals were included. The quality of evidence was ranked using QUADAS for validity and QAREL for reliability, as appropriate. Data were extracted and synthesized, and were evaluated in terms of strength of evidence and the degree to which the evidence was favourable for clinical use of the method under investigation. Results: A total of 2594 titles were screened from which 201 articles met all inclusion criteria. The spectrum of manuscript quality was quite broad, as was the degree to which the evidence favoured clinical application of the diagnostic methods reviewed. The most convincing favourable evidence was for methods which confirmed or provoked pain at a specific spinal segmental level or region. There was also high quality evidence supporting the use, with limitations, of static and motion palpation, and measures of leg length inequality. Evidence of mixed quality supported the use, with limitations, of postural evaluation. The evidence was unclear on the applicability of measures of stiffness and the use of spinal x-rays. The evidence was of mixed quality, but unfavourable for the use of manual muscle testing, skin conductance, surface electromyography and skin temperature measurement. Conclusions: A considerable range of methods is in use for determining where in the spine to administer spinal manipulation. The currently published evidence falls across a spectrum ranging from strongly favourable to strongly unfavourable in regard to using these methods. In general, the stronger and more favourable evidence is for those procedures which take a direct measure of the presumptive site of care– methods involving pain provocation upon palpation or localized tissue examination. Procedures which involve some indirect assessment for identifying the manipulable lesion of the spine–such as skin conductance or thermography–tend not to be supported by the available evidence.https://doi.org/10.1186/2045-709X-21-3

Coadministration of Glucagon-Like Peptide-1 During Glucagon Infusion in Humans Results in Increased Energy Expenditure and Amelioration of Hyperglycemia

Glucagon and glucagon-like peptide (GLP)-1 are the primary products of proglucagon processing from the pancreas and gut, respectively. Giving dual agonists with glucagon and GLP-1 activity to diabetic, obese mice causes enhanced weight loss and improves glucose tolerance by reduction of food intake and by increase in energy expenditure (EE). We aimed to observe the effect of a combination of glucagon and GLP-1 on resting EE and glycemia in healthy human volunteers. In a randomized, double-blinded crossover study, 10 overweight or obese volunteers without diabetes received placebo infusion, GLP-1 alone, glucagon alone, and GLP-1 plus glucagon simultaneously. Resting EE—measured using indirect calorimetry—was not affected by GLP-1 infusion but rose significantly with glucagon alone and to a similar degree with glucagon and GLP-1 together. Glucagon infusion was accompanied by a rise in plasma glucose levels, but addition of GLP-1 to glucagon rapidly reduced this excursion, due to a synergistic insulinotropic effect. The data indicate that drugs with glucagon and GLP-1 agonist activity may represent a useful treatment for type 2 diabetes and obesity. Long-term studies are required to demonstrate that this combination will reduce weight and improve glycemia in patients

Combination of peptide YY3-36 with GLP-1(7-36) amide causes an increase in first-phase insulin secretion after IV glucose

Context: The combination of peptide YY (PYY) and glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) has been proposed as a potential treatment for diabetes and obesity. However, the combined effects of these hormones, PYY3–36 and GLP-17–36 amide, on glucose homeostasis are unknown. Objective: This study sought to investigate the acute effects of PYY3–36 and GLP-17–36 amide, individually and in combination, on insulin secretion and sensitivity. Setting and Design: Using a frequently sampled iv glucose tolerance test (FSIVGTT) and minimal modeling, this study measured the effects of PYY3–36 alone, GLP-17–36 amide alone, and a combination of PYY3–36 and GLP-17–36 amide on acute insulin response to glucose (AIRg) and insulin sensitivity index (SI) in 14 overweight human volunteers, studied in a clinical research facility. Results: PYY3–36 alone caused a small but nonsignificant increase in AIRg. GLP-17–36 amide alone and the combination of PYY3–36 and GLP-17–36 amide did increase AIRg significantly. No significant differences in SI were observed with any intervention. Conclusions: PYY3–36 lacks any significant acute effects on first-phase insulin secretion or SI when tested using an FSIVGTT. Both GLP-17–36 amide alone and the combination of PYY3–36 and GLP-17–36 amide increase first-phase insulin secretion. There does not seem to be any additive or synergistic effect between PYY3–36 and GLP-17–36 amide on first-phase insulin secretion. Neither hormone alone nor the combination had any significant effects on SI