Lyndon Amorin-Woods

Background
Accreditation of healthcare provider training programs ensures graduate competency and provides a means for programs to improve. Accreditation consistency assures the public that healthcare providers have similar basic training across world regions. Currently, it is unknown if chiropractic accrediting agencies have congruent standards globally. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to investigate similarities and differences in student competencies and program standards among four chiropractic accreditation agencies worldwide.

Methods
A quantitative content analysis was performed on accreditation standards from regional international accreditation agencies responsible for accrediting the majority of the world’s chiropractic degree programs. Agencies included the Council on Chiropractic Education (United States), the European Council on Chiropractic Education (Europe, United Kingdom, South Africa), the Council on Chiropractic Education Australasia (Australia, New Zealand, Malaysia), and the Council on Chiropractic Education Canada (Canada). The contents of the accrediting standards were coded using a standardized coding list. A modified Delphi technique was used by 21 international experts from December 1, 2023, to April 18, 2024. After four rounds of consideration to achieve consensus, the contents were analyzed for frequency and congruence of coded items across the accrediting agencies’ standards. A two-way analysis of variance was conducted to identify if there were any differences among the accreditation agencies.

Results
Neither student competencies [F(3,8) = 0.007, p > .05] nor program standards [F(3,4) = 0.002, p > .05] differed significantly across the accrediting agencies. The statistical relationships between accreditation agencies and coding frequencies remained stable across all coded items, with no single code exhibiting differential performance depending on the accrediting body. The overall model showed R2 = 0.96 for student competencies and R2 = 0.87 for program standards; thus, the models’ predictions align with the observed data.

Conclusions
The study findings demonstrate congruence for student competencies and program standards among chiropractic accreditation agencies across multiple geographic regions. The patterns of content were stable and consistent across the four accrediting agencies, with no evidence of differential effects among the agencies. In addition, this study provides essential details and standardized codes for agencies’ documents, which may facilitate dialogue and comprehension among agencies, educators, regulators, governing officials, and other stakeholders in chiropractic education.

Aim:
To report the rate and severity of adverse events (AEs) among patients receiving services at university-based chiropractic clinical placements over a 15-year period in Western Australia.

Methods:
Patients reporting AEs were identified from an incident register between 2008 and 2023. Details of all incidents were authenticated through extracted data from patient follow-up, clinical records, clinician reports, legal, and insurer advice and were graded (1-5) based on severity.

Results and Discussion:
Chiropractic services were delivered by 921 chiropractic students and supervised by 44 registered chiropractors during the 15-year time span in metropolitan, rural, and remote locations. Among 410,957 clinical encounters (CE) comprising 349,075 treatment sessions for 61,882 unique patients, 20 mild (grade 1) clinical AEs were identified, yielding a crude incidence rate of 4.87 per 100,000 (95% CI: 2.79-7.52), or 1:20,548 clinical encounters. Signs and symptoms of AEs were acute or exacerbated low back pain, neck pain, and mid-back pain/shoulder pain. The most common presenting complaints among the patients reporting an AE were pain in 3 spinal regions.

Conclusions:
The incidence of AEs associated with chiropractic care in this population corroborates previous studies that report the rate and severity of AEs to be rare and mild.

Objective:
This scoping review aimed to map the volume (number of studies) and nature (topics and designs) of chiropractic education research and scholarly publications on chiropractic learners and programs worldwide.

Introduction:
Despite the expansion of the chiropractic profession and its recognition by entities such as the World Health Organization, a gap exists in comprehending the international landscape of chiropractic education. No prior studies have systematically mapped the volume and nature of chiropractic education research and scholarly publications. A scoping review of chiropractic education research and scholarly publications is needed to guide future policy development, research agendas, and educational initiatives within the chiropractic profession.

Inclusion criteria:
Publications in the indexed literature on chiropractic students, graduates, academics, and programs in any chiropractic education setting were included. Studies focused on chiropractic programs and education for chiropractic students or chiropractors worldwide. All research designs, literature reviews, descriptive studies, and commentaries were included.

Methods:
This scoping review was conducted according to JBI methodology for scoping reviews and was reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR). The databases PubMed (NLM), Scopus, CINAHL via EBSCOhost, Index to Chiropractic Literature, Biblioteca Virtual em Saúde, and Educational Resources Information Center were searched from their inception to November 5 and 6, 2023, with no language limits. Data were extracted for primary topics, study designs, and regions of the included documents and entered in Covidence by paired independent reviewers. The findings were organized into figures and tables with a narrative description.

Results:
The search identified 7494 documents. After deduplication, 5041 were screened for relevance, of which 667 were selected for full-text review. From these, 598 were selected for data extraction. The chiropractic education topics included values/ethical competence (n=3), personal/behavioral competence (n=34), knowledge and cognitive competence (n=49), functional and clinical competence (n=93), and program-relevant research (n=419). Most designs were quantitative (n=391), followed by descriptive reports (n=91), qualitative (n=43), mixed methods (n=40), commentaries (n=22), and literature reviews (n=11). Chiropractic education was most studied in the United States (n=359), Australia (n=116), and Canada (n=106).

Conclusions:
This scoping review reports the volume and nature of indexed publications relating to chiropractic learners and programs worldwide. This body of literature contains learner competencies in knowledge, skills, and attitudes, as well as studies about chiropractic programs. The increasing number of publications and proportion of study designs over time show that chiropractic scholars and programs are engaged in collecting, analyzing, and distributing data relevant to education and training. The map of professional competencies in the chiropractic education literature shows that the profession possesses the fundamental traits needed to contribute to the global health care workforce.

Objective

This study aimed to (1) collect and analyze statements about how to celebrate chiropractic in the present and roles that chiropractors may fulfill in the future, (2) identify if there was congruence among the themes between present and future statements, and (3) offer a model about the chiropractic profession that captures its complex relationships that encompass its interactions within microsystem, mesosystem, exosystem, and macrosystem levels.

Methods

For this qualitative analysis, we used pattern and grounded theory approaches. A purposive sample of thought leaders in the chiropractic profession were invited to answer the following 2 open-ended questions: (1) envision the chiropractor of the future, and (2) recommendations on how to celebrate chiropractic. Information was collected during April 2023 using Survey Monkey. The information was entered into a spreadsheet and analyzed for topic clusters, which resulted in matching concepts with social-ecological themes. The themes between the responses to the 2 questions were analyzed for congruence. We used the Standards for Reporting Qualitative Research to report our findings.

Results

Of the 54 experts invited, 32 (59%) participated. Authors represented 7 countries and have a median of 32 years of chiropractic experience, with a range of 5 to 51 years. Nineteen major topics in the future statements and 23 major topics in statements about celebrating chiropractic were combined in a model. The topics were presented using the 4 levels of the social-ecological framework. Individual (microsystem): chiropractors are competent, well-educated experts in spine and musculoskeletal care who apply evidence-based practices, which is a combination of the best available evidence, clinical expertise, and patient values. Interpersonal relationships (mesosystem): chiropractors serve the best interests of their patients, provide person-centered care, embrace diversity, equity, and inclusion, consider specific health needs and the health of the whole person. Community (exosystem): chiropractors provide care within integrated health care environments and in private practices, serve the best interests of the public through participation in their communities, participate through multidisciplinary collaboration with and within the health care system, and work together as a profession with a strong professional identity. Societal (macrosystem): chiropractors contribute to the greater good of society and participate on a global level in policy, leadership, and research. There was concordance between both the future envisioning statements and the present celebration recommendations, which suggest logical validity based on the congruence of these concepts.

Conclusion

A sample of independent views, including the perceptions from a broad range of chiropractic thought leaders from various backgrounds, philosophies, diversity characteristics, and world regions, were assembled to create a comprehensive model of the chiropractic profession. The resulting model shows an array of intrinsic values and provides the roles that chiropractors may provide to serve patients and the public. This study offers insights into the roles that future chiropractors may fulfill and how these are congruent with present-day values. These core concepts and this novel model may have utility during dialogs about identity, applications regarding chiropractic in policy, practice, education, and research, and building positive relationships and collaborations.

Objective: To explore Australian chiropractors' and final year students' readiness to identify and support patient's experiencing intimate partner violence (IPV). Methods: This cross-sectional study used the Chiro-PREMIS, an adaptation of the Physician Readiness to Manage Intimate Partner Violence Survey (PREMIS) to explore chiropractors' and final year students' readiness. Survey responses were analyzed through a lens of Miller's framework for developing clinical competence and chiropractic graduate competencies. Results: One hundred forty participants completed the online survey (n = 99 chiropractors and n = 41 students). Reports of practice over the 4 weeks prior to completing the survey showed 21% of chiropractors and 20% of students consulted with patients who had disclosed they were involved in IPV. Thirty-three percent of chiropractors and 27% of students suspected a patient was involved, but that patient did not disclose. Participants report meager training in IPV. Many are unclear about appropriate questioning techniques, documentation, referrals, identifying available resources, and legal literacy. Overall, participants do not "know"about IPV, they do not "know how"to and may not be able to "show how"or "do"when it comes to managing IPV-related clinical scenarios. Further studies are needed to confirm if chiropractors have the appropriate clinical capabilities. Conclusion: With proper preparation, chiropractors have an opportunity to make a positive contribution to this social problem. We anticipate chiropractic-specific discourse surrounding these escalating growing social concerns will highlight the intent of the chiropractic profession to make a substantial contribution to the health care of the Australian public. More studies are needed.

The current Australian guidelines and standards for the management of spinal pain (low back and neck) need to be updated to reflect best available evidence and protect the public.


Opioids have been demonstrated to be clinically ineffective in the treatment of acute back and neck pain and have the potential to cause serious harm or even death. Despite this, current Australian guidelines still recommend their use. A recent randomised controlled trial that ran over six years (The OPAL study) found that opioids are less effective than placebo, with patients in the placebo group reporting significantly lower pain scores compared to the opioid group after one year. Additionally, the study revealed a higher risk of misuse among individuals who received opioids in the trial.


This paper argues for urgent action to update Australian standards and guidelines to explicitly prioritise non-pharmacological management of acute and chronic spinal pain, thus aligning with international guidelines and standards. The implications for chiropractors are discussed, emphasising their role in providing drug-free approaches to spinal pain management.

Objective

The purpose of this study was to identify and compare the research priorities of Australian practicing chiropractors and academics across listed research domains and to seek their views on existing chiropractic research strategies. Concurrent objectives were to gain insight into the perspectives on characteristics of research and solicit ideas and suggestions for future research from both groups.

Methods

This study used a mixed-method research design to collect data using an online survey portal. Australian chiropractic academics (n = 220) and practicing chiropractors who were also members of a nationally representative, practice-based research network database (n = 1680) were invited to participate. Data were collected (February 19, 2019, to May 24, 2019). The free-text data were analyzed primarily via semantic coding and verbatim referential units in cases where the category was an exact match for the textual data. Content analyses of the qualitative data were presented in a tabulated and narrative manner as identified domains. Selected representative examples were provided verbatim.

Results

The response rate for the survey was 44% for full-time equivalent academics, 8% for casuals and part-time chiropractic academics, and 21.5% for Australian Chiropractic Research Network database chiropractic practitioners. Open-text data comprised a narrower focus on musculoskeletal (MSK) conditions and opposition or reservations by academics and some practitioners toward the research agenda of those espousing traditional concepts and terminology. Comments from both groups illustrate the strongly held views that characterize divergent factions of the chiropractic profession. Some practitioners were highly critical of the narrow focus and epistemological paradigm of Australian university-based research, while others were strongly supportive of the traditional focus of the Australian Spinal Research Foundation. Australian academics at the 4 university-based programs held the view that MSK and spinal pain, for which some evidence already exists, should be the priority of future research, building on what is known. Practitioners believed that future research should be directed toward expanded areas such as basic science, younger populations, and non-MSK conditions. Respondents were sharply divided on attitudes toward traditional chiropractic terminology, concepts, and philosophy and the utility of future research on these topics.

Conclusion

Our qualitative findings suggest there is a division in the Australian chiropractic profession regarding research direction and priorities. This divide exists between academics and researchers and within field practitioners. This study highlights the attitudes, opinions, and perceptions of important stakeholder groups, which should be considered by decision-makers when formulating research policy, strategy, and prioritization of funding.

Objective: To build upon existing recommendations on best practices for chiropractic management of children by conducting a formal consensus process and best evidence synthesis.

Design: Best practice guide based on recommendations from current best available evidence and formal consensus of a panel of experienced practitioners, consumers, and experts for chiropractic management of pediatric patients.

Methods: Synthesis of results of a literature search to inform the development of recommendations from a multidisciplinary steering committee, including experts in pediatrics, followed by a formal Delphi panel consensus process.

Results: The consensus process was conducted June to August 2022. All 60 panelists completed the process and reached at least 80% consensus on all recommendations after three Delphi rounds. Recommendations for best practices for chiropractic care for children addressed these aspects of the clinical encounter: patient communication, including informed consent; appropriate clinical history, including health habits; appropriate physical examination procedures; red flags/contraindications to chiropractic care and/or spinal manipulation; aspects of chiropractic management of pediatric patients, including infants; modifications of spinal manipulation and other manual procedures for pediatric patients; appropriate referral and comanagement; and appropriate health promotion and disease prevention practices.

Conclusion: This set of recommendations represents a general framework for an evidence-informed and reasonable approach to the management of pediatric patients by chiropractors.

In 2019, Safer Care Victoria (SCV) conducted a government-funded inquiry into the practice of spinal manipulation (SMT) of children under 12 years of age by chiropractors. SCV assembled an advisory panel, commissioned a Cochrane Collaboration Review, and invited submissions from consumers, health practitioners, insurers, education institutions, professional organizations, and interested stakeholders.

The report's principal findings were that while spinal manipulation of children results in very rare instances of harm, since evidence of the effectiveness of SMT is lacking, SMT cannot be recommended for children under 12 for a list of conditions or for general wellness.

Objective The purpose of this study was to explore the research priorities of Australian practicing chiropractors and academics across a set of research domains to determine the agreement or disagreement based on these domains. Methods We conducted a pilot-tested online survey focusing on the following 5 principal research domains: basic science, conditions (disorders chiropractors may encounter), patient subgroups, clinical interventions, and practice and public health/health services. Responses were sought regarding support for funding research scholarships, practice-based research networks, scientific conferences/symposia, journals, and existing research agendas. Data were collected (February 19 to May 24, 2019) from a sample of chiropractic academics (n1 = 33) representing 4 Australian programs and practicing chiropractors (n2 = 340). Collected data were ranked and analyzed to determine agreement across domains and items. Results There was agreement between the 2 groups across the majority (>90%) of domain items. The closest agreement and highest rankings were achieved for the “clinical interventions and practice” and “conditions” domains. Disagreement was observed within specific domain items, such as patient subgroups (infants), and for 1 intervention (chiropractic-specific techniques). Disagreement also occurred outside of the main domains, including research agenda support and funding. Conclusions There was overall agreement between practicing chiropractors and academics across most research area domain items, which should help facilitate consensus-led development of any potential Australian Chiropractic research agenda. Disagreements across specific domain items, such as population subgroups, interventions, and funding require further investigation.