Study Design: A randomized controlled study investigated the effects of therapeutic climbing in patients with chronic low back pain. Before and after 4 weeks of training, physical and mental well-being were measured by two questionnaires (36-Item Short Form Health Survey [SF-36]; Hannover Functional Ability Questionnaire for measuring back pain–related disability [FFbH-R]).
Objective: Therapeutic climbing has been suggested to increase muscular strength and perceived physical and mental well-being. This study focused on the psychological effects of therapeutic climbing and compared it with standard exercise therapy.
Summary of Background Data: Therapeutic climbing has become increasingly popular in rehabilitation and its effects on muscular strengthening have been shown. Therapeutic climbing has also been suggested to yield psychological effects such as changes in attentional focus from pain to physical capabilities. To date, no controlled clinical trial has investigated these psychological effects and it is unclear whether therapeutic climbing is comparable or superior to other forms of exercise.
Methods: Twenty-eight patients with chronic low back pain conducted either a therapeutic climbing or a standard exercise regime. Each program took 4 weeks, including four guided training sessions per week. Before and after the program, patients answered two questionnaires assessing their physical and mental well-being.
Results: For the Hannover Functional Ability Questionnaire for measuring back pain–related disability, there was no difference before versus after or between the treatments. For the SF-36, both treatments showed significant improvements in 3/8 subscales of the SF-36. In 2/8 subscales, only the participants of the therapeutic climbing improved and in 1/8 subscales the converse was true. Comparing both groups, significantly larger improvements were found after therapeutic climbing in two subscales of the SF-36: physical functioning and general health perception.
Conclusion: The benefits of therapeutic climbing were comparable with those of a standard exercise regime. In two subscales of the SF-36, the benefits of therapeutic climbing exceeded those of standard exercise therapy, primarily in perceived health and physical functioning of the patients. This finding demonstrates that therapeutic climbing is equivalent and partly superior to standard exercise therapy for patients with chronic low back pain.
Source: http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/742533
David P. Chen, D.C.
Chiropractor
20708
Laurel Regional Chiropractic
Monday, June 20, 2011
Monday, June 13, 2011
High heels and the risk of arthritis
Women who wear high heels or badly-fitting trainers could be putting themselves at risk of arthritis, experts have warned.
The Society of Chiropodists and Podiatrists said the UK could be facing an "arthritis crisis" due to increasing levels of obesity, people living longer and poor footwear.
The most common form of the condition, osteoarthritis, causes pain and stiffness in the joints and affects at least eight million people in the UK.
High heels affect body posture, placing more pressure on foot, ankle and knee joints. This can cause stress to the cartilage and lead to the onset of osteoarthritis.
The condition is more common and severe in women, and can badly affect the feet. A quarter of women wear high heels every day or "frequently", a poll of 2,000 people for the Society of Chiropodists and Podiatrists found.
The poll also found that 77% of both men and women do not wear shoes designed specifically for the sport they are doing, which can cause injury and stress on the joints, increasing the risk of the debilitating condition.
Although you are more likely to develop arthritis as you get older, it can occur at any age and the good news is that there are simple things you can do to help prevent and treat arthritis. Choosing the right footwear will help minimize the stress placed on the feet and joints during everyday activity and helps reduce the risk of injury and joint damage.
For daily wear, the recommendation is to opt for a round-toed shoe with a heel height of no more than 2-3cm (one inch) and with a shock-absorbent sole to help minimize shock to the joints. When doing exercise, wearing trainers that are fitted and designed specifically for that form of exercise will both improve performance and protect from injury.
The survey found 36% of people do not know much about arthritis and 22% think it is an inevitable part of getting older. While 65% have suffered stiffness or pain in their lower body and feet, only half have sought help for their symptoms.
Experts say people should be on their guard because arthritis is on the rise, with 60% of cases in feet.
Source: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/women_shealth/8565796/High-heels-could-cause-UK-arthritis-crisis.html
David P. Chen, D.C.
Chiropractor
Laurel, MD 20708
The Society of Chiropodists and Podiatrists said the UK could be facing an "arthritis crisis" due to increasing levels of obesity, people living longer and poor footwear.
The most common form of the condition, osteoarthritis, causes pain and stiffness in the joints and affects at least eight million people in the UK.
High heels affect body posture, placing more pressure on foot, ankle and knee joints. This can cause stress to the cartilage and lead to the onset of osteoarthritis.
The condition is more common and severe in women, and can badly affect the feet. A quarter of women wear high heels every day or "frequently", a poll of 2,000 people for the Society of Chiropodists and Podiatrists found.
The poll also found that 77% of both men and women do not wear shoes designed specifically for the sport they are doing, which can cause injury and stress on the joints, increasing the risk of the debilitating condition.
Although you are more likely to develop arthritis as you get older, it can occur at any age and the good news is that there are simple things you can do to help prevent and treat arthritis. Choosing the right footwear will help minimize the stress placed on the feet and joints during everyday activity and helps reduce the risk of injury and joint damage.
For daily wear, the recommendation is to opt for a round-toed shoe with a heel height of no more than 2-3cm (one inch) and with a shock-absorbent sole to help minimize shock to the joints. When doing exercise, wearing trainers that are fitted and designed specifically for that form of exercise will both improve performance and protect from injury.
The survey found 36% of people do not know much about arthritis and 22% think it is an inevitable part of getting older. While 65% have suffered stiffness or pain in their lower body and feet, only half have sought help for their symptoms.
Experts say people should be on their guard because arthritis is on the rise, with 60% of cases in feet.
Source: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/women_shealth/8565796/High-heels-could-cause-UK-arthritis-crisis.html
David P. Chen, D.C.
Chiropractor
Laurel, MD 20708
Monday, June 6, 2011
Women With Carpal Tunnel Syndrome Show Restricted Cervical Range of Motion
STUDY DESIGN: A case control, blinded study.
OBJECTIVES: To compare the amount of cervical range of motion in women with minimal, mild/moderate, and severe carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS) to that of healthy control participants. We also assessed the relationships between cervical range of motion and clinical variables related to the intensity and temporal profile of pain within each CTS group.
BACKGROUND: It is plausible that the cervical spine may be involved in individuals with CTS. No study has investigated the relationship between cervical range of motion and symptoms associated with CTS severity.
METHODS: Cervical range of motion was assessed in 71 women with CTS (18 with minimal, 18 with mild/moderate, and 35 with severe signs and symptoms) and in 20 similar, healthy women. Those with CTS were aged 35 to 59 years (mean ± SD, 45 ± 8 years) and those in the healthy group were aged 31 to 60 years (45 ± 8 years). An experienced therapist, blinded to the participants’ conditions, used a cervical range-of-motion (CROM) device to assess cervical range of motion. Mixed-model analyses of variance (ANOVAs) were conducted to evaluate the differences in cervical range of motion among the 3 groups of patients with CTS and healthy controls. A corrected P value of less than .025 was used as threshold for significance (Bonferroni correction).
RESULTS: The mixed-model ANOVAs revealed that the individuals with CTS exhibited restricted cervical range of motion compared to healthy controls (P<.001), with no significant differences among the groups with minimal, mild/moderate, or severe CTS (P>.356). A significant negative correlation between pain intensity and cervical spine lateral flexion away from the affected side was identified: the greater the mean pain intensity, the lesser the cervical lateral flexion away from the affected side.
CONCLUSIONS: Women with minimal, mild/moderate, or severe CTS exhibited less cervical range of motion compared to women of a similar age, suggesting that restricted cervical range of motion may be a common feature in individuals with CTS, independent of severity subgroups, as defined by electrodiagnosis. Future research should investigate cervical range of motion as a possible consequence or causative factor of CTS and related symptoms.
Source: http://www.jospt.org/issues/articleID.2575,type.2/article_detail.asp
David P. Chen, D.C.
Chiropractor
Laurel, MD 20708
OBJECTIVES: To compare the amount of cervical range of motion in women with minimal, mild/moderate, and severe carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS) to that of healthy control participants. We also assessed the relationships between cervical range of motion and clinical variables related to the intensity and temporal profile of pain within each CTS group.
BACKGROUND: It is plausible that the cervical spine may be involved in individuals with CTS. No study has investigated the relationship between cervical range of motion and symptoms associated with CTS severity.
METHODS: Cervical range of motion was assessed in 71 women with CTS (18 with minimal, 18 with mild/moderate, and 35 with severe signs and symptoms) and in 20 similar, healthy women. Those with CTS were aged 35 to 59 years (mean ± SD, 45 ± 8 years) and those in the healthy group were aged 31 to 60 years (45 ± 8 years). An experienced therapist, blinded to the participants’ conditions, used a cervical range-of-motion (CROM) device to assess cervical range of motion. Mixed-model analyses of variance (ANOVAs) were conducted to evaluate the differences in cervical range of motion among the 3 groups of patients with CTS and healthy controls. A corrected P value of less than .025 was used as threshold for significance (Bonferroni correction).
RESULTS: The mixed-model ANOVAs revealed that the individuals with CTS exhibited restricted cervical range of motion compared to healthy controls (P<.001), with no significant differences among the groups with minimal, mild/moderate, or severe CTS (P>.356). A significant negative correlation between pain intensity and cervical spine lateral flexion away from the affected side was identified: the greater the mean pain intensity, the lesser the cervical lateral flexion away from the affected side.
CONCLUSIONS: Women with minimal, mild/moderate, or severe CTS exhibited less cervical range of motion compared to women of a similar age, suggesting that restricted cervical range of motion may be a common feature in individuals with CTS, independent of severity subgroups, as defined by electrodiagnosis. Future research should investigate cervical range of motion as a possible consequence or causative factor of CTS and related symptoms.
Source: http://www.jospt.org/issues/articleID.2575,type.2/article_detail.asp
David P. Chen, D.C.
Chiropractor
Laurel, MD 20708
Thursday, June 2, 2011
Arthritis, Foot Pain and Shoe Wear
Both arthritis and foot pain are major public health problems. Approximately 24% of adults have foot ailments, and the prevalence increases with age. Foot pain, particularly related to shoes, footwear and rheumatic disorders, may be an important modifiable factor.
Despite the major focus of structure and alignment in arthritis, remarkably little work has focused on the foot and nonsurgical foot interventions that might affect lower extremity joint alignment, structure and pain in rheumatic diseases. Emerging research suggests that there may be a significant role for foot orthotics and footwear in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis and osteoarthritis of the hip, knee and foot. This review highlights the current understanding on the topic of foot orthotics and footwear in adults with rheumatic diseases.
Biomechanical evidence indicates that foot orthotics and specialized footwear may change muscle activation and gait patterns to reduce joint loading. Emerging evidence suggests that orthotics, specific shoe types and footwear interventions may provide an effective nonsurgical intervention in rheumatic diseases. As there are a limited number of studies that underpin the foot's role in arthritis cause and progression, clinical trials and prospective studies are of utmost importance to unravel the links between foot pain, foot conditions and interventions that lessen the impact of rheumatic diseases.
Source: http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/736930
David P. Chen, D.C.
Chiropractor in Laurel, MD
20708
Despite the major focus of structure and alignment in arthritis, remarkably little work has focused on the foot and nonsurgical foot interventions that might affect lower extremity joint alignment, structure and pain in rheumatic diseases. Emerging research suggests that there may be a significant role for foot orthotics and footwear in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis and osteoarthritis of the hip, knee and foot. This review highlights the current understanding on the topic of foot orthotics and footwear in adults with rheumatic diseases.
Biomechanical evidence indicates that foot orthotics and specialized footwear may change muscle activation and gait patterns to reduce joint loading. Emerging evidence suggests that orthotics, specific shoe types and footwear interventions may provide an effective nonsurgical intervention in rheumatic diseases. As there are a limited number of studies that underpin the foot's role in arthritis cause and progression, clinical trials and prospective studies are of utmost importance to unravel the links between foot pain, foot conditions and interventions that lessen the impact of rheumatic diseases.
Source: http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/736930
David P. Chen, D.C.
Chiropractor in Laurel, MD
20708
Wednesday, June 1, 2011
Study Suggests Back Disease May Run in Families
In an analysis of a database of more than 2 million people, first-degree and third-degree relatives of people with lumbar disc disease had a significantly increased relative risk of developing the back condition themselves compared with expected rates for the general population. "The results of this study support a heritable predisposition to lumbar disc disease," lead author Alpesh A. Patel, MD, and colleagues from the departments of Orthopaedics and Biomedical Informatics, University of Utah School of Medicine, Salt Lake City, report in the February 2 issue of the Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery.
Low back pain is common and costly — its estimated lifetime risk in the United States is 84%, with an annual cost that exceeds $100 billion — yet its etiology remains incompletely understood. Several earlier studies have hinted at a familial predisposition.
To test the hypothesis that lumbar disc disease may be inherited, the authors analyzed data from both the Utah Population Database, which permits the tracking of medical information on the founding pioneers of Utah and their descendents, and the University of Utah Health Sciences Center data warehouse, which has diagnosis and procedure data on all patients treated at the University Hospital. Together, the databases contain information on more than 2.4 million patients. Only patients and control participants with at least 3 generations of genealogical data were included in the study.
Of those individuals, 1254 people had at least 1 diagnosis of lumbar disc disease or lumbar disc herniation, along with the requisite genealogical data. The authors tested for heritability in 2 ways: by estimating the relative risk for lumbar disease in relatives and by determining a genealogical index of familiality (GIF). They compared their findings in affected families with the expected results for the general population of Utah.
First-degree relatives of people with lumbar disc disease had a relative risk of 4.15 of having the disease themselves (95% confidence interval [CI], 2.82 - 6.10; P < .001). In third-degree relatives, the relative risk was 1.46 (95% CI, 1.06 - 2.01; P = .027). Relative risk was slightly elevated in second-degree relatives, at 1.15, but this was not significant (95% CI, .71 - 1.87; P = .60), perhaps because of limitations in the data.
The GIF tests the hypothesis that there is no excess familial clustering, or relatedness, of the phenotype of interest by measuring excess relationships between pairs of patients compared with pairs of control participants. "It is not the absolute value of the GIF statistic that reveals excess relatedness of disease, but the relative value of the case-GIF to the control-GIF," the authors explain. In this analysis, the case overall GIF was 3.05 compared with a mean control GIF of 2.51 (P < .001 for overall GIF), suggesting "a significant excess of relationships among patients compared with controls."
Now that a genetic predisposition to lumbar disc disease has been identified, the identification of the specific genetic products responsible for lumbar disc disease may help in the development of potential biologic interventions to prevent and/or treat lumbar disc disease in the population at large.
Source: http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/736881
David P. Chen, D.C.
Chiropractor in Laurel, MD
20708
Low back pain is common and costly — its estimated lifetime risk in the United States is 84%, with an annual cost that exceeds $100 billion — yet its etiology remains incompletely understood. Several earlier studies have hinted at a familial predisposition.
To test the hypothesis that lumbar disc disease may be inherited, the authors analyzed data from both the Utah Population Database, which permits the tracking of medical information on the founding pioneers of Utah and their descendents, and the University of Utah Health Sciences Center data warehouse, which has diagnosis and procedure data on all patients treated at the University Hospital. Together, the databases contain information on more than 2.4 million patients. Only patients and control participants with at least 3 generations of genealogical data were included in the study.
Of those individuals, 1254 people had at least 1 diagnosis of lumbar disc disease or lumbar disc herniation, along with the requisite genealogical data. The authors tested for heritability in 2 ways: by estimating the relative risk for lumbar disease in relatives and by determining a genealogical index of familiality (GIF). They compared their findings in affected families with the expected results for the general population of Utah.
First-degree relatives of people with lumbar disc disease had a relative risk of 4.15 of having the disease themselves (95% confidence interval [CI], 2.82 - 6.10; P < .001). In third-degree relatives, the relative risk was 1.46 (95% CI, 1.06 - 2.01; P = .027). Relative risk was slightly elevated in second-degree relatives, at 1.15, but this was not significant (95% CI, .71 - 1.87; P = .60), perhaps because of limitations in the data.
The GIF tests the hypothesis that there is no excess familial clustering, or relatedness, of the phenotype of interest by measuring excess relationships between pairs of patients compared with pairs of control participants. "It is not the absolute value of the GIF statistic that reveals excess relatedness of disease, but the relative value of the case-GIF to the control-GIF," the authors explain. In this analysis, the case overall GIF was 3.05 compared with a mean control GIF of 2.51 (P < .001 for overall GIF), suggesting "a significant excess of relationships among patients compared with controls."
Now that a genetic predisposition to lumbar disc disease has been identified, the identification of the specific genetic products responsible for lumbar disc disease may help in the development of potential biologic interventions to prevent and/or treat lumbar disc disease in the population at large.
Source: http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/736881
David P. Chen, D.C.
Chiropractor in Laurel, MD
20708
Tuesday, May 24, 2011
Exercising With Arthritis
An estimated 40 million people have some form of arthritis. The two most common forms are osteoarthritis, a degenerative joint disease characterized by a progressive loss of cartilage, and rheumatoid arthritis, a chronic condition causing the lining of the joints to become inflamed. Both conditions can make exercise a difficult and painful proposition. However, a well-designed physical activity program can decrease joint swelling and pain and improve overall function. Furthermore, regular exercise can help you maintain a healthy weight (which reduces pressure on your joints) and improve cartilage and bone tissue health. The key is to keep yourself active in a variety of ways, and you will be on your way to greater mobility and better health.
Getting Started:
Talk with your health care provider before starting an exercise program and ask for specific recommendations.
Select low-impact and non-impact activities such as walking, swimming, water exercise and cycling.
An extended warm-up and a gradual cool-down may help reduce the likelihood of aggravating joint pain.
Spread your activity throughout the day (e.g., three 10-minute sessions). Set time goals rather than distance goals.
Start slowly and gradually progress the intensity and duration of your workouts. Take frequent breaks during activity if needed.
Select shoes and insoles for maximum shock absorption. Be prepared to adjust your workouts according to fluctuations in your symptoms.
Exercise Cautions:
Avoid overstretching.
Some discomfort after your workouts is to be expected, but you should not be in pain.
Avoid vigorous, highly repetitive activities, particularly if your joints are unstable.
Your exercise program should be modified to maximize the benefits while minimizing the risk of aggravating your health condition. Contact us at Laurel Regional Chiropractic, we will help you to establish realistic goals and design a safe and effective program that addresses your specific needs.
David P. Chen, D.C.
Chiropractor in Laurel, MD
20708
Getting Started:
Talk with your health care provider before starting an exercise program and ask for specific recommendations.
Select low-impact and non-impact activities such as walking, swimming, water exercise and cycling.
An extended warm-up and a gradual cool-down may help reduce the likelihood of aggravating joint pain.
Spread your activity throughout the day (e.g., three 10-minute sessions). Set time goals rather than distance goals.
Start slowly and gradually progress the intensity and duration of your workouts. Take frequent breaks during activity if needed.
Select shoes and insoles for maximum shock absorption. Be prepared to adjust your workouts according to fluctuations in your symptoms.
Exercise Cautions:
Avoid overstretching.
Some discomfort after your workouts is to be expected, but you should not be in pain.
Avoid vigorous, highly repetitive activities, particularly if your joints are unstable.
Your exercise program should be modified to maximize the benefits while minimizing the risk of aggravating your health condition. Contact us at Laurel Regional Chiropractic, we will help you to establish realistic goals and design a safe and effective program that addresses your specific needs.
David P. Chen, D.C.
Chiropractor in Laurel, MD
20708
Monday, May 16, 2011
High-intensity Training versus Traditional Exercise Interventions for Promoting Health
This study shows that if you want to lose weight or lower your cholesterol, then you have to stick to a long-term exercise or strength training program. But if your goal is just cardio-respiratory fitness and glucose tolerance, then short-term intense interval training can help you to achieve that goal.
Purpose: The purpose of this study was to determine the effectiveness of brief intense interval training as exercise intervention for promoting health and to evaluate potential benefits about common interventions, that is, prolonged exercise and strength training.
Methods: Thirty-six untrained men were divided into groups that completed 12 wk of intense interval running (INT; total training time 40 min·wk−1), prolonged running (~150 min·wk−1), and strength training (~150 min·wk−1) or continued their habitual lifestyle without participation in physical training.
Results: The improvement in cardio-respiratory fitness was superior in the INT (14% ± 2% increase in VO2max) compared with the other two exercise interventions (7% ± 2% and 3% ± 2% increases). The blood glucose concentration 2 h after oral ingestion of 75 g of glucose was lowered to a similar extent after training in the INT (from 6.1 ± 0.6 to 5.1 ± 0.4 mM, P < 0.05) and the prolonged running group (from 5.6 ± 1.5 to 4.9 ± 1.1 mM, P < 0.05). In contrast, INT was less efficient than prolonged running for lowering the subjects' resting HR, fat percentage, and reducing the ratio between total and HDL plasma cholesterol. Furthermore, total bone mass and lean body mass remained unchanged in the INT group, whereas both these parameters were increased by the strength-training intervention.
Conclusions: INT for 12 wk is an effective training stimulus for improvement of cardio-respiratory fitness and glucose tolerance, but in relation to the treatment of hyperlipidemia and obesity, it is less effective than prolonged training. Furthermore and in contrast to strength training, 12 wk of INT had no impact on muscle mass or indices of skeletal health.
Source: http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/729632
David P. Chen, D.C.
Chiropractor in Laurel, Maryland 20708
Purpose: The purpose of this study was to determine the effectiveness of brief intense interval training as exercise intervention for promoting health and to evaluate potential benefits about common interventions, that is, prolonged exercise and strength training.
Methods: Thirty-six untrained men were divided into groups that completed 12 wk of intense interval running (INT; total training time 40 min·wk−1), prolonged running (~150 min·wk−1), and strength training (~150 min·wk−1) or continued their habitual lifestyle without participation in physical training.
Results: The improvement in cardio-respiratory fitness was superior in the INT (14% ± 2% increase in VO2max) compared with the other two exercise interventions (7% ± 2% and 3% ± 2% increases). The blood glucose concentration 2 h after oral ingestion of 75 g of glucose was lowered to a similar extent after training in the INT (from 6.1 ± 0.6 to 5.1 ± 0.4 mM, P < 0.05) and the prolonged running group (from 5.6 ± 1.5 to 4.9 ± 1.1 mM, P < 0.05). In contrast, INT was less efficient than prolonged running for lowering the subjects' resting HR, fat percentage, and reducing the ratio between total and HDL plasma cholesterol. Furthermore, total bone mass and lean body mass remained unchanged in the INT group, whereas both these parameters were increased by the strength-training intervention.
Conclusions: INT for 12 wk is an effective training stimulus for improvement of cardio-respiratory fitness and glucose tolerance, but in relation to the treatment of hyperlipidemia and obesity, it is less effective than prolonged training. Furthermore and in contrast to strength training, 12 wk of INT had no impact on muscle mass or indices of skeletal health.
Source: http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/729632
David P. Chen, D.C.
Chiropractor in Laurel, Maryland 20708
Friday, May 13, 2011
Is there any truth to the "old wives' tale" that habitual knuckle-cracking will lead to osteoarthritis in the hands?
This is among one of the most asked questions when patients come to see me at Laurel Regional Chiropractic. According to this recent article in the American Board of Family Medicine (2011;24(2):169-174), there appears to be no correlation between knuckle cracking and hand osteoarthritis.
Background: Previous studies have not shown a correlation between knuckle cracking (KC) and hand osteoarthritis (OA). However, one study showed an inverse correlation between KC and metacarpophalangeal joint OA.
Methods: We conducted a retrospective case-control study among persons aged 50 to 89 years who received a radiograph of the right hand during the last 5 years. Patients had radiographically proven hand OA, and controls did not. Participants indicated frequency, duration, and details of their KC behavior and known risk factors for hand OA.
Results: The prevalence of KC among 215 respondents (135 patients, 80 controls) was 20%. When examined in aggregate, the prevalence of OA in any joint was similar among those who crack knuckles (18.1%) and those who do not (21.5%; P = .548). When examined by joint type, KC was not a risk for OA in that joint. Total past duration (in years) and volume (daily frequency × years) of KC of each joint type also was not significantly correlated with OA at the respective joint.
Conclusions: A history of habitual KC—including the total duration and total cumulative exposure—does not seem to be a risk factor for hand OA.
Source: http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/739188
David P. Chen, D.C.
Chiropractor at Laurel Regional Chiropractic
Background: Previous studies have not shown a correlation between knuckle cracking (KC) and hand osteoarthritis (OA). However, one study showed an inverse correlation between KC and metacarpophalangeal joint OA.
Methods: We conducted a retrospective case-control study among persons aged 50 to 89 years who received a radiograph of the right hand during the last 5 years. Patients had radiographically proven hand OA, and controls did not. Participants indicated frequency, duration, and details of their KC behavior and known risk factors for hand OA.
Results: The prevalence of KC among 215 respondents (135 patients, 80 controls) was 20%. When examined in aggregate, the prevalence of OA in any joint was similar among those who crack knuckles (18.1%) and those who do not (21.5%; P = .548). When examined by joint type, KC was not a risk for OA in that joint. Total past duration (in years) and volume (daily frequency × years) of KC of each joint type also was not significantly correlated with OA at the respective joint.
Conclusions: A history of habitual KC—including the total duration and total cumulative exposure—does not seem to be a risk factor for hand OA.
Source: http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/739188
David P. Chen, D.C.
Chiropractor at Laurel Regional Chiropractic
Monday, May 9, 2011
Exercising With Lower Back Pain: Prescription for Health
Lower back pain is one of the most common medical complaints in the world. Don't let low back pain get you down! A well-designed exercise program can help speed recovery from low back pain, reduce pain levels, and possibly prevent reinjury. In fact, regular physical activity has been shown to increase muscle strength and endurance, enhance mobility and reduce the risk of falling is superior to spine therapy at helping people cope with back pain and at keeping it under control! The key to maximizing the benefits of exercise is to follow a well-designed program that you can stick to over the long-term.
The goal of exercise training is to improve overall fitness (cardiovascular, muscle strength and endurance, flexibility, coordination and function) while minimizing the stress to the lower back.
Talk with your health care provider before starting an exercise program and ask if they have specific concerns about you doing exercise. Most people do very well with regular exercise and sufficient time, but some people do need surgery.
Choose low-impact activities, such as walking, swimming, and cycling.
Strong abdominals, back, and leg muscles are essential for helping you maintain good posture and body mechanics. Once the acute pain subsides, you can begin doing light strengthening-training exercises designed to help your posture.
Yoga and tai chi may help relieve or prevent lower back pain by increasing flexibility and reducing tension. Be careful, however, not to do any poses that could exacerbate your condition.
Start slowly and gradually progress the intensity and duration of your workouts.
Do low- to moderate-intensity cardiovascular exercise for 20 to 60 minutes at least three to four days per week.
Avoid high-impact activities such as running.
While low-impact aerobic activities can be started within two weeks of the onset of lower back pain, exercises that target the trunk region should be delayed until at least two weeks after the first sign of symptoms.
Never exercise to the point of pain -- if something hurts, don't do it.
Your exercise program should be designed to maximize the benefits with the fewest risks of aggravating your health or physical condition.
Contact us at Laurel Regional Chiropractic for your lower back pain, we can work with you to establish realistic goals and design a safe and effective exercise program that addresses your specific condition.
Source: http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/719762
David P. Chen, D.C.
Chiropractor in Laurel, MD 20708
The goal of exercise training is to improve overall fitness (cardiovascular, muscle strength and endurance, flexibility, coordination and function) while minimizing the stress to the lower back.
Talk with your health care provider before starting an exercise program and ask if they have specific concerns about you doing exercise. Most people do very well with regular exercise and sufficient time, but some people do need surgery.
Choose low-impact activities, such as walking, swimming, and cycling.
Strong abdominals, back, and leg muscles are essential for helping you maintain good posture and body mechanics. Once the acute pain subsides, you can begin doing light strengthening-training exercises designed to help your posture.
Yoga and tai chi may help relieve or prevent lower back pain by increasing flexibility and reducing tension. Be careful, however, not to do any poses that could exacerbate your condition.
Start slowly and gradually progress the intensity and duration of your workouts.
Do low- to moderate-intensity cardiovascular exercise for 20 to 60 minutes at least three to four days per week.
Avoid high-impact activities such as running.
While low-impact aerobic activities can be started within two weeks of the onset of lower back pain, exercises that target the trunk region should be delayed until at least two weeks after the first sign of symptoms.
Never exercise to the point of pain -- if something hurts, don't do it.
Your exercise program should be designed to maximize the benefits with the fewest risks of aggravating your health or physical condition.
Contact us at Laurel Regional Chiropractic for your lower back pain, we can work with you to establish realistic goals and design a safe and effective exercise program that addresses your specific condition.
Source: http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/719762
David P. Chen, D.C.
Chiropractor in Laurel, MD 20708
Wednesday, May 4, 2011
A herniated disc...a prolapsed disc...or a ruptured disc?
What's the difference between a herniated disc, a prolapsed disc, a ruptured disc, they all sound pretty scary, but guess what? There is virtually no agreement in the medical community as to the differences between the terms - their definitions are disputed all the time.
But what does the definition really matter? Isn’t it more important that we know there is pain? Isn’t that we know the cause of pain more important?
The fact is, different doctors will interpret MRIs and x-rays differently. A single film might lead to multiple diagnoses. The focus should be on getting the right kind of treatment for pain and helping restore function and ability, not splitting hairs with definitions. That’s why at Laurel Regional Chiropractic, we put the spotlight on your well-being.
The fact is, for back injuries and pain that are disc-related, doctors and surgeons will often prescribe surgery when it isn’t necessary or even recommended. It’s the last line of defense, not the first. At Laurel Regional Chiropractic, we take the non-surgical route by providing conservative treatments. Therapies like the mechanical traction, spinal manipulation, and physical rehabilitation can restore range of motion and improve muscle support. For everyone we see, we will create the right treatment plan for each individual patient.
If you have a herniated disc and are suffering, come in and see us. We’re here to help. Call us at 301-953-0256 for our office in Laurel, MD and make your appointment for a consultation.
David P. Chen, D.C.
Chiropractor in Laurel, MD
But what does the definition really matter? Isn’t it more important that we know there is pain? Isn’t that we know the cause of pain more important?
The fact is, different doctors will interpret MRIs and x-rays differently. A single film might lead to multiple diagnoses. The focus should be on getting the right kind of treatment for pain and helping restore function and ability, not splitting hairs with definitions. That’s why at Laurel Regional Chiropractic, we put the spotlight on your well-being.
The fact is, for back injuries and pain that are disc-related, doctors and surgeons will often prescribe surgery when it isn’t necessary or even recommended. It’s the last line of defense, not the first. At Laurel Regional Chiropractic, we take the non-surgical route by providing conservative treatments. Therapies like the mechanical traction, spinal manipulation, and physical rehabilitation can restore range of motion and improve muscle support. For everyone we see, we will create the right treatment plan for each individual patient.
If you have a herniated disc and are suffering, come in and see us. We’re here to help. Call us at 301-953-0256 for our office in Laurel, MD and make your appointment for a consultation.
David P. Chen, D.C.
Chiropractor in Laurel, MD
Thursday, April 28, 2011
Chiropractic manipulative therapy and low-level laser therapy in the management of cervical facet dysfunction
PURPOSE:
The aim of this study was to determine the short-term effect of chiropractic joint manipulation therapy (CMT) and low-level laser therapy (LLLT) on pain and range of motion in the management of cervical facet dysfunction.
METHODS:
Sixty ambulatory women between the ages of 18 and 40 years with cervical facet joint pain of more than 30-day duration and normal neurologic examination were randomized to receive 1 of 3 treatment options: (1) CMT of the cervical spine, (2) LLLT applied to the cervical facet joints, or (3) a combination of CMT and LLLT. Each participant received 6 treatments in 3 weeks. The main outcome measures were as follows: the Numerical Pain Rating Scale, Neck Disability Index, Cervical Range of Motion Instrument, and Baseline Digital Inclinometer. Measurements were taken during weeks 1 (baseline), 2, 3, and 4.
RESULTS:
No differences existed between the 3 groups at baseline. A significant difference was seen between groups 1 (CMT) and 2 (LLLT) for cervical flexion, between groups 1 (CMT) and 3 (CMT + LLLT) for cervical flexion and rotation, and between groups 2 (LLLT) and 3 (CMT + LLLT) for pain disability in everyday life, lateral flexion, and rotation.
CONCLUSION:
All 3 groups showed improvement in the primary and secondary outcomes. A combination of CMT and LLLT was more effective than either of the 2 on their own. Both therapies are indicated as potentially beneficial treatments for cervical facet dysfunction. Further studies are needed to explore optimal treatment procedures for CMT and LLLT and the possible mechanism of interaction between therapies.
Source: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21492750
David P. Chen, D.C.
Chiropractor in Laurel, MD 20708
The aim of this study was to determine the short-term effect of chiropractic joint manipulation therapy (CMT) and low-level laser therapy (LLLT) on pain and range of motion in the management of cervical facet dysfunction.
METHODS:
Sixty ambulatory women between the ages of 18 and 40 years with cervical facet joint pain of more than 30-day duration and normal neurologic examination were randomized to receive 1 of 3 treatment options: (1) CMT of the cervical spine, (2) LLLT applied to the cervical facet joints, or (3) a combination of CMT and LLLT. Each participant received 6 treatments in 3 weeks. The main outcome measures were as follows: the Numerical Pain Rating Scale, Neck Disability Index, Cervical Range of Motion Instrument, and Baseline Digital Inclinometer. Measurements were taken during weeks 1 (baseline), 2, 3, and 4.
RESULTS:
No differences existed between the 3 groups at baseline. A significant difference was seen between groups 1 (CMT) and 2 (LLLT) for cervical flexion, between groups 1 (CMT) and 3 (CMT + LLLT) for cervical flexion and rotation, and between groups 2 (LLLT) and 3 (CMT + LLLT) for pain disability in everyday life, lateral flexion, and rotation.
CONCLUSION:
All 3 groups showed improvement in the primary and secondary outcomes. A combination of CMT and LLLT was more effective than either of the 2 on their own. Both therapies are indicated as potentially beneficial treatments for cervical facet dysfunction. Further studies are needed to explore optimal treatment procedures for CMT and LLLT and the possible mechanism of interaction between therapies.
Source: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21492750
David P. Chen, D.C.
Chiropractor in Laurel, MD 20708
Tuesday, April 19, 2011
Upper Cervical Manipulation Combined with Mobilization for the Treatment of Atlantoaxial Osteoarthritis
This new case series, managed by the Department of Orthopedics, in the General Military Hospital of Beijing, China, involved 10 patients with idiopathic degenerative and posttraumatic atlantoaxial osteoarthritis. They were treated with upper cervical chiropractic adjusting, in combination with mobilization device therapy.
Outcome measures included self-reported pain using a numeric pain scale (NPS) (1-10, with 0 is no pain and 10 is the worst possible pain), physical examination findings, and radiologic changes.
The reported results were quite impressive:
Pre to post pain findings included a reduction of pain from 8.6 to 2.6.
Rotation of C1 upon C2 increased from 28° to 52°, effectively doubling upper cervical range of motion.
Restoration of joint space was observed in 6 patients.
Clinical improvement was rated as “good” to “excellent” by 80% of these patients.
Source: http://www.chiro.org/cases/ABSTRACTS/Upper_Cervical_Manipulation.shtml
David P. Chen, D.C.
Chiropractor in Laurel, MD 20708
Outcome measures included self-reported pain using a numeric pain scale (NPS) (1-10, with 0 is no pain and 10 is the worst possible pain), physical examination findings, and radiologic changes.
The reported results were quite impressive:
Pre to post pain findings included a reduction of pain from 8.6 to 2.6.
Rotation of C1 upon C2 increased from 28° to 52°, effectively doubling upper cervical range of motion.
Restoration of joint space was observed in 6 patients.
Clinical improvement was rated as “good” to “excellent” by 80% of these patients.
Source: http://www.chiro.org/cases/ABSTRACTS/Upper_Cervical_Manipulation.shtml
David P. Chen, D.C.
Chiropractor in Laurel, MD 20708
Monday, April 4, 2011
60% of Surgical Candidates Avoid Surgery with Chiropractic
Lifetime prevalence of a herniated disc has been estimated to be 35% in men and 45% in woman and it has been estimated that 90% of all leg pain secondary to herniated discs occurs at either the L4-5 or L5-S1 levels. It has also been reported that average duration of symptoms is 55.9 weeks, underscoring the critical necessity for finding a viable solution for these patients”
It was reported by McMorland, Suter, Casha, du Plessis, and Hurlbert in 2010 that over 250,000 patients a year undergo elective lumbar discectomy (spinal surgery) for the treatment of low back disc issues in the United States. The researchers did a comparative randomized clinical study comparing spinal microdiscectomy (surgery) performed by neurosurgeons to non-operative manipulative treatments (chiropractic adjustments) performed by chiropractors. They compared quality of life and disabilities of the patients in the study.
This study was limited to patients with distinct one-sided lumbar disc herniations as diagnosed via MRI and had associated radicular (nerve root) symptoms. Based upon the authors’ review of available MRI studies, the patients participating in the study were all initially considered surgical candidates.
Both the surgical and chiropractic groups reported no new neurological problems surfaced and had only minor post-treatment soreness. 60% of the patients who underwent chiropractic care reported a successful outcome while 40% required surgery and of those 40%, all reported successful outcomes. Of those patients choosing surgery as the primary means of treatment, 15% reported a failed surgical outcome and then chose chiropractic as a secondary choice. Of those 15% with failed surgeries, all were reported to have performed worse in clinical outcomes.
While it is clear that an accurate diagnosis could dictate that many patients require immediate surgery, many also do not. The above study indicates that a conservative non-operative approach of chiropractic care prevented 60% from needless surgery. While a larger study would give us more information, based upon the outcomes, cost factors and potential increased risks of surgery, it was concluded that chiropractic is a viable, first line treatment option.
These studies along with many others conclude that a drug-free approach of chiropractic care is one of the best solutions for patients with surgical lumbar discs and sciatic pain.
Source: http://healthfultips.com/?p=955
David P. Chen, D.C.
Chiropractor in Laurel, MD 20708
It was reported by McMorland, Suter, Casha, du Plessis, and Hurlbert in 2010 that over 250,000 patients a year undergo elective lumbar discectomy (spinal surgery) for the treatment of low back disc issues in the United States. The researchers did a comparative randomized clinical study comparing spinal microdiscectomy (surgery) performed by neurosurgeons to non-operative manipulative treatments (chiropractic adjustments) performed by chiropractors. They compared quality of life and disabilities of the patients in the study.
This study was limited to patients with distinct one-sided lumbar disc herniations as diagnosed via MRI and had associated radicular (nerve root) symptoms. Based upon the authors’ review of available MRI studies, the patients participating in the study were all initially considered surgical candidates.
Both the surgical and chiropractic groups reported no new neurological problems surfaced and had only minor post-treatment soreness. 60% of the patients who underwent chiropractic care reported a successful outcome while 40% required surgery and of those 40%, all reported successful outcomes. Of those patients choosing surgery as the primary means of treatment, 15% reported a failed surgical outcome and then chose chiropractic as a secondary choice. Of those 15% with failed surgeries, all were reported to have performed worse in clinical outcomes.
While it is clear that an accurate diagnosis could dictate that many patients require immediate surgery, many also do not. The above study indicates that a conservative non-operative approach of chiropractic care prevented 60% from needless surgery. While a larger study would give us more information, based upon the outcomes, cost factors and potential increased risks of surgery, it was concluded that chiropractic is a viable, first line treatment option.
These studies along with many others conclude that a drug-free approach of chiropractic care is one of the best solutions for patients with surgical lumbar discs and sciatic pain.
Source: http://healthfultips.com/?p=955
David P. Chen, D.C.
Chiropractor in Laurel, MD 20708
Monday, March 28, 2011
Early Treatment for Whiplash Injuries
For many people, the term “whiplash” conjures up a fairly uncomfortable image: being rear-ended by another car and having your head suddenly snapped back and forth by the impact.
Despite innovations in automotive design, whiplash injuries have become increasingly frequent in the past 30 years. Symptoms of whiplash can include serious and lingering neck pain, back pain, headaches and dizziness; no single effective treatment has been identified to deal with this chronic, frustrating condition.
But help may be on the way. A recent study in the journal of Spine suggests that early, active treatment is most effective for managing whiplash symptoms. In the study, “active” treatment consisted of repetitive motion exercises performed at home (10 times every hour, beginning within 96 hours of injury); “standard” treatment involved home exercises performed only a few times each day, starting two weeks after injury.
Results showed that 38% of patients receiving immediate, active treatment reported “no pain” at six-month followup, compared to only 5% of patients receiving delayed standard treatment. The authors note that this type of active home treatment is an “ideal form of rehabilitation” because it expends only small resources within the health care system.
It’s time to whip whiplash! If you or someone you know is suffering from whiplash, schedule an appointment today with us at Laurel Regional Chiropractic.
Reference: Rosenfeld M, Gunnarsson R, Borenstein P. Early intervention in whiplash-associated disorders. A comparison of two treatment protocols. Spine 2000: Vol. 25, No. 14, pp1782-87.
Dr. David P. Chen
Chiropractor in Laurel, MD 20708
Despite innovations in automotive design, whiplash injuries have become increasingly frequent in the past 30 years. Symptoms of whiplash can include serious and lingering neck pain, back pain, headaches and dizziness; no single effective treatment has been identified to deal with this chronic, frustrating condition.
But help may be on the way. A recent study in the journal of Spine suggests that early, active treatment is most effective for managing whiplash symptoms. In the study, “active” treatment consisted of repetitive motion exercises performed at home (10 times every hour, beginning within 96 hours of injury); “standard” treatment involved home exercises performed only a few times each day, starting two weeks after injury.
Results showed that 38% of patients receiving immediate, active treatment reported “no pain” at six-month followup, compared to only 5% of patients receiving delayed standard treatment. The authors note that this type of active home treatment is an “ideal form of rehabilitation” because it expends only small resources within the health care system.
It’s time to whip whiplash! If you or someone you know is suffering from whiplash, schedule an appointment today with us at Laurel Regional Chiropractic.
Reference: Rosenfeld M, Gunnarsson R, Borenstein P. Early intervention in whiplash-associated disorders. A comparison of two treatment protocols. Spine 2000: Vol. 25, No. 14, pp1782-87.
Dr. David P. Chen
Chiropractor in Laurel, MD 20708
Monday, March 21, 2011
Friday, March 18, 2011
Study Reveals Chiropractic Is Better Than Physical Therapy and Allopathic Care for Work-Related Low Back Pain
We've treated many work accident patients here at Laurel Regional Chiropractic, and quite often the patients received inappropriate care from either the hospital, medical doctor, or the physical therapy clinic. Here is a new study that concludes chiropractic is better than physical therapy and medical doctor for work-related low back pain.
OBJECTIVES: To compare occurrence of repeated disability episodes across types of health care providers who treat claimants with new episodes of work-related low back pain (LBP).
METHOD: A total of 894 cases followed 1 year using workers' compensation claims data. Provider types were defined for the initial episode of disability and subsequent episode of health maintenance care.
RESULTS: Controlling for demographics and severity, the hazard ratio [HR] of disability recurrence for patients of physical therapists (HR = 2.0; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.0 to 3.9) or physicians (HR = 1.6; 95% CI = 0.9 to 6.2) was higher than that of chiropractor (referent, HR = 1.0), which was similar to that of the patients non-treated after return to work (HR = 1.2; 95% CI = 0.4 to 3.8).
CONCLUSIONS: In work-related nonspecific LBP, the use of health maintenance care provided by physical therapist or physician services was associated with a higher disability recurrence than in chiropractic services or no treatment.
Statistically, this means you are twice as likely to end up disabled if you got your care from a physical therapist, rather than from a chiropractor. You’re also 60% more likely to be disabled if you choose a medical doctor to manage your care.
Reference: Cifuentes M, Willetts J, Wasiak R. Health Maintenance Care in Work-Related Low Back Pain and Its Association With Disability Recurrence. Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine 2011 (Mar 14).
Dr. David P. Chen
Chiropractor in Laurel, MD 20708
OBJECTIVES: To compare occurrence of repeated disability episodes across types of health care providers who treat claimants with new episodes of work-related low back pain (LBP).
METHOD: A total of 894 cases followed 1 year using workers' compensation claims data. Provider types were defined for the initial episode of disability and subsequent episode of health maintenance care.
RESULTS: Controlling for demographics and severity, the hazard ratio [HR] of disability recurrence for patients of physical therapists (HR = 2.0; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.0 to 3.9) or physicians (HR = 1.6; 95% CI = 0.9 to 6.2) was higher than that of chiropractor (referent, HR = 1.0), which was similar to that of the patients non-treated after return to work (HR = 1.2; 95% CI = 0.4 to 3.8).
CONCLUSIONS: In work-related nonspecific LBP, the use of health maintenance care provided by physical therapist or physician services was associated with a higher disability recurrence than in chiropractic services or no treatment.
Statistically, this means you are twice as likely to end up disabled if you got your care from a physical therapist, rather than from a chiropractor. You’re also 60% more likely to be disabled if you choose a medical doctor to manage your care.
Reference: Cifuentes M, Willetts J, Wasiak R. Health Maintenance Care in Work-Related Low Back Pain and Its Association With Disability Recurrence. Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine 2011 (Mar 14).
Dr. David P. Chen
Chiropractor in Laurel, MD 20708
Thursday, March 10, 2011
Chiropractic management of myofascial trigger points and myofascial pain syndrome: a systematic review of the literature.
In my practice here in Laurel, Maryland, patients are often amazed that we can find, just by palpating, the "painful spots". Trigger points are extremely sensitive spots in muscle bands that trigger painful responses and are characterized by heightened discomfort in the patient and a noticeable hardness to the doctor or therapist. Trigger points are not just tender nodules, but they affect the surrounding muscle and tissues. Trigger point therapy (TPT) involves the application of pressure to these painful, tender areas in order to relieve their pain and dysfunction as well as pain in other parts of the body. The patients will find that trigger point therapy in combination with other physiotherapy modalities and chiropractic manipulation often provides pain relief. Here is a study in support of manual-type therapies and some physiologic therapeutic modalities for trigger points.
OBJECTIVES: Myofascial pain syndrome (MPS) and myofascial trigger points (MTrPs) are important aspects of musculoskeletal medicine, including chiropractic. The purpose of this study was to review the most commonly used treatment procedures in chiropractic for MPS and MTrPs.
METHODS: The Scientific Commission of the Council on Chiropractic Guidelines and Practice Parameters (CCGPP) was charged with developing literature syntheses, organized by anatomical region, to evaluate and report on the evidence base for chiropractic care. This article is the outcome of this charge. As part of the CCGPP process, preliminary drafts of these articles were posted on the CCGPP Web site www.ccgpp.org (2006-8) to allow for an open process and the broadest possible mechanism for stakeholder input. PubMed, Excerpta Medica Database, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, and databases for systematic reviews and clinical guidelines were searched. Separate searches were conducted for (1) manual palpation and algometry, (2) chiropractic and other manual therapies, and (3) other conservative and complementary/alternative therapies. Studies were screened for relevance and rated using the Oxford Scale and Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network rating system.
RESULTS: A total of 112 articles were identified. Review of these articles resulted in the following recommendations regarding treatment: Moderately strong evidence supports manipulation and ischemic pressure for immediate pain relief at MTrPs, but only limited evidence exists for long-term pain relief at MTrPs. Evidence supports laser therapy (strong), transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation, acupuncture, and magnet therapy (all moderate) for MTrPs and MPS, although the duration of relief varies among therapies. Limited evidence supports electrical muscle stimulation, high-voltage galvanic stimulation, interferential current, and frequency modulated neural stimulation in the treatment of MTrPs and MPS. Evidence is weak for ultrasound therapy.
CONCLUSIONS: Manual-type therapies and some physiologic therapeutic modalities have acceptable evidentiary support in the treatment of MPS and TrPs.
Source: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19121461
Dr. David P. Chen
Chiropractor in Laurel, MD 20708
Laurel Regional Chiropractic
OBJECTIVES: Myofascial pain syndrome (MPS) and myofascial trigger points (MTrPs) are important aspects of musculoskeletal medicine, including chiropractic. The purpose of this study was to review the most commonly used treatment procedures in chiropractic for MPS and MTrPs.
METHODS: The Scientific Commission of the Council on Chiropractic Guidelines and Practice Parameters (CCGPP) was charged with developing literature syntheses, organized by anatomical region, to evaluate and report on the evidence base for chiropractic care. This article is the outcome of this charge. As part of the CCGPP process, preliminary drafts of these articles were posted on the CCGPP Web site www.ccgpp.org (2006-8) to allow for an open process and the broadest possible mechanism for stakeholder input. PubMed, Excerpta Medica Database, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, and databases for systematic reviews and clinical guidelines were searched. Separate searches were conducted for (1) manual palpation and algometry, (2) chiropractic and other manual therapies, and (3) other conservative and complementary/alternative therapies. Studies were screened for relevance and rated using the Oxford Scale and Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network rating system.
RESULTS: A total of 112 articles were identified. Review of these articles resulted in the following recommendations regarding treatment: Moderately strong evidence supports manipulation and ischemic pressure for immediate pain relief at MTrPs, but only limited evidence exists for long-term pain relief at MTrPs. Evidence supports laser therapy (strong), transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation, acupuncture, and magnet therapy (all moderate) for MTrPs and MPS, although the duration of relief varies among therapies. Limited evidence supports electrical muscle stimulation, high-voltage galvanic stimulation, interferential current, and frequency modulated neural stimulation in the treatment of MTrPs and MPS. Evidence is weak for ultrasound therapy.
CONCLUSIONS: Manual-type therapies and some physiologic therapeutic modalities have acceptable evidentiary support in the treatment of MPS and TrPs.
Source: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19121461
Dr. David P. Chen
Chiropractor in Laurel, MD 20708
Laurel Regional Chiropractic
Wednesday, March 9, 2011
Friday, March 4, 2011
Spinal Manipulation Eliminates Need for Surgery in Many Lumbar Disc Herniation Cases
Canadian researchers compared the clinical efficacy of spinal manipulation against microdiskectomy in patients with sciatica secondary to lumbar disk herniation (LDH). One hundred twenty patients presenting through elective referral by primary care physicians to neurosurgical spine surgeons were consecutively screened for symptoms of unilateral lumbar radiculopathy secondary to LDH at L3-4, L4-5, or L5-S1. Forty consecutive consenting patients who met inclusion criteria (patients must have failed at least 3 months of nonoperative management including treatment with analgesics, lifestyle modification, physiotherapy, massage therapy, and/or acupuncture) were randomized to either surgical microdiskectomy or standardized chiropractic spinal manipulation. Crossover to the alternate treatment was allowed after 3 months.
Significant improvement in both treatment groups compared to baseline scores over time was observed in all outcome measures. After 1 year, follow-up intent-to-treat analysis did not reveal a difference in outcome based on the original treatment received. However, 3 patients crossed over from surgery to spinal manipulation and failed to gain further improvement. Eight patients crossed from spinal manipulation to surgery and improved to the same degree as their primary surgical counterparts. The research team concluded that 60% of patients with sciatica who had failed other medical management benefited from spinal manipulation to the same degree as if they underwent surgical intervention. Of 40% left unsatisfied, subsequent surgical intervention confers excellent outcome. Patients with symptomatic LDH failing medical management should consider spinal manipulation followed by surgery if warranted.
Reference: McMorland G, Suter E, Casha S, du Plessis SJ, Hurlbert RJ. Manipulation or microdiskectomy for sciatica? A prospective randomized clinical study. J Manipulative Physiol Ther. Oct 2010;33(8):576-584.
Dr. David P. Chen
Chiropractor in Laurel, MD 20708
Significant improvement in both treatment groups compared to baseline scores over time was observed in all outcome measures. After 1 year, follow-up intent-to-treat analysis did not reveal a difference in outcome based on the original treatment received. However, 3 patients crossed over from surgery to spinal manipulation and failed to gain further improvement. Eight patients crossed from spinal manipulation to surgery and improved to the same degree as their primary surgical counterparts. The research team concluded that 60% of patients with sciatica who had failed other medical management benefited from spinal manipulation to the same degree as if they underwent surgical intervention. Of 40% left unsatisfied, subsequent surgical intervention confers excellent outcome. Patients with symptomatic LDH failing medical management should consider spinal manipulation followed by surgery if warranted.
Reference: McMorland G, Suter E, Casha S, du Plessis SJ, Hurlbert RJ. Manipulation or microdiskectomy for sciatica? A prospective randomized clinical study. J Manipulative Physiol Ther. Oct 2010;33(8):576-584.
Dr. David P. Chen
Chiropractor in Laurel, MD 20708
Saturday, February 26, 2011
Tuesday, February 22, 2011
Chiropractic Management of Migraine Headache
A recent Norwegian systematic review of manual therapies for migraine prevention concluded that chiropractic spinal manipulation and some other conservative interventions appear to be equal to medications (propranolol & topiramate) in their ability to prevent migraines.
Although most of the published research supporting chiropractic treatment of migraine is based upon case reports, there have been other studies including a limited number of randomized clinical trials. A previous 2001 systematic review by Bronfort et. al. concluded that “SMT appears to have a better effect than massage for cervicogenic headache. It also appears that SMT has an effect comparable to commonly used first-line prophylactic prescription medications for tension-type headache and migraine headache.
Migraine occurs in about 15% of the general population. Migraine is usually managed by medication, but some patients do not tolerate migraine medication due to side effects or prefer to avoid medication for other reasons. Non-pharmacological management is an alternative treatment option. The Randomized Clinical Trials (RCTs) suggest that massage therapy, physiotherapy, relaxation and chiropractic spinal manipulative therapy might be equally effective as propranolol and topiramate in the prophylactic management of migraine. However, due to the methodological shortcomings of the evaluated RCTs, future, well-conducted RCTs on manual therapies for migraine will be required.
Source: http://www.chiroaccess.com/Articles/Chiropractic-Management-of-Migraine-Headache.aspx?id=0000243
Dr. David P. Chen
Chiropractor in Laurel, MD 20708
Although most of the published research supporting chiropractic treatment of migraine is based upon case reports, there have been other studies including a limited number of randomized clinical trials. A previous 2001 systematic review by Bronfort et. al. concluded that “SMT appears to have a better effect than massage for cervicogenic headache. It also appears that SMT has an effect comparable to commonly used first-line prophylactic prescription medications for tension-type headache and migraine headache.
Migraine occurs in about 15% of the general population. Migraine is usually managed by medication, but some patients do not tolerate migraine medication due to side effects or prefer to avoid medication for other reasons. Non-pharmacological management is an alternative treatment option. The Randomized Clinical Trials (RCTs) suggest that massage therapy, physiotherapy, relaxation and chiropractic spinal manipulative therapy might be equally effective as propranolol and topiramate in the prophylactic management of migraine. However, due to the methodological shortcomings of the evaluated RCTs, future, well-conducted RCTs on manual therapies for migraine will be required.
Source: http://www.chiroaccess.com/Articles/Chiropractic-Management-of-Migraine-Headache.aspx?id=0000243
Dr. David P. Chen
Chiropractor in Laurel, MD 20708
Monday, February 14, 2011
Physio ball for back pain relief
The cause of back pain and the potential treatments for back injury are diverse. Back pain can be the result of a range of conditions that affect muscles, tendons, ligaments, discs, nerves, other soft tissues or joints. Most back pain does not have one simple cause, but may be due to a range of factors, such as poor posture, repetitive activity or trauma. A staple piece of equipment for rehabilitating a back injury is the physio ball.
No matter what the particular cause of back injury, it is well documented that the resulting low back pain inhibits the deep abdominal muscles whose job it is to support the spine. A vicious downward spiral is created where injury causes back pain, which causes the muscles that support the spine to weaken which in turn leaves that back more vulnerable to further injury. It is possible to break free from this cycle and specific lower abdominal stabilization training is a key component to winning the battle. This is where the physio ball comes in, it can also be referred to as an exercise ball, gym ball, stability ball or therapy ball. It is effective in rehabilitation of the back because it helps strengthen and develop the core body muscles that help to stabilize the spine.
It has been shown that the muscle activity required to perform a simple curl-up exercise is almost doubled when using a physio ball compared to the same exercise on a stable surface. Using equipment like the physio ball to perform abdominal exercises changes both the level of muscle activity and the way the muscles work together to stabilize the spine and whole body, this effect is exactly that which is required to counteract the negative effects that back pain has on the muscles.
The physio ball does not simply provide a method to restore the spinal stability that is lost in an episode of back pain. The range of exercises that can be performed when using it allows for expansive program progression, making it suitable for use in very early remedial exercises to end stage functional rehabilitation. It is also possible to perform a range of mobility exercises to promote increased range of motion about the spine as well as improve stability.
The use of a physio ball is an excellent conservative back exercise treatment option for back pain sufferers. It is a readily available, inexpensive and versatile piece of equipment that can be used under the supervision of a health professional and/or as part of an independent management plan for back pain. Not only will its use help to resolve the presenting complaint, it will also help prevent further episodes of low back pain when used as part of a rehabilitation program.
Reference: Exercises on a "swiss ball" for chronic low back pain. Stankovic, A, Lazovic, M and Kocic, M. 2008, Proceedings of the 7th Mediterranean congress of physical an rehabilitation medicine, pp. 58-60.
Dr. David P. Chen
Chiropractor in Laurel, MD 20708
No matter what the particular cause of back injury, it is well documented that the resulting low back pain inhibits the deep abdominal muscles whose job it is to support the spine. A vicious downward spiral is created where injury causes back pain, which causes the muscles that support the spine to weaken which in turn leaves that back more vulnerable to further injury. It is possible to break free from this cycle and specific lower abdominal stabilization training is a key component to winning the battle. This is where the physio ball comes in, it can also be referred to as an exercise ball, gym ball, stability ball or therapy ball. It is effective in rehabilitation of the back because it helps strengthen and develop the core body muscles that help to stabilize the spine.
It has been shown that the muscle activity required to perform a simple curl-up exercise is almost doubled when using a physio ball compared to the same exercise on a stable surface. Using equipment like the physio ball to perform abdominal exercises changes both the level of muscle activity and the way the muscles work together to stabilize the spine and whole body, this effect is exactly that which is required to counteract the negative effects that back pain has on the muscles.
The physio ball does not simply provide a method to restore the spinal stability that is lost in an episode of back pain. The range of exercises that can be performed when using it allows for expansive program progression, making it suitable for use in very early remedial exercises to end stage functional rehabilitation. It is also possible to perform a range of mobility exercises to promote increased range of motion about the spine as well as improve stability.
The use of a physio ball is an excellent conservative back exercise treatment option for back pain sufferers. It is a readily available, inexpensive and versatile piece of equipment that can be used under the supervision of a health professional and/or as part of an independent management plan for back pain. Not only will its use help to resolve the presenting complaint, it will also help prevent further episodes of low back pain when used as part of a rehabilitation program.
Reference: Exercises on a "swiss ball" for chronic low back pain. Stankovic, A, Lazovic, M and Kocic, M. 2008, Proceedings of the 7th Mediterranean congress of physical an rehabilitation medicine, pp. 58-60.
Dr. David P. Chen
Chiropractor in Laurel, MD 20708
Friday, February 11, 2011
Recovery and Sports
Most of you that follow my blog know that I am passionate about recovery and feel that it's the secret to increased performance in elite level athletics. I recently found Restwise when a professional athlete I know suggested them to me. When I did some research and called the company I could not believe they were on the same page as I was in terms of implementing aspects of recovery.
"Restwise takes the science of recovery out of the lab and puts it into your hands. Answer a brief series of research-based questions on the Restwise website every day and the resulting Recovery Score will, for the first time ever, quantify your body's state of recovery. "
I will be teaming up with Restwise to sponsor a group of varied athletes in different sports, called "Team-Recovery Doc." I will be combining Restwise data and apply them to my five pillars of recovery in addition to all of the modalities at my disposal....
Dartfish Motion Analysis
Class IV Lasers
Diagnostic Muskuloskelteal Ultrasound
RecoveyDoc Movement Assements evaluation
Nutrition.......................etc etc.
We are going to change the way RECOVERY is done.
Check back soon to see who the newest members will be!!!!!
Monday, February 7, 2011
Chiropractic care is the key to optimum perfomance
Green Bay Packers quarterback Aaron Rodgers and fitness pioneer Jack Lalanne are huge advocates for chiropractic care. Actually, Aaron Rodgers' father is a chiropractor in Chico, California and Jack Lalanne was a Doctor of Chiropractic himself.
Aaron Rodgers is not the only NFL player or athlete who believes in the benefit of chiropractic care. New Orleans Saints 2006 first round pick, Reggie Bush, has been receiving regular chiropractic care since playing football in high school and his collegiate years. "I look at Chiropractic care as important to keeping me healthy and at the top of my game." 2010 Hall Of Fame inductee Jerry Rice, who is a spokesperson for the Foundation for Chiropractic Progress, a non-profit organization dedicated to educating the public of the many benefits associated with chiropractic care. "I did a lot of things to stay in the game, but regular visits to my chiropractor made all of the difference", Jerry Rice says. Some of the elite athletes, Lance Armstrong, Tiger Woods, Emmitt Smith, Tom Brady, and Michael Jordan just to name a few, have all benefited from chiropractic care to help them to stay on top of their game. All 32 teams in the NFL have either one or several chiropractors on staff. The need for chiropractic care in the NFL has been driven by the players' desire for optimum performance, and not just for treating injuries.
The good news is that you don't have to be a professional athlete to receive chiropractic care, but you do have to want to make an investment in your health and want to create a healthier lifestyle. It doesn't matter if you have extreme pain or no pain at all, chiropractic allows you to live life to the fullest.
Dr. David P. Chen
Chiropractor in Laurel, MD 20708
Aaron Rodgers is not the only NFL player or athlete who believes in the benefit of chiropractic care. New Orleans Saints 2006 first round pick, Reggie Bush, has been receiving regular chiropractic care since playing football in high school and his collegiate years. "I look at Chiropractic care as important to keeping me healthy and at the top of my game." 2010 Hall Of Fame inductee Jerry Rice, who is a spokesperson for the Foundation for Chiropractic Progress, a non-profit organization dedicated to educating the public of the many benefits associated with chiropractic care. "I did a lot of things to stay in the game, but regular visits to my chiropractor made all of the difference", Jerry Rice says. Some of the elite athletes, Lance Armstrong, Tiger Woods, Emmitt Smith, Tom Brady, and Michael Jordan just to name a few, have all benefited from chiropractic care to help them to stay on top of their game. All 32 teams in the NFL have either one or several chiropractors on staff. The need for chiropractic care in the NFL has been driven by the players' desire for optimum performance, and not just for treating injuries.
The good news is that you don't have to be a professional athlete to receive chiropractic care, but you do have to want to make an investment in your health and want to create a healthier lifestyle. It doesn't matter if you have extreme pain or no pain at all, chiropractic allows you to live life to the fullest.
Dr. David P. Chen
Chiropractor in Laurel, MD 20708
Friday, February 4, 2011
Spinal Manipulation Therapy for Acute Low Back Pain
The October 2010 issue of The Spine Journal includes a new review of the scientific evidence supporting spinal manipulative therapy (SMT) for low back pain (LBP). The results were quite favorable and reflect a growing body of evidence supporting SMT over medications and other conservative options. SMT research demonstrates “equivalent or superior improvement in pain and function when compared with other commonly used interventions, such as physical modalities, medication, education, or exercise, for short, intermediate, and long-term follow-up.” The authors conclude by recommending that other health care providers consider SMT as a viable option if self care or education fails to provide pain relief.
METHODS: Literature was identified by searching MEDLINE using indexed and free text terms. Studies were included if they were randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published in English, and SMT was administered to a group of patients with LBP of less than 3 months. RCTs included in two previous SRs were also screened, as were reference lists of included studies. Combined search results were screened for relevance by two reviewers. Data related to methods, risk of bias, harms, and results were abstracted independently by two reviewers.
RESULTS: The MEDLINE search returned 699 studies, of which six were included; an additional eight studies were identified from two previous SRs. There were 2,027 participants in the 14 included RCTs, which combined SMT with education (n=5), mobilization (MOB) (n=4), exercise (n=3), modalities (n=3), or medication (n=2). The groups that received SMT were most commonly compared with those receiving physical modalities (n=7), education (n=6), medication (n=5), exercise (n=5), MOB (n=3), or sham SMT (n=2). Most studies (n=6) administered 5 to 10 sessions of SMT over 2 to 4 weeks for acute LBP. Outcomes measured included pain (n=10), function (n=10), health-care utilization (n=6), and global effect (n=5). Studies had a follow-up of less than 1 month (n=7), 3 months (n=1), 6 months (n=3), 1 year (n=2), or 2 years (n=1). When compared with various control groups, results for improvement in pain in the SMT groups were superior in three RCTs and equivalent in three RCTs in the short term, equivalent in four RCTs in the intermediate term, and equivalent in two RCTs in the long term. For improvement in function, results from the SMT groups were superior in one RCT and equivalent in four RCTs in the short term, superior in one RCT and equivalent in one RCT in the intermediate term, and equivalent in one RCT and inferior in one RCT in the long term. No harms related to SMT were reported in these RCTs.
CONCLUSIONS: Several RCTs have been conducted to assess the efficacy of SMT for acute LBP using various methods. Results from most studies suggest that 5 to 10 sessions of SMT administered over 2 to 4 weeks achieve equivalent or superior improvement in pain and function when compared with other commonly used interventions, such as physical modalities, medication, education, or exercise, for short, intermediate, and long-term follow-up.
Reference: Dagenais, S; Gay, RE; Tricco, AC; Freeman, MD; Mayer, JM (2010). "NASS Contemporary Concepts in Spine Care: spinal manipulation therapy for acute low back pain.". The spine journal. 10 (10): 918–40.
Dr. David P. Chen
Chiropractor in Laurel, MD 20708
METHODS: Literature was identified by searching MEDLINE using indexed and free text terms. Studies were included if they were randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published in English, and SMT was administered to a group of patients with LBP of less than 3 months. RCTs included in two previous SRs were also screened, as were reference lists of included studies. Combined search results were screened for relevance by two reviewers. Data related to methods, risk of bias, harms, and results were abstracted independently by two reviewers.
RESULTS: The MEDLINE search returned 699 studies, of which six were included; an additional eight studies were identified from two previous SRs. There were 2,027 participants in the 14 included RCTs, which combined SMT with education (n=5), mobilization (MOB) (n=4), exercise (n=3), modalities (n=3), or medication (n=2). The groups that received SMT were most commonly compared with those receiving physical modalities (n=7), education (n=6), medication (n=5), exercise (n=5), MOB (n=3), or sham SMT (n=2). Most studies (n=6) administered 5 to 10 sessions of SMT over 2 to 4 weeks for acute LBP. Outcomes measured included pain (n=10), function (n=10), health-care utilization (n=6), and global effect (n=5). Studies had a follow-up of less than 1 month (n=7), 3 months (n=1), 6 months (n=3), 1 year (n=2), or 2 years (n=1). When compared with various control groups, results for improvement in pain in the SMT groups were superior in three RCTs and equivalent in three RCTs in the short term, equivalent in four RCTs in the intermediate term, and equivalent in two RCTs in the long term. For improvement in function, results from the SMT groups were superior in one RCT and equivalent in four RCTs in the short term, superior in one RCT and equivalent in one RCT in the intermediate term, and equivalent in one RCT and inferior in one RCT in the long term. No harms related to SMT were reported in these RCTs.
CONCLUSIONS: Several RCTs have been conducted to assess the efficacy of SMT for acute LBP using various methods. Results from most studies suggest that 5 to 10 sessions of SMT administered over 2 to 4 weeks achieve equivalent or superior improvement in pain and function when compared with other commonly used interventions, such as physical modalities, medication, education, or exercise, for short, intermediate, and long-term follow-up.
Reference: Dagenais, S; Gay, RE; Tricco, AC; Freeman, MD; Mayer, JM (2010). "NASS Contemporary Concepts in Spine Care: spinal manipulation therapy for acute low back pain.". The spine journal. 10 (10): 918–40.
Dr. David P. Chen
Chiropractor in Laurel, MD 20708
Wednesday, February 2, 2011
Chiropractic Maintenance Care for Chronic Lower Back Pain
A new single blinded placebo controlled study conducted by the faculty of medicine at Mansoura University, conclusively demonstrates that chiropractic maintenance care provides significant benefits for those with chronic low back pain.
BACKGROUND: Spinal adjustments is a common treatment option for low back pain (LBP). Numerous clinical trials have attempted to evaluate its effectiveness for different subgroups of acute and chronic LBP previously, but the efficacy of maintenance adjustments in chronic non-specific LBP has never been studied.
In this study, 60 patients with chronic, nonspecific LBP lasting at leas 6 months were randomized into 3 groups:
1. One third of them received 12 treatments of sham adjustments over a one-month.
2. One third of them received 12 treatments of adjustments during a one-month period, with no follow-up care during the next nine months.
3. One third of them received 12 Chiropractic adjustments during the first month, followed by “maintenance” adjustments every two weeks, for the next nine months.
To determine any difference among these 3 care groups, researchers measured pain and disability scores, generic health status, and back-specific patient satisfaction at baseline, and at 1-month, 4-months, 7-months, and at 10-months.
RESULTS: Patients in groups (groups 2 & 3) experienced significantly lower pain and disability scores than the sham group at the end of the first 1-month period.
At the 10-month follow-up, only the maintenance group maintained improvements in pain and disability, while the group that only received 1-months care had reverted to their pretreatment pain and disability levels.
CONCLUSIONS: This is the first medically managed trial that clearly demonstrates that maintenance chiropractic care provides significant benefits to those who suffer from chronic low back pain.
SOURCE: "Does Maintained Spinal Manipulation Therapy for Chronic Non-specific Low Back Pain Result in Better Long Term Outcome?" Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2011 Jan 17.
Dr. David P. Chen
Chiropractor in Laurel, Maryland
Laurel Regional Chiropractic
BACKGROUND: Spinal adjustments is a common treatment option for low back pain (LBP). Numerous clinical trials have attempted to evaluate its effectiveness for different subgroups of acute and chronic LBP previously, but the efficacy of maintenance adjustments in chronic non-specific LBP has never been studied.
In this study, 60 patients with chronic, nonspecific LBP lasting at leas 6 months were randomized into 3 groups:
1. One third of them received 12 treatments of sham adjustments over a one-month.
2. One third of them received 12 treatments of adjustments during a one-month period, with no follow-up care during the next nine months.
3. One third of them received 12 Chiropractic adjustments during the first month, followed by “maintenance” adjustments every two weeks, for the next nine months.
To determine any difference among these 3 care groups, researchers measured pain and disability scores, generic health status, and back-specific patient satisfaction at baseline, and at 1-month, 4-months, 7-months, and at 10-months.
RESULTS: Patients in groups (groups 2 & 3) experienced significantly lower pain and disability scores than the sham group at the end of the first 1-month period.
At the 10-month follow-up, only the maintenance group maintained improvements in pain and disability, while the group that only received 1-months care had reverted to their pretreatment pain and disability levels.
CONCLUSIONS: This is the first medically managed trial that clearly demonstrates that maintenance chiropractic care provides significant benefits to those who suffer from chronic low back pain.
SOURCE: "Does Maintained Spinal Manipulation Therapy for Chronic Non-specific Low Back Pain Result in Better Long Term Outcome?" Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2011 Jan 17.
Dr. David P. Chen
Chiropractor in Laurel, Maryland
Laurel Regional Chiropractic
Wednesday, January 26, 2011
One more reason to take breaks from sitting: a smaller waistline
Always wanted a smaller waist? Scientists have discovered that the answer could be something as simple as taking frequent small breaks from sitting.
A U.S. National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey published in the European Society of Cardiology’s European Heart Journal revealed that participants who took more small breaks from sitting had smaller waistlines than those who did not. This was true even for those who were spent up to 21.2 hours a day sedentary. For the 25% of participants who took the most breaks from sitting, the survey found that waistlines were on average 1.61 inches or 4.1 centimeters smaller than the 25% of participants who took the fewest breaks. The survey, led by University of Queensland researcher followed 4,757 people, all aged 20 and older. The survey lasted for seven days, during which participants wore an accelerometer on their right hips when they were awake. These accelerometers measured the intensity of the participants’ physical activity. Low levels of intensity were equated with sedentary periods.
Having a small waistline indicates less abdominal fat, which in turn is an indicator for better heart health. Larger waists, on the other hand, are linked to cardiovascular disease and high blood pressure as well as higher risk for type 2 diabetes. Another study published in the journal, Obesity, links increases in waistlines to increased chance of premature death.
Participants who took more frequent breaks from sitting also had lower levels of C-reactive protein (CRP). CRPs are produced by the liver. Production is correlated with the level of inflammation in the body. The study also found that taking breaks had a significant effect on lowering HDL-cholesterol, particularly in non-Hispanic whites. Conversely, those who were had higher sedentary times tended to have larger waists, higher HDL-cholesterol, CRPs, triglycerides and insulin.
The benefits of frequent breaks from sitting is linked to muscle activity in the legs and back. When sitting or reclining, these large muscles are largely inactive. However when standing, these muscles are forced to continually contract in order to maintain posture. This increased activity helps to clear plasma triglycerides, which is a risk factor for cardiovascular disease.
Still not convinced? By taking frequent breaks and doing some stretches while sitting at work will also save you from frequent neck and back pain.
Source: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/41028986/ns/health-diet_and_nutrition/
Dr. David P. Chen
Chiropractor in Laurel, MD 20708
Laurel Regional Chiropractic
A U.S. National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey published in the European Society of Cardiology’s European Heart Journal revealed that participants who took more small breaks from sitting had smaller waistlines than those who did not. This was true even for those who were spent up to 21.2 hours a day sedentary. For the 25% of participants who took the most breaks from sitting, the survey found that waistlines were on average 1.61 inches or 4.1 centimeters smaller than the 25% of participants who took the fewest breaks. The survey, led by University of Queensland researcher followed 4,757 people, all aged 20 and older. The survey lasted for seven days, during which participants wore an accelerometer on their right hips when they were awake. These accelerometers measured the intensity of the participants’ physical activity. Low levels of intensity were equated with sedentary periods.
Having a small waistline indicates less abdominal fat, which in turn is an indicator for better heart health. Larger waists, on the other hand, are linked to cardiovascular disease and high blood pressure as well as higher risk for type 2 diabetes. Another study published in the journal, Obesity, links increases in waistlines to increased chance of premature death.
Participants who took more frequent breaks from sitting also had lower levels of C-reactive protein (CRP). CRPs are produced by the liver. Production is correlated with the level of inflammation in the body. The study also found that taking breaks had a significant effect on lowering HDL-cholesterol, particularly in non-Hispanic whites. Conversely, those who were had higher sedentary times tended to have larger waists, higher HDL-cholesterol, CRPs, triglycerides and insulin.
The benefits of frequent breaks from sitting is linked to muscle activity in the legs and back. When sitting or reclining, these large muscles are largely inactive. However when standing, these muscles are forced to continually contract in order to maintain posture. This increased activity helps to clear plasma triglycerides, which is a risk factor for cardiovascular disease.
Still not convinced? By taking frequent breaks and doing some stretches while sitting at work will also save you from frequent neck and back pain.
Source: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/41028986/ns/health-diet_and_nutrition/
Dr. David P. Chen
Chiropractor in Laurel, MD 20708
Laurel Regional Chiropractic
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)