Complementary and Alternative Care in the Long-Term Care Setting
INTRODUCTION
Complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) therapies, defined as “a diverse group of medical and health care systems, therapies and products that are not considered to be part of conventional medicine,” have become commonplace among older Americans.1 Regardless of preconceived notions of the effectiveness of such therapies, clinicians must be knowledgeable about alternative treatment modalities in order to develop an effective care plan. This article will highlight the rationale and evidence, where it exists, of the most commonly utilized CAM therapies in older adults, with a focus on patients who require care in an institutional setting where a variety of supportive services are available, such as long-term care (LTC).
Recent studies have highlighted the increased utilization of CAM therapies among older adults.2 It is estimated that 42% of Americans used CAM therapies in 1997, a number that has increased to 62% in 2002.1-5 Estimates of utilization of all types of CAM therapies in older adults is reported between 30%2 and 47.8%.4 The most commonly utilized therapies in older adults are chiropractic services (11%), herbal remedies (8%), relaxation techniques (5%), high-dose megavitamins (5%), and religious or spiritual healing by others (4%).4 A recent survey of 31,000 adults assessing utilization of CAM therapies in the U.S. reported that 14.6% of those over 65 years of age utilized “manipulative and body based therapies, including chiropractic and massage.”4 The most common conditions treated with these alternative therapies are arthritis and back pain.5 In another recent survey of patients with osteoarthritis, 47% of patients reported using alternative care including massage therapy, chiropractic care, and nonprescribed alternative therapies.5 The reasons for the increased utilization of CAM therapies is not completely understood, but two of the reasons may include perceived effectiveness by users of these therapies as well as the toxicity associated with commonly utilized pain medications.6-8
Many of the older adults who are utilizing alternative therapies will require care in a long-term care setting. It is estimated that the number of these older adults who require long-term care will continue to rise over the next 20 years, given the lifetime risk for nursing home placement of 43% in those over 65 years of age.9,10 Older adults who are placed in LTC settings may benefit from alternative therapies, but it again is imperative that providers be aware of the potential benefits and also the potential harm from commonly utilized alternative therapies.
Most studies evaluating the use of CAM therapies in older adults have been performed on community-dwelling older adults, although there are some small reports on the utilization of CAM therapies in long-term care.11-18 However, there is a paucity of formal studies evaluating the use of CAM therapies in a long-term care setting. This is surprising given the large number of older adults in LTC settings. It is also surprising given the incidence of chronic illnesses and chronic pain, which is the most common reason for seeking out CAM therapies.1-4 It is reported that 45-80% of nursing home residents have pain that contributes to functional impairment;19 yet, this pain is often undertreated or treated with only pharmaceutical agents.20
The studies that have been performed in the LTC setting have reported on herbal remedies, chiropractic care, massage, acupuncture, aromatherapy, meditation, and guided imagery; the first two are the most commonly utilized with a growing utilization of massage therapy.11-18 The specific therapies reviewed below will highlight the evidence for, the risk associated with, and the applicability to long-term care of the most commonly utilized CAM therapies in the older adult population. The Table illustrates the different types of CAM therapies and possible contraindications to each.
ENERGY THERAPIES
Therapeutic touch was developed in the early 1970s. It is based on the premise that a person is an open energy system, and illness is a reflection of an imbalance in the individual’s energy field. A recent review evaluated 33 studies on healing touch.14 Of the 33 studies evaluated, six were randomized, controlled trials; however, these were of low quality.14,15 Four of the studies evaluated specifically looked at older adults. The results of these studies found improvement in pain, appetite, and sleep.12 Reiki, another form of therapeutic touch, is an energy therapy developed in Japan. Rei is defined as universal spirit or cosmic force of the universe, and ki is the life force or energy. The Reiki practitioner is thought to be the conduit for the Reiki energy.12,14 There have been no randomized, controlled trials on the utilization of therapeutic touch or Reiki in the long-term care population.12-16
Acupuncture was developed in China more than 5000 years ago, and it is the oldest of the CAM therapies. Acupuncture is based on the theory that a vital life force, known as qi or ch’i, flows through the body on 12 lines called meridians. Illnesses or disruptions to the body’s harmony can result if meridians become blocked or imbalanced. The most common reason why people seek acupuncture is to alleviate pain, although acupuncture also has been shown to provide benefits for addictions, asthma, nausea, osteoarthritis, Menriere’s disease, depression, AIDS, migraines, and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.16 The exact mechanism of action of acupuncture is unknown. It is thought however to act on the descending inhibitory system of the central nervous system.21 There are no randomized, controlled trials of utilization of acupuncture in older adults or in long-term care facilities. Most studies that have evaluated acupuncture have had methodological flaws, which have made the drawing of definitive conclusions difficult.21 However, acupuncture does appear to be a relatively safe treatment modality. The most significant issue for its utilization in long-term care would be the risk of significant bruising in the patient with anticoagulation.21
HERBAL REMEDIES
Herbal products are considered dietary supplements; they can be easily obtained and are presumed by the public to be safe and effective. The sale of herbal products increased exponentially in the past 10 years. In 1995 Americans spent $1.5 billion on herbal products,22 and in 1997 $5.1 billion was spent.1 Estimates range from 8% to 49% of older adults utilizing herbal remedies.1,4 The most recent survey on alternative care found that 48.8% of those over age 65 reported utilizing biologically-based therapies including megavitamins.4 All of the studies done up to this point on the utilization of herbal remedies in older adults have been done on community-dwelling adults.1,4 Although the direct risk of adverse reaction is low with the use of herbal remedies, the greatest risk—particularly in the long-term care population—is with drug–herb interaction. In the case of drug–herb or drug–nutrient interaction, there is a risk that the natural agents may potentiate or modify the action of certain prescription medications. This is of greatest concern when the patient is taking a drug with a narrow therapeutic window. The most commonly utilized herbal medicinal products are echinacea (40.3%), ginseng (24.1%), ginkgo biloba (21.1%), garlic supplements (19.9%), glucosamine sulfate (14.9%), and St. John’s wort (12.0%).4
Echinacea has traditionally been used topically and orally for diverse indications, including wound healing, abscesses, burns, eczema, and leg ulcers, which are all common conditions in long-term care.22,23 The efficacy of echinacea for either treatment or prevention of illness has yet to be determined. There are approximately 16 trials evaluating the effectiveness of echinacea for upper respiratory infection with moderate to good methodology.22 There have been no systematic reviews evaluating adverse events from echinacea. The Australian Adverse Drug Reaction Advisory Committee received only 11 reports of adverse reactions from echinacea over a 1-year period.24 There have been no randomized trials on the utilization of echinacea in a LTC setting.
Ginseng has been used for its alleged sedative, hypnotic, demulcent, aphrodisiac, antidepressant, and diuretic activity. It is often recommended for improving stamina, concentration, vigilance, and well-being.22 A systematic review included 16 randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials.25 Most of these studies were of low methodological quality, using healthy subjects rather than patient samples. Evidence from the clinical trials did not support utilization for the above-mentioned indications.22,25 The exact incidence of adverse reactions from ginseng is unknown. Several adverse reactions have been reported but there has been no systematic analysis of these reactions. There are also concerns about the quality of many commercial ginseng products, which may contain contaminants.22,25 There have been no randomized, clinical trials on the utilization of ginseng in a LTC setting.
Ginkgo fruits and seeds have been utilized in Chinese medicine for thousands of years.26 In vitro and in vivo studies suggest that ginkgo has antiedemic, antihypoxic, free radical scavenging, antioxidant, metabolic, antiplatelet, hemorheologic, and microcirculatory actions.26,27 Ginkgo has been used experimentally for myocardial reperfusion injury, depression, brain trauma, free radical damage to the retina, cochlear deafness, vertigo, male impotence, and asthma.23 There have been systematic reviews of the studies for memory impairment, dementia, tinnitus, and intermittent claudication. These data show that there may be some therapeutic effect of ginkgo on these conditions but it requires further study.27-29 The adverse effects of ginkgo have been reported to be mild and transient. The most serious adverse event is likely associated with the antiplatelet activity, which may cause an interaction between anticoagulants and the ginkgo.30 This side effect is very relevant in the LTC population, given the high utilization of anticoagulants in this setting.9 Although the therapeutic benefit of utilizing ginkgo for conditions such as memory impairment and dementia is enticing, the benefits may not outweigh the risks.22,29,30 It is imperative that randomized, controlled trials be carried out prior to recommending this therapy in the LTC setting.
Garlic is a traditional medicinal herb used throughout the world. It has been hypothesized as an antiplatelet, antiparasitic, antifungal, antiviral, anti-inflammatory, and anti-cancer agent.31 Animal in vitro and ex vivo studies suggest inhibition of lipid uptake by aortic cells, inhibition of smooth muscle proliferation, and decreased oxidation of low-density lipoproteins.31,32 Two recent meta-analyses showed an average reduction of 9-12% in total cholesterol and 13% in triglycerides.32,33 Garlic has only a weak antihypertensive effect. Meta-analyses of eight studies showed a significant reduction of diastolic blood pressure in four studies and systolic blood pressure in three studies.34 Several small, nondefinitive randomized, clinical trials also support garlic’s antiplatelet, antithrombotic, and fibrinolytic properties.35 The majority of reported side effects of garlic have been reported as mild. These side effects include gastrointestinal discomfort, bloating, headache, sweating, lightheadedness, menorrhagia, and garlic odor.35 Caution should be exercised—especially in the older adult population—of combining garlic with other anticoagulation agents, such as aspirin, ginkgo, feverfew, and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. Garlic may increase the international normalized ratio of patients on warfarin; therefore, high-dose garlic should be used with caution in a LTC setting.36 There are no randomized, controlled trials on the utilization of garlic in a LTC setting.
Glucosamine sulfate is a natural substance and is the building block of the ground substance of articular cartilage, the proteoglycans. The rationale for the use of glucosamine sulfate is based largely on in vitro and animal models of osteoarthritis. It has been experimentally shown to normalize cartilage metabolism and rebuild damaged cartilage, and has demonstrated mild anti-inflammatory properties. One systematic review evaluated 16 randomized, controlled trials; they concluded that there needs to be further research to confirm the long-term effectiveness of glucosamine sulfate for the treatment of osteoarthritis. With regard to side effects, it appears that glucosamine sulfate is safe. Of 1000 patients who participated in the randomized, controlled trials evaluating glucosamine sulfate, only 14 withdrew due to toxicity. The most common side effect from glucosamine sulfate was mild gastrointestinal tract complaints, which occurred in 12% of the patients in the trials and were described as mild.37 Given the prevalence of osteoarthritis in older adults, especially in the LTC setting,9 it is important in the future to evaluate the role of glucosamine sulfate in this setting. There are currently no randomized, controlled trials that have evaluated the benefits of glucosamine sulfate in the LTC setting.
St. John’s wort is used almost exclusively as an antidepressant. Its mechanism is thought to be similar to that of tricyclic antidepressants. It is thought to lie in selective inhibition of serotonin, dopamine, and norepinephrine reuptake in the central nervous system.38,39 A recent meta-analysis evaluated 27 randomized, double-blind clinical trials. These authors confirmed that St. John’s wort is more effective than placebo in the treatment of mild-to-moderate depression and is similar in effectiveness to low-dose tricyclic antidepressants.39 Depression is a common comorbidity in the LTC setting; however, none of the studies evaluating St. John’s wort have been done in this setting. Taken alone, St. John’s wort has an excellent safety profile. However, when taken with other medications St. John’s wort can cause serious side effects. Evidence indicates that it can decrease plasma levels of a large range of prescribed drugs, such as anticoagulants, oral contraceptives, and antiviral agents.22,40 Evidence also indicates that the combination of St. John’s wort with selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors can lead to serotonin overload or serotonin syndrome, particularly in older adults.41
MASSAGE THERAPY
Massage therapy is a commonly utilized form of alternative therapy in the older adult population. In a recent survey of older adults with osteoarthritis, it was the most commonly utilized form of alternative therapy.5 Soft tissue massage is thought to improve physiologic and clinical outcomes by offering symptomatic relief of pain through physical and mental relaxation and increasing the pain threshold through the release of endorphins.42,43 A recent systematic analysis of the literature revealed no randomized, controlled trials that have specifically evaluated the effects of massage therapy in the older adult.42 One small study did report a decrease in anxiety in institutionalized older adults with massage therapy.43
The Cochrane database identified nine publications reporting on eight randomized trials involving massage therapy for lower back pain.43 Three studies had low methodological quality scores and five trials had high scores. Massage has been compared to an inert treatment (sham laser) in one study that showed that massage was superior, especially if given in combination with exercise and education. In the other seven studies, massage was compared to different active treatments. They showed that massage was inferior to manipulation and to transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation; it was equal to corsets and exercises; and it was superior to relaxation therapy, acupuncture, and self-care education.43 There have been no randomized, controlled trials of massage therapy in the LTC setting. Side effects of massage therapy are generally mild and transient, although serious complications have been reported. The most commonly reported side effects involve transient soreness after the treatment.44 There are several contraindications to massage therapy being applied to areas over acute inflammation, skin infection, nonconsolidated fracture, burn areas, deep vein thrombosis, or active cancer tumor.45
CHIROPRACTIC CARE
In 1998 the American Geriatrics Society published guidelines on the management of chronic pain in older persons.46 These guidelines listed chiropractic care among the nonpharmacologic strategies for pain management that have been helpful in older adults. The utilization of chiropractic care among the geriatric population has been estimated at between 11% and 20%.2,47 In the Iowa 65+ Rural Health Study, they found that a higher percentage of older adults were utilizing chiropractic services for their lower back pain.48 A subanalysis of a small group of patients in a large study observed that older adults who received chiropractic care were less likely to be hospitalized, less likely to have used a nursing home, more likely to report a better health status, more likely to exercise vigorously, and more likely to be mobile in the community.49
Chiropractic management involves many techniques and procedures; the most common are manual therapies and exercise.40 Over the past 10 years there has been a significant increase in the literature in the number of randomized, controlled trials on spinal manipulation. To date, at least 73 randomized, clinical trials of a broadly defined spinal manipulation procedure can be found in the English language literature. The clinical trials include placebo-controlled comparisons, comparisons with other treatments, and pragmatic comparisons of chiropractic management with “normal medical care.”50 A systematic review conducted by Koes et al51 in 1996 assessed 35 randomized, controlled studies involving manipulation and mobilization for chronic and acute spine pain. This systematic review provided limited evidence that spinal manipulation or mobilization would benefit patients with chronic low back pain. van Tulder et al52 reviewed nine studies involving patients with chronic low back pain, including five of the studies from the Koes et al51 review. The investigators concluded that there was strong evidence that manipulation is more effective than placebo in the management of chronic low back pain. They also found moderate evidence that manipulation was more effective than bed rest, analgesics, massage, and care by a general physician.52
Four systematic reviews have found that manipulation or mobilization versus other treatments improves symptoms in patients with chronic neck pain.53-56 In the geriatric patient, however, issues of safety must be taken into consideration given the reduced strength, endurance, and tissue capacity associated with aging and disease.57 Spinal manipulation has been shown to be safe in the general population. Six prospective studies have been done looking at spinal manipulation; these studies evaluated over 2000 patients. In these six prospective studies, not a single incident of serious complication was noted.58 The most valid studies suggest that about half of all patients will experience adverse events after spinal manipulation therapy. These events are usually mild and transient. No reliable data exist about the incidence of serious adverse events. These data indicate that mild, transient adverse events seem to be frequent. Serious adverse events are probably rare. Senstad et al,59,60 who performed the largest of the prospective studies, reports, “The most common incidents are related to innocuous physiologic reactions or short-term discomfort, generally in the site treated. These are self-limiting events that resolve within 24 hours, much like the soreness following intramuscular injection.” There have been no randomized, controlled trials on the utilization of chiropractic care in the long-term care setting.
A model of successful integration of a chiropractic clinic in a long-term care setting has been presented.17,18 A chiropractic clinic was established in a university-affiliated long-term care facility. This clinic has integrated chiropractic care into basic treatment algorithms for pain management. The preliminary data from the clinic have been promising, with patients showing improvements in quality-of-life surveys as well as decrease in pain levels. This model has also demonstrated the safety of chiropractic care in the LTC population, with the reported side effects being lower than those reported in the younger, community-dwelling population.17,18 While there is a need for randomized, controlled trials evaluating chiropractic services in long-term care, these preliminary data do seem promising that chiropractic care may play a role in pain management for residents of LTC facilities.
CONCLUSION
The growth in long-term care utilization is predicted to be substantial over the next 10-20 years, with estimates of increased growth of 10-25%.61 This fact, combined with the trends in utilization of complementary and alternative care in older adults,1-4 necessitates that those involved in the treatment of patients in LTC settings should be informed about alternative care. This article has reviewed the evidence base for and side effects of the most commonly utilized forms of alternative care. While there is a growing amount of data on the safety and efficacy of complementary and alternative care, there remains a need for further high-quality trials to best assess the role of these therapies in older adults, and specifically, those in long-term care settings. The current literature, however, is encouraging for the possibility of the utilization of these different therapies to give long-term care residents diverse options for their care. “The integrated medicine of today will simply be the medicine of the new century.”62
1. Eisenberg DM, Davis RB, Ettner SL, et al. Trends in alternative medicine use in the United States, 1990-1997: Results of a follow-up national survey. JAMA 1998;280(18):1569-1575.
2. Foster DF, Phillips RS, Hamel MB, Eisenberg DM. Alternative medicine use in older Americans. J Am Geriatr Soc 2000;48(12):1560-1565.
3. Najm W, Reinsch S, Hoehler F, Tobus J. Use of complementary and alternative medicine among the ethnic elderly. Altern Ther Health Med 2003;9:50-57.
4. Barnes PM, Powell-Griner E, McFann K, Nahin RL. Complementary and alternative medicine use among adults: United States, 2002. Adv Data 2004;343:1-19.
5. Ramsey SD, Spencer AC, Topolski TD, et al. Use of alternative therapies by older adults with osteoarthritis. Arthritis Rheum 2001;45(3):222-227.
6. Gloth FM III. Pain management in older adults: Prevention and treatment. J Am Geriatr Soc 2001;49(2):188-199.
7. Smalley WE, Ray WA, Daugherty JR, Griffin MR. Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and the incidence of hospitalizations for peptic ulcer disease in elderly persons. Am J Epidemiol 1995;141:539-545.
8. Davis MP, Srivastava M. Demographics, assessment and management of pain in the elderly. Drugs Aging 2003;20(1):23-57.
9. Walpole A, Katz P. Nursing home care. In: Hazzard WR, Blass JP, Ettinger WH, Halter JB, Ouslander JG, eds. Principles of Geriatric Medicine and Gerontology. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill; 2003:197-217.
10. Lakdawalla D, Goldman DP, Bhattacharya J, et al. Forecasting the nursing home population. Med Care 2003;41(1):8-20.
11. Piturro M. Alternative medicine meets long-term care. Caring for the Ages 2003;4:15-16.
12. Gehlhaart C, Dail P. Effectiveness of healing touch and therapeutic touch on elderly residents of long-term care facilities on reducing pain and anxiety levels. Healing Touch Newsletter 2000;1(3):8.
1
3. Bullock M. Reiki: A complementary therapy for life. Am J Hosp Palliat Care 1997;14(1):31-33.
14. Wardell DW, Weymouth KF. Review of studies of healing touch. J Nurs Scholarsh 2004;36(2):147-154.
15. Snyder SR. Therapeutic touch and the terminally ill: Healing power through the hands. Am J Hosp Palliat Care 1997;14(20):83-87.
16. Eliopoulos C. Complementary and alterative therapies in long-term care. Lippincotts Prim Care Pract 1999; 3(2):194-203.
17. Dishman JD, Katz P. Establishment of chiropractic services in a geriatric in-patient rehabilitation hospital: A pilot of one model of integration. Journal of Chiropractic Education 2003 17(1):6-7.
18. Dougherty PE, Katz P, Karuza J. Chiropractic services within a long-term care setting. J Am Geriatr Soc 2004; 52:105.
19. Fox PL, Raina P, Jadad AR. Prevalence and treatment of pain in older adults in nursing homes and other long-term care institutions: A systematic review. CMAJ 1999;160:329-333.
20. Ferrell BA. Pain evaluation and management in the nursing home. Ann Intern Med 1995;123(9):681-687.
21. Weiner DK, Ernst E. Complementary and alternative approaches to the treatment of persistent musculoskeletal pain. Clin J Pain 2004;20(4):244-255.
22. Ernst E. The risk-benefit profile of commonly used herbal therapies: Ginko, St. John’s Wort, Ginseng, Echinacea, Saw Palmetto and Kava. Ann Intern Med 2002;136(1):42-53.
23. Gray MA. Herbs: Multicultural folk medicines. Orthop Nurs 1996;15:49-56.
24. Mullins RJ. Echinacea-associated anaphylaxis. Med J Aust 1998;168:170-171.
25. Vogler BK, Pittler MH, Ernst E. The efficacy of ginseng: A systematic review of randomized clinical trials. Eur J Clin Pharmacol 1999;55:567-575.
26. DeFeudis FV. Gingko Biloba Extract: Pharmacological Activities and Clinical Applications. Amsterdam: Elsevier; 1991.
27. Boon HS, Smith M. The Botanical Pharmacy: The Pharmacology of 47 Common Herbs. Kingston, Ontario, Canada: Quarry Press; 1999.
28. Kleijnen J, Knipschild P. Ginko biloba for cerebral insufficiency. Br J Clin Pharmacol 1992;34:352-358.
29. Oken BS, Strozbach DM, Kaye JA. The efficacy of Ginko biloba on cognitive function in Alzheimer disease. Arch Neurol 1998; 55:1409-1415.
30. Ernst E. Interactions between synthetic and herbal medicinal products, Part 2: A systematic review of the indirect evidence. Perfusion 2000;13:60-70.
31. Koch HP, Lawson LD, eds. Garlic: The Science and Therapeutic Application of Allium Sativum L and Related Species. 2nd ed. Baltimore, MD: Williams & Wilkins;1996.
32. Warshafsky S, Kamer RS, Sivak L. Effect of garlic on total serum cholesterol. Ann Intern Med 1993;119:599-605.
33. Silagy C, Neil A. Garlic as a lipid-lowering agent: A meta-analysis. J R Coll Physicians Lond 1994;28:2-8.
34. Silagy C, Neil A. A meta-analysis of the effect of garlic on blood pressure. J Hypertens 1994;12:463-468.
35. Tesch BJ. Herbs commonly used by women: An evidence based review. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2003;188(5):S44-55.
36. Sunter WH. Warfarin and garlic. Pharmaceutical Journal 1999;246: 722.
37. Towheed TE, Anastassiades TP, Shea B, et al. Glucosamine therapy for treating osteoarthritis. In: The Cochrane Library. Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd; 2004;1-40.
38. Schulz V, Haensel R. Rationale Phytotherapie. Berlin: Springer; 1999.
39. Linde K, Mulrow CD. St. John’s wort for depression. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2000;(2):CD000448.
40. Christenson M, Morgan E, eds. Job Analysis of Chiropractic: A Project Report, Survey Analysis and Summary of Practice of Chiropractic within the United States. Greeley, CO: National Board of Chiropractic Examiners; 1993.
41. Ernst E. Second thoughts about safety of St John’s wort. Lancet 1999;354:2014-2016.
42. Ernst E. Massage therapy for low back pain: A systematic review. J Pain Symptom Manage 1999;17:65-69.
43. Furlan AD, Brosseau L, Imamura M, Irvin E. Massage for low-back pain: A systematic review within the framework of the Cochrane Collaboration Review Group. Spine 2002;27(17):1896-1910.
44. Ernst E. The safety of massage therapy. Rheumatology 2003;42(9): 1101-1106.
45. Vickers A, Zollman C. ABC of complementary medicine: Massage therapies. Br Med J 1999;319:1254-1257.
46. American Geriatrics Society. The management of chronic pain in older persons: AGS panel on chronic pain in older persons. J Am Geriatr Soc 1998;46:635-651.
47. Astin JA, Pelletier KR, Marie A, Haskell WL. Complementary and alternative medicine use among elderly persons: One-year analysis of a Blue Shield Medicare supplement. J Gerontol Biol Sci Med Sci 2000;55 (1): M4-9.
48. Mobily PR, Herr KA, Clark MK, Wallace RB. An epidemiologic analysis of pain in the elderly: The Iowa 65+ Rural Health Study. Journal of Aging and Health 1994;6:139-154.
49. Coulter ID, Hurwitz EL, Aronow HU, et al. Chiropractic patients in a comprehensive home-based geriatric assessment, follow-up and health promotion program. Topics in Clinical Chiropractics 1996;3(2):46-55.
50. Meeker WC, Haldeman S. Chiropractic: A profession at the crossroads of mainstream and alternative medicine. Ann Intern Med 2002;136(3): 216-227.
51. Koes BW, Assendelft WJ, van der Heijden GJ, et al. Spinal manipulation and mobilization for back and neck pain: A blinded review. BMJ 1991;363: 1298-1303.
52. van Tulder MW, Koes BW, Bouter LM. Conservative treatment of acute and chronic nonspecific low back pain: A systematic review of randomized controlled trials of the most common interventions. Spine 1997;22:2128-2156.
53. Aker PD, Gross AR, Goldsmith CH, Peloso P. Conservative management of mechanical neck pain: Systematic overview and meta-analysis. BMJ 1996;313: 1291-1296.
54. Koes BW, Bouter LM, Van Mameren H, et al. Randomised clinical trial of manipulative therapy and physiotherapy for persistent back and neck complaints: Results of one year follow up. BMJ 1992;304:601-605.
55. Hurwitz EL, Aker PD, Adams AH, et al. Manipulation and mobilization of the cervical spine: A systematic review of the literature. Spine 1996;21: 1746-1760.
56. Kjellman GV, Skargren EI, Oberg BE. A critical analysis of randomised clinical trials on neck pain and treatment efficacy: A review of the literature. Scand J Rehabil Med 1999;31:139-152.
57. Triano JJ. Managing geriatric spine patients. In: Bougie J, Morgenthal AP, eds. The Aging Body: Conservative Management of Common Neuromusculosketal Conditions. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc.; 2001.
58. Ernst E. Prospective investigations into the safety of spinal manipulation. J Pain Symptom Manage 2001;21(3):238-242.
59. Senstad O, Leboeuf-Yde C, Borchgrevink C. Side-effects of chiropractic spinal manipulation: Types frequency, discomfort and course. Scand J Prim Health Care 1996;14(1):50-53.
60. Senstad O, Leboeuf-Yde C, Borchgrevink C. Frequency and characteristics of side effects of spinal manipulative therapy. Spine 1997;22(4):435-441.
61. Hoffman C, Rice D, Sung HY. Persons with chronic conditions: Their prevalence and costs. JAMA 1996;276(18):1473-1479.
62. Snyderman R, Weil AT. Integrated medicine: Bringing medicine back to its roots. Arch Intern Med 2002;162(4):395-397.
- Login or register to post comments
- Email this page
Anytown, Alabama
Long-Term Care News
- SAMHSA Awards More Than $12 Million To Help Community Programs Meet The Mental Health Needs Of Older Americans
- Both Genetic And Environmental Factors Contribute To The Process Of Disability Retirement
- Resveratrol, Red Wine Compound Linked To Health, Also Found In Dark Chocolate And Cocoa
- Most Patients Not Receiving Stress Tests To Confirm Need For Cardiac Stent, New Study Finds
- Searching The Internet Increases Brain Function According To UCLA Study







