Efficacy of Chiropractic Treatment for Post-Surgical Continued Low Back and Radicular Pain
81% of chiropractic post-surgical patients showed greater than 50% reduction in pain.
Mark Studin DC
William J. Owens DC
A report on the scientific literature
Park et. Al (2016) reported that low back pain radiating into the lower extremities have greater impact on disability and time off work that any other medical condition. Vleggeert-Lankamp, Arts and Jacobs (2013) reported “The term ‘failed back surgery syndrome’ (FBSS) is used to describe a clinical condition defined by persistent or recurrent complaints of leg pain and/or back pain regardless of one or more surgical procedures of the lumbar spine. The definition of FBSS (failed back surgery syndrome) is modified by some authors by adding that at least one surgical intervention was to be performed and that pain should persist after the last surgical intervention, for at least one year.1 The term implies that the surgery plays a role in the cause of the pain, although in most cases the surgical intervention was technically successful. It is known that nearly 20% of patients undergoing spine surgery will require secondary surgery for persistent pain or surgery-related complications during the subsequent years.” (pg. 48) El-Badawy and El Mikkawy (2016) reported that failed back surgery syndrome occurs with lateral disc surgery upwards of 17%, spinal stenosis 29% and instability 14.8%.
Perhaps the reason for failed back surgery syndrome is what the surgeons have considered their “gold standard, fusion and the ensuing loss of mobility of the spinal motor unit. Mulholland (2008) reported “Spinal fusion became what has been termed the “gold standard” for the treatment of mechanical low back pain, yet there was no scientific basis for this.” (pg. 619) The history of spinal fusion is both fascinating and disturbing and reveals why chiropractic both helps post-surgical cases and should always be considered first, prior to surgery as an option.
Mulholland (2008) continued:
In 1962 Harmon presented a review paper at the western orthopaedic association meeting in San Francisco, in which the term “Instability” appears.
However, Harmon’s description of what he meant by instability (unfortunately in a footnote) is revealing “Spinal instability refers to a low back-gluteal-thigh clinical triad of symptoms that may be accompanied (overt cases) by incapacitating regional weakness and pain. This is the effect of disk degeneration with or without disc hernia. Some may be asymptomatic or slightly symptomatic when instability is compensated by muscle or ligament control. It does not refer to spinous process or laminal hypermobility which some surgeons like to demonstrate at the operating table nor does this clinical concept parallel the common spinal hypermobility, which is the product of intervertebral disc degeneration, demonstrable in flexion-extension filming of the region, since the anatomic hypermobility is not always productive of symptoms”
Sadly this description of instability appears to have been ignored, and the concept of mechanical instability as a cause of back pain was progressively accepted. Harmon’s view of the effect of fusion was that it cured pain by reducing the irritation of the neural contents produced by movement. His paper was influential as he emphasized the importance of appropriate investigations prior to fusion and the segmental nature of back pain but unfortunately his use of the term instability was interpreted as supporting the view that segmental abnormal movement was the cause of the pain.
In 1965 Newman in an editorial concerning lumbo-sacral arthrodesis (surgical immobilization) refers to the need to stabilize the lumbar spine in patients with back pain after discectomy for a lumbar root entrapment.
At the beginning of the seventies the perception was that disc degeneration led to abnormal translational movement, and this was painful.
McNab in 1971 who had done much work on the disturbance of movement in the degenerate disc described what he termed the “traction spur,” a particular type of anterior osteophytes which he said was related to an abnormal pattern of translational movement. This view again supported the concept of instability. He added the important caveat that it “was impossible to establish the clinical significance of the traction spur as a statistically valid investigation the traction spur was revisited in the late eighties and was shown to be no different to claw osteophytes, and often both would be present in the same patient. It was not related to abnormal movement.”
Although McNab used the term instability, he used it in the sense that the spine was vulnerable to acute episodes of pain, because the degenerate disc rendered it more easily injured. He did not view it as a cause of chronic back pain.
Kirkaldy Willis set out his views on instability in 1982. In “Instability of the Lumbar Spine” he described the process of disc degeneration as passing through a stage of dysfunction, (intermittent pain), instability which caused more persistent pain but then with time stabilizing to a painless state. This was his explanation for the observed fact that many very degenerate discs were painless. However, he at that stage was somewhat unhappy with an entirely mechanistic view for pain. Hence, he writes “Instability can be defined as the clinical status of the patient with a back problem who with the least provocation steps from the mildly symptomatic to a severe episode”. Further he writes “Detectable increased motion does not always solicit a clinical response, and that abnormal motion may be abnormal increase or abnormal decrease”. He further writes “It is insufficient to detect the abnormal increased motion, but the mechanism by which it precipitates the symptomatic episode must also be identified”. Indeed in the seven cases he reported only one patient had backache alone, the others were all radicular problems. His paper shows that identifying abnormal movement establishes the fact that the segment is disordered, but he does not in that paper indicate that movement itself is the cause of pain.
Subsequently in his very influential book “Managing Back Pain” in 259 pages just one page is devoted to the rationale of lumbar fusion. The only reason for fusion appeared to be that, other treatments had failed, that it was reasonable from the psychological viewpoint, and that instability was present. Instability is defined elsewhere in the book as increased abnormal movement, and this is illustrated by x-rays purporting to show abnormal rotations and various types of abnormal tilt. He accepts that such appearances may be entirely painless, but in the patient with back pain they identify the causative level, and fusion is justified.
However, in a joint paper with Depuis in 1985 entitled “Radiological Diagnosis of Degenerative Lumbar instability” they write “A lumbar motion segment is considered unstable when it exhibits abnormal movements. The movement is abnormal in quality (abnormal coupling patterns) or in quality (abnormal increase of movement...) Pain is a signal of impending or actual tissue damage-and when present it indicates that a mechanical threshold has been reached or transgressed. Repeated transgressions will damage the stabilizing structures beyond physiological repair, thus putting abnormal demands on secondary restraints”.
Hence from being a method of identifying an abnormal degenerate disc, abnormal motion itself became the injurious agent.
In 1985 Pope and Panjabi in a paper entitled “Biomechanical definition of spinal instability” wrote “Instability is a mechanical entity and an unstable spine is one that is not in an optimal state of equilibrium. (...In the spine stability is affected by restraining structures that if damaged or lax will lead to altered equilibrium and thus instability. Instability is defined as a loss of stiffness”. Panjabi’s views were generally accepted by basic scientists interested in this field.
Subsequently Panjabi concluded that increased movement was not necessarily a feature of what he termed instability, but reduction in the neutral zone was. However, in a more recent paper he has abandoned the concept of instability altogether and ascribes chronic back pain as being caused by ligament sub-failure injuries leading to muscle control dysfunction.
However, throughout the period from the fifties to the nineties, the Panjabi view held sway, and the term instability evolved from being a useful term to denote a segment that was abnormal due to a degenerate disc, to a term denoting a diagnosis of an abnormal, (usually increased) pattern of movement with a translational component. The abnormal movement was thought to be the cause of the pain and clearly fusion or stopping movement was a logical treatment.
However, the inability to show that abnormal or increased movement was a feature peculiar to the painful degenerate disc, combined with the fact that despite more rigid fusions using pedicle fixation, the clinical results of fusion had not improved, was increasingly casting doubt on the concept of instability. The paper by Murata combining MRI examination with flexion and extension films in patients with back pain, showed that increased angular and translational movement was a feature of the normal or mildly degenerate disc, not of the markedly degenerate disc, where movements were reduced. In 1998 Kaigle et al. demonstrated that comparing patients with normal subjects there was always less movement present in the degenerate spine. It was therefore generally accepted that the effect of disc degeneration was to reduce movement not to increase it, as the term “instability” would imply. It may be argued that, unfortunately, this reduction of movement is associated with abnormal patterns of movement, and this is the meaning of “instability”. However despite considerable efforts over many years, using flexion/extension films, no clear relationship has been established between pain and such abnormal movements. In other words, patients with degenerative disc disease may exhibit abnormal patterns of movement yet have no pain.
By the mid-nineties, instability was still the term used to describe the disorder that we treated by fusion, but the failure to improve results by the introduction of pedicle fixation, caused many surgeons to question the concept of instability, but surgeons were all aware that fusion although unpredictable in terms of clinical result, was the best surgical treatment for chronic low back pain. It was well recognized that clinical success was unrelated to the success of the fusion, pseudarthrosis was as common amongst successful patients as in those who had failed. Was there anything else that a fusion did to the intervertebral disc unrelated to the fact that it stopped movement? (pgs. 619-623)
Mulholland (2008) concluded with a powerful statement that perhaps sums up why chiropractic realizes significant result when treating post-surgical cases.
Abnormal movement of a degenerated segment may be associated with back pain but is not causative. The concept of instability as a cause of back pain is a myth. The clinical results of any procedure that allows abnormal disc loading to continue are unpredictable. (pg. 624)
To underscore the point of fusion being a failed surgical paradigm in many patients, Gudavalli, Olding, Joachim, & Cox (2016) reported,
Surgical decompression of the lumbar spine in older patients had a 24% reoperation rate, and a 20-fold increase in lumbar surgical fusion rates among Medicare enrollees is reported. Lumbar cage fusion rates increased from 3.6% in 1996 to 58% in 2001, and the result was increased complication risk without improved disability or reoperation rates. Adjacent segment degenerative changes and instability at the level immediately above single-segment fusion with clinical deterioration are shown in up to 90% of the cases. The incidence of radiographic adjacent segment disease following fusion has been reported to be as high as 50% in the cervical spine and 70% in the lumbar spine at 10 years. However, the incidence of clinically relevant symptomatic adjacent segment disease is quite lower, estimated at 25% in the cervical spine and 36% in the lumbar spine at 10 years.
Comparing surgery with nonsurgical treatment for back and radicular pain shows that intensive rehabilitation is more effective than fusion surgery, and nonsurgical treatment of low back and radicular pain patients is reported to reduce lumbar disk surgery by approximately two-thirds. Chronic low back pain in 349 patients aged 18-55 years found no evidence that surgery was any more beneficial than intensive rehabilitation. A study of 600 single-operated low back patients showed that 71% did not return to work 4 years after surgery, and 400 multiple-operated backs showed that 95% did not return to work 4 years later. (pg. 124)
Gudavalli, Olding, Joachim, & Cox (2016) went on to report what has been found clinically effective in both pre and post-operative cases, "Treating lumbar disk herniation and spinal stenosis patients successfully with conservative care is documented. Chiropractic manipulation prior to spine surgery is appropriate. Previous reports of the biomechanical changes in the spine when CTFD (Cox technique, flexion-traction) spinal manipulation is applied include decreased intradiscal pressure; intervertebral disk foraminal area increase; increased intervertebral disk space height; and physiological range of motion of the facet joint." (pg. 124)
Regarding post-surgical care, Gudavalli, Olding, Joachim, & Cox (2016) concluded,
81% of the (post-surgical chiropractic) patients showed greater than 50% reduction in pain levels at the end of the last treatment. At 24-month follow-up, 78.6% had continued pain relief of greater than 50%. (pg. 121)
Although one of the goals of chiropractic care is pain relief, there are still the underlying biomechanical pathologies to consider that are concurrently treated while under chiropractic care. The more pressing issue in the post-surgical cases are “could these surgeries been avoided” in the first place with correcting the underlying biomechanical pathologies prior to surgery This underscores the overwhelming need for chiropractic as Primary Spine Care providers being the first treatment option. It goes back to the adage “drugless first, drugs seconds and surgery last.” It’s just common sense and chiropractic has been verified in numerous outcome studies proven to be the most effective 1st treatment option for spine.
References:
Acute and Chronic Herniated Discs Have Significantly Favorable Outcomes With Chiropractic Care
95% Reported Improvement
A report on the scientific literature
By Mark Studin DC, FASBE(C), DAAPM, DAAMLP
Approximately 70% of the population will have back pain at some point in time in their life according to Lehman ET. Al. (2014). The pain ranges from mild to either moderate or severe and can often be debilitating and associated with or without leg pain if it’s originating from your lower back. Treatment for this common problem is usually broken up into two categories, surgical versus conservative care however, I am going to break it into three categories: surgical, medication and conservative care. This article is going to focus on the continual growing body of evidence of treatment of herniated discs via conservative care and specifically with a chiropractic spinal adjustment.
It was reported by McMorland, Suter, Casha,du Plessis, andHurlbertin 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.
The 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 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. This study concluded that 60% of the potential surgical candidates had positive outcomes utilizing chiropractic as the alternative to surgery.
Although the previous report concluded that a chiropractic spinal adjustment is an effective treatment modality for herniated disc a more recent study (Lehman ET. Al. (2014), further clarifies the improvement with chiropractic care. This study considered both herniated discs and radiculopathy or pain radiating down into the leg as a baseline for analysis. The study also considered acute and chronic lumbar herniated disc pain patients.
In this study the acute onset patient (the pain just started) reported 80% improvement at 2 weeks, 85% improvement at 1 month, and a 95% improvement at 3 months. The study went on to conclude that the patient stabilized at both the six month and one year mark after the onset of the original complaint. Although one might argue that the patient would have gotten better with no treatment it was reported that after two weeks of no treatment only 36% of the patients felt better and at 12 weeks up to 73% felt better. This study clearly indicates that chiropractic is a far superior solution to doing nothing and at the same time helps the patient return to their normal life without pain, drugs or surgery.
Chiropractic Care and Herniated Discs with Leg Pain
|
2 Week Improvement |
1 Month Improvement |
3 Month Improvement |
|
80.6% |
84.6% |
94.5% |
The caveat is that there are patients who could need drugs or surgery and an accurate diagnosis is paramount and it is incumbent upon the doctor of chiropractic to be fully trained in both the diagnostic and treatment facets of care. It is also important that the chiropractor is well-versed in MRI protocols and interpretation as well as disc pathology to be able to triage the patient accordingly based upon the clinical presentation inclusive of the MRI results.
Chiropractic is one of the safest treatments currently available in healthcare and when there is a treatment where the potential for benefits far outweighs any risk, it deserves serious consideration. Whedon et al. (2014) based their study on 6,669,603 subjects after the unqualified subjects had been removed from the study and accounted for 24,068,808 office visits. They concluded, “No mechanism by which SM (spinal manipulation) induces injury into normal healthy tissues has been identified.(Whedon et al.,2014, p. 5)
References:
Disc Surgery (Discectomy,) Sciatica (Leg Pain) & Lumbar Disc Herniation
Surgery vs. Chiropractic Care
A report on the scientific literature
by
Mark Studin DC, FASBE(C), DAAPM, DAAMLP
60% of Surgical Candidates Avoid Surgery with Chiropractic
According to a group at MayoClinic.com (2010), "Sciatica refers to pain that radiates along the path of the sciatic nerve and its branches — from your back down your buttock and leg. The sciatic nerve is the longest nerve in your body. It runs from your spinal cord to your buttock and hip area and down the back of each leg. Sciatica is a symptom, not a disorder. The radiating pain of sciatica signals another problem involving the nerve, such as a herniated disk" (http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/ sciatica/DS00516).
Sciatica symptoms include: Pain "…likely to occur along a path from your low back to your buttock and the back of your thigh and calf. Numbness or muscle weakness along the nerve pathway in your leg or foot. In some cases, you may have pain in one part of your leg and numbness in another. Tingling or a pins-and-needles feeling, often in your toes or part of your foot. A loss of bladder or bowel control. This is a sign of cauda equina syndrome, a serious condition that requires emergency care" (Mayo Clinic Staff, 2010, http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/sciatica/DS00516/DSECTION=symptoms).
A prime symptom of sciatica is leg pain in conjunction with herniated discs. As reported by the US Chiropractic Directory in 2010, "Pain radiating down your leg secondary to a herniated disc is a common and often disabling occurrence. A disc in your spine is comprised of 2 basic components, the inner nucleus pulposis that is gelatinous in composition and the outer annulus fibrosis that is fibro-cartilaginous and very strong. When a person experiences trauma and the forces are directed at the spine and disc. The pressure on the inside of the disc is increased (like stepping on a balloon) and the internal nucleus pulposis creates pressure from the inside out. It tears the outer annulus fibrosis causing the internal material to go beyond the outer boundaries of the disc. This has often been misnamed a ‘slipped disc’ because the disc doesn’t slip or slide, it is torn from the trauma allowing the internal material to escape.
Conversely, a bulging disc, which gets confused with a herniated disc, is a degenerative "wear and tear scenario" that occurs over time with the annulus fibrosis degenerating. This can also be a "risk factor" allowing the disc to herniate with less trauma due to the degeneration or thinning of the disc walls. This, however, is a conversation for another article.
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" (http://www.uschirodirectory.com/index.php/patient-information/item/235-herniated-discs-radiating-pain-and-chiropractic).
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. To find a qualified doctor of chiropractic near you go to the US Chiropractic Directory at www.USChiroDirectory.com and search your state.
References:
1. Mayo Clinic Staff. (2010, April 22). Sciatica, Definition. MayoClinic.com, Retrieved from, http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/sciatica/DS00516
2. Mayo Clinic Staff. (2010, April 22). Sciatica, Symptoms. MayoClinic.com, Retrieved from http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/sciatica/DS00516/DSECTION=symptoms
3. Studin, M. (2010). Herniated discs, radiating pain and chiropractic. US Chiropractic Directory. Retrieved from http://www.uschirodirectory.com/index.php/patient-information/item/235-herniated-discs-radiating-pain-and-chiropractic
4. McMorland, G., Suter, E., Casha, S., du Plessis, S. J., & Hurlbert, R. J. (2010). Manipulation or microdiskectomy for sciatica? A prospective randomized clinical study. Journal of Manipulative and Physiological Therapeutics, 33 (8), 576-584
Back and Leg Pain (Lumbar Radiculopathy) as a Result of Disc Herniation and the Long Term Effect of Chiropractic Care
90% of all low back-lumbar disc herniation patients got better with chiropractic care
A report on the scientific literature
By
Mark Studin DC, FASBE (C), DAAPM, DAAMLP
The term "herniated disc" has been called many things from a slipped disc to a bulging disc. For a doctor who specializes in disc problems, the term is critical because it tells him/her how to create a prognosis and subsequent treatment plan for a patient. To clarify the disc issue, a herniated disc is where a disc tears and the internal material of the disc, called the nucleus pulposis, extends through that tear. It is always results from trauma or an accident. A bulging disc is a degenerative "wear and tear" phenomenon where the internal material or nucleus pulposis does not extend through the disc because there has been no tear, but the walls of the disc have been thinned from degeneration and the internal disc material creates pressure with thinned external walls. The disc itself "spreads out" or bulges.
There are various forms and degrees of disc issues, but the biggest concern of the specialist is whether nerves are being affected that can cause significant pain or other problems. The problem exists when the disc, as a result of a herniation or bulge, is touching or compressing those neurological elements, which is comprised of either the spinal cord, the nerve root (a nerve the extends from the spinal cord) or the covering of the nerves, called the thecal sac.
With regard to the structure that we have just discussed, the doctor must wonder what the herniation of the neurological element has caused. In this scenario, there are 2 possible problems, the spinal cord and nerve root. If the disc has compromised the spinal cord, it is called a myelopathy (my-e-lo-pathy). You have a compression of the spinal cord and problems with your arms or legs. An immediate visit to the neurosurgeon is warranted for a surgical consultation. The second problem is when the disc is effecting the spinal nerve root, called a radiculopathy. It is a very common problem. A doctor of chiropractic experienced in treating radiculopathy has to determine if there is enough room between the disc and the nerve in order to determine if a surgical consultation is warranted or if he/she can safely treat you. This is done by a thorough clinical examination and in many cases, an MRI is required to make a final diagnosis. Most patients do not need a surgical consultation and can be safely treated by an experienced chiropractor.
While herniations can occur anywhere, it was reported by Jordan, Konstanttinou, & O'Dowd (2009) that 95% occur in the lower back. "The highest prevalence is among people aged 30–50 years, with a male to female ratio of 2:1. In people aged 25–55 years, about 95% of herniated discs occur at the lower lumbar spine (L4/5 and L5/S1 level); disc herniation above this level is more common in people aged over 55 years" (http://clinicalevidence.bmj.com/ceweb/conditions/msd/1118/1118_background.jsp#incidence).
It was reported by Aspegren et al. (2009) that 80% of the chiropractic patients studied with both neck and low back (cervical and lumbar) disc herniations had a good clinical outcome with post-care visual analog scores under 2 [0 to 10 with 0 being no pain and 10 being the worst pain imaginable] and resolution of abnormal clinical examination findings. Anatomically, after repeat MRI scans, 63% of the patients studied revealed a reduced size or completely resorbed disc herniation. A study by Murphy, Hurwitz, and McGovern (2009) focused only on low back (lumbar) disc herniations and concluded that, "Nearly 90% of patients reported their outcome to be either 'excellent' or 'good'...clinically meaningful improvement in pain intensity was seen in 74% of patients (p. 729)." The researchers also concluded that the improvements from chiropractic care was maintained for 14 1/2 months, the length of the study, indicating this isn't a temporary, but a long-term solution. It was reported by BenEliyahu (1996) that 78% percent of the low back-lumbar disc herniation patients were able to return to work in their pre-disability occupations, which is the result of the 90% of all low back-lumbar disc herniation patients getting better with chiropractic care as discussed above.
These are the reasons that chiropractic has been, and needs to be, considered for the primary care for low back-lumbar disc herniations with resultant pain in the back or legs. This study along with many others concludes that a drug-free approach of chiropractic care is one of the best solutions for herniated discs and low back or leg pain. To find a qualified doctor of chiropractic near you go to the US Chiropractic Directory at www.USChiroDirectory.com and search your state.
References:
1. Jordan, J., Konstanttinou, K., & O'Dowd, J. (2009, March 26). Herniated lumbar disc. Clinical Evidence. Retrieved from http://clinicalevidence.bmj.com/ceweb/conditions/msd/1118/1118_background.jsp#incidence
2. Aspegren, D., Enebo, B. A., Miller, M., White, L., Akuthota, V., Hyde, T. E., & Cox, J. M. (2009). Functional scores and subjective responses of injured workers with back or neck pain treated with chiropractic care in an integrative program: A retrospective analysis of 100 cases. Journal Manipulative Physiological Therapy 32(9), 765-771.
3. Murphy, D. R., Hurwitz, E. L., & McGovern, E. E. (2009). A nonsurgical approach to the management of patients with lumbar radiculopathy secondary to herniated disk: A prospective observational cohort study with follow-up. Journal Manipulative Physiological Therapy, (32)9, 723-733.
4. BenEliyahu, D. J. (1996). Magnetic resonance imaging and clinical follow-up: Study of 27 patients receiving chiropractic care for cervical and lumbar disc herniations. Journal Manipulative Physiological Therapy, 19(9), 597-606.
Homeof the USCD 
ResearchBrowse Chiropractic Conditions 
RegisterDoctors JOIN here