Category: Advanced

  • Tissue Healing and Low Level Laser Therapy

    Tissue Healing and Low Level Laser Therapy

    The 2010 Olympic gold-medal downhill skier Lindsey Vonn was recently (March 8, 2010) interviewed in the magazine Time. Lindsey Vonn was the first American woman to win gold in an Olympic downhill, and she did so while being injured. One of the questions posed to her was:

    “How did you find the strength to ski with an injury?”

    Her response was, in part:

    “It’s been a real challenge for me to be able to ski well despite this injury. I’ve been doing as much therapy as I can.”

    “And I do laser therapy and massage.”

    •••••

    The healing of injured musculoskeletal tissue is primarily done by the formation of a protein patch. The primary repair protein is the connective tissue collagen. The primary cell that creates the collagen repair is the connective tissue fibrocyte cell.

    Healing of injured musculoskeletal tissues takes place in three specific phases. A review of these phases is as follows (Kellett 1986):

    The first phase is called the acute inflammatory phase. This phase will last approximately 72 hours. After the initial injury, an electrical current is generated at the wound, called the “current of injury.” This “current of injury” attracts fibroblasts to the wound (Oschman, 2000). During this phase there is also initial bleeding and continual associated inflammation of the injured tissues. Because of the increasing inflammatory cascade during this period of time, it is not uncommon for the patient to feel worse for each of the first three days following injury. Because there is disruption of local vascular supplies, there is insufficient availability of substrate (glucose, oxygen, etc.) to produce large enough quantities of ATP energy to initiate collagen protein synthesis to repair the wound.

    After about 72 hours following injury, the damaged blood vessels have repaired. The resulting increased availability of glucose and oxygen elevates local ATP levels and collagen repair begins by the fibroblasts that accumulated during the acute inflammatory phase. This second phase of healing is called the phase of regeneration. During the regeneration phase the disruption in the injured muscles and ligaments is bridged. This phase will last approximately 6-8 weeks (Jackson, 1977). At the end of 6-8 weeks, the gap in the torn tissues is more than 90% bridged.

    There is a third and final phase of healing. This phase is called the phase of remodeling. The phase of remodeling starts near the end of the phase of regeneration. During the phase of remodeling the collagen protein glues that have been laid down for repair are remodeled in the direction of stress and strain. This means that the fibers in the tissue will become stronger, and will change their orientation from an irregular pattern to a more regular pattern, a pattern more like the original undamaged tissues.

    stages of healing following soft tissue injury

    It is established that remodeling takes place as a direct byproduct of motion. Traditional chiropractic management of injured musculoskeletal tissues involves the application of controlled motion into those tissues and joints. Consequently, chiropractic management has its greatest influence on the third phase of healing, the phase of remodeling. This is reflected in the studies that show that chiropractic spinal adjusting (specific directional manipulation) achieves its greatest clinical improvement in patients that are suffering from chronic problems and who have failed to achieve an acceptable clinical outcome from other approaches to management (Kirkaldy-Willis 1985, Meade 1990, Woodward 1996, Khan 1999, Giles 2003). The important question for this discussion is this:

    Is there a safe, effective approach to enhance the timing and quality of musculoskeletal healing that targets the second phase of the response, the phase of regeneration?

    Key to this discussion, and it is important to restate, is that ATP energy is required to synthesize repair proteins. In 1997, Douglas Wallace wrote an article for Scientific American titled “Mitochondrial DNA In Aging and Disease.” In this article, he notes that an intracellular organelle, the mitochondria, is the power plant of cells because it produces ATP energy. “Mitochondria provide about 90% of the energy that cells, and thus tissues, organs and the body as a whole, need to function.” Every cell in the body contains hundreds of mitochondria that produce the energy that the body requires.

    Synthesizing repair proteins occurs primarily in the phase of regeneration. Attachment of a single amino acid onto the string of amino acids that will become a protein requires the availability and expenditure of 4 ATP molecules (Champe 1994). Also, additional ATP molecules are required for both initiation and termination of the amino acid chain synthesis. The development of repair proteins is limited by the availability of ATP energy.

    A summary of the genesis of ATP energy is as follows:

    • The two variable but absolute substances required for ATP genesis are glucose and oxygen.

    • Without adequate oxygen the cytoplasm of the cell can produce 2 ATP molecules per glucose molecule. This is called anaerobic glycolosis. Aerobic life cannot be sustained through the anaerobically derived quantity of ATP energy.

    • With oxygen, additional ATP energy is formed in an intracellular organelle called the mitochondria.

    • With adequate oxygen, the mitochondrial Kreb’s Cycle can produce 2 more ATP molecules per original glucose molecule. Simultaneously, the Kreb’s Cycle is generating the all important electron transport proteins, which are shunted to the inner membrane of the mitochondria, know as the electron transport system (chain).

    • The electron transport chain of the mitochondria produces the majority of ATP molecules, an astonishing 34 per glucose molecule. Function and efficiency of the electron transport chain is also oxygen dependent.

    On the following page, a summary of these steps is graphically represented:

    image explained above

    image explained above

    Things that compromise the synthesis of ATP energy will impair healing. As an example, smoking cigarettes. The carbon monoxide in cigarette smoke has a greater affinity for hemoglobin than does oxygen. Smoking reduces the delivery of oxygen to the cells, impairing both the Kreb’s Cycle and electron transport chain genesis of ATP energy. Consequently, smokers heal more slowly and less completely. They suffer from accelerated tissue degradation and degeneration as a consequence of reduced ability to replicate proteins.

    In contrast, things that enhance tissue oxygenation will enhance the genesis of ATP energy, in turn enhancing the genesis of repair proteins. Some examples of this include:

    • Yogi breathing exercises (Weil 1996).

    Improved breathing results in improved tissue oxygenation, improving the genesis of mitochondrial (Kreb’s Cycle and electron transport chain) ATP, enhancing the timing and the quality of the genesis of repair proteins, accelerating healing.

    • Being aerobically fit.

    The number of mitochondria one has per cell is not a constant, it is a variable. The more aerobically fit one is the more mitochondria one will have per cell. The more mitochondria one has, the more efficient one is at utilizing glucose and oxygen in generating mitochondrial (Kreb’s Cycle and electron transport chain) ATP energy. More ATP enhances the timing and the quality of the genesis of repair proteins, accelerating healing.

    There is another variable controlling the mitochondrial genesis of ATP energy that is becoming increasingly noticed and documented in the National Library of Medicine literature database: it is an enzyme called:

    cytochrome c oxidase

    The cytochrome c oxidase enzyme is a terminal enzyme of the mitochondrial electron transport chain. In fact, it is the rate-limiting enzyme in the production of ATP energy by the electron transport system. Upregulating or increasing the activity of the cytochrome c oxidase will proportionally increase the genesis of ATP energy. How can the treating doctor upregulate or increase the activity of the cytochrome c oxidase enzyme? A portion of the answer is the understanding that “chrome” pertains to color. The remainder of the answer is Low Level Laser Therapy.

    Laser light is different than background environmental light. In the electromagnetic spectrum, visible background environmental light exists between wavelengths of about 400 – 800 nanometers (nm). Different wavelengths will produce different colors. As examples, 410 nm is a blue color, 535 nm is a green color, and 635 nm is a red color. Background environmental light is a combination of all wavelengths, and therefore of all colors. Laser light is monochromatic. This means laser light is of a single wavelength and therefore a single color. Laser eliminates all wavelengths but one.

    Background environmental light is also scattered, meaning the light is spread in all directions. In contrast, laser light is coherent. This means that the light is not scattered. All of the light waves are brought to a single point.

    As a consequence of laser light’s monochromatism and coherency, laser light can elicit interesting biological and physiological responses.

    In the understanding of low level laser physiology, it is important to restate that the primary producer of ATP energy is the electron transport system of the mitochondria. The inner membrane of the mitochondria contains 4 protein complexes called the respiratory chain. Electrons from food pass through these protein complexes with the help of Coenzyme Q10, interacting with oxygen and hydrogen to produce water and ATP energy.

    As the respiratory chain participates in ATP energy production, toxic by-products known as oxygen free radicals are generated. These free radicals can attack all components of cells, including respiratory chain proteins and mitochondrial DNA. Anything that impedes the flow of electrons through the respiratory chain can increase their transfer to oxygen molecules and promote the generation of free radicals. Importantly, anything that improves the flow of electrons through the respiratory chain will increases the production of ATP while reducing the generation of free radicals.

    Tiina Karu, PhD, is the world’s leading authority on low level laser therapy. Dr. Karu is Head of the Laboratory of Laser Biology and Medicine, Institute on Laser and Informatic Technologies of the Russian Academy of Science. Dr. Karu holds two PhD’s; one in Science and Biophysics, and another in Photochemistry. Pertaining to laser biophysics and laser physiology, Dr. Karu has authored 3 books, 16 book chapters, and 146 journal articles.

    Dr. Karu wrote “Low-Power Laser Therapy” in Biomedical Photonics Handbook, in 2003. She notes that low-level laser therapy probably works because the laser light is absorbed by the mitochondria photoreceptors, which enhances cellular metabolism. This means the mitochondria produce more ATP as a result of exposure to laser light. She notes that the primary reaction of laser light is in the mitochondria, which results in increased ATP energy. Dr. Karu states:

    “The mechanism of low-power laser therapy at the cellular level is based on the increase of oxidative metabolism of mitochondria, which is caused by electronic excitation of components of the respiratory chain.”

    “It is known that even small changes in ATP level can significantly alter cellular metabolism.”

    “Our results also provide evidence that various wavelengths (670, 632.8, and 820 nm) can be used for increasing respiratory activity.”

    “The photobiological action mechanism via activation of the respiratory chain is a universal mechanism” [for laser light effects].

    In 2007, Dr. Karu wrote a book titled:

    Ten Lectures on Basic Science of Laser Phototherapy

    This book is perhaps the most detailed accounting of the biological and physiological basis for low-level laser therapy published to date. Dr. Karu reviews how laser radiation can modulate cell metabolism through the mediation of a universal photoreceptor, the cytochrome c oxidase enzyme. Once again, the cytochrome c oxidase enzyme is the enzyme that catalyzes the final step in the mitochondrial respiratory chain, thereby becoming the rate-limiting step in the genesis of ATP energy. In this book, Dr. Karu makes the following points:

    Cytochrome c oxidase plays a central role in the bioenergetics of the cell.”

    “It is well known that it is only in the ideal case where the supply of electrons from cytochrome c oxidase is unlimited that electrons are always present to reduce oxygen,” thus maximizing production of ATP and minimizing production of oxygen free radicals.

    “One of the most important biological mechanisms [for low level laser therapy is] based on activation/upgrading of the terminal enzyme of the mitochondrial respiratory chain, cytochrome c oxidase, is shown to be a universal mechanism controlling many aspects of the metabolism in different types of [laser] irradiated cells.”

    “The activation of cells via the mitochondria is suggested to be a universal photobiological mechanism.”

    “Laser phototherapy is used by physiotherapists (to treat a wide variety of acute and chronic musculoskeletal aches and pains), by dentists (to treat inflamed oral tissues and to heal diverse ulceration), by dermatologists (to treat edema, indolent ulcers, burns, and dermatitis), by rheumatologists (to relieve pain and treat chronic inflammation and autoimmune diseases), and by other specialists, as well as by general practitioners. Laser phototherapy is also widely used in veterinary medicine (especially in racehorse-training centers) and in sports medicine and rehabilitation clinics (to reduce acute swelling and hematoma, relieve pain, improve mobility, and treat acute soft-tissue injuries.”

    •••••

    Another reference text pertaining to low-level laser therapy was published in 2002 by Jan Turner and Lars Hode, titled:

    Laser Therapy Clinical Practice and Scientific Background

    This book contains 1,281 references. These authors note:

    1) “Today, we can safely say that therapeutic lasers have an important biological effect, and a very positive one at that.”

    2) “We believe that lasers have a tremendous and as yet untapped potential in the field of healthcare.”

    3) “Therapeutic lasers have no undesirable side effects in the hands of a reasonably qualified therapist.”

    4) Lasers are “sterile, painless, and often less expensive than methods already in use,” and does not have side effects as does pharmacotherapy.

    5) “Laser therapy of wounds is ideal, since it promotes healing and reduces pain at the same time.”

    6) Laser light increases the cell’s ATP energy.

    In their text, Turner and Hode note that the first company to receive a 510(k) market clearance from the Federal Drug Administration (FDA) was a US company, Erchonia Laser. This occurred in 2002. There are now (as of March 28, 2010) 7 FDA market clearances for low-level laser therapy, Erchonia obtaining 5 of the 7. Erchonia is located in McKinney, TX, and they can be contacted at phone number (214) 544-2227 or web address www.erchonia.com.

    •••••

    A recent (March 28, 2010) search of the National Library of Medicine database using the PubMed search engine and the words “low-level laser therapy” brought up 2,204 titles. Two representative articles pertaining to low level laser therapy and tissue healing are reviewed below:

    Effects of Helium-Neon Laser on Levels of Stress Protein and Arthritic Histopathology in Experimental Osteoarthritis

    American Journal of Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation

    October 2004, 83(10):758-765

    Lin, Yueh-Shuang MS; Huang, Mao-Hsiung MD, PhD; Chai, Chee-Yin MD, PhD; Yang, Rei-Cheng MD, PhD

    In this study, researchers injured the knees of 42 rats giving them arthritis. Twenty-one of the rats were given 632 nm low-level laser (red color), applied over the arthritic knee for 15 minutes, three times per week, for 8 weeks; the other 21 rats were not similarly exposed. The results showed a marked repair of arthritic cartilage in the lased rats, but not in the non-lased group. The authors concluded that the 632 nm low-power laser enhances protein production in arthritic joints and repairs the arthritic cartilage.

    These authors also note: Laser is “thought to cause electronic excitation of the photoacceptor molecules, which are thought to be various cytochrome enzymes that are terminal electron carriers in the respiratory chain.” This is thought to accelerate electron transfer. “Electron transport in the mitochondrial membrane is one of the main fueling mechanisms underpinning metabolism and proliferation of cells, including generation of adenosine triphosphate (ATP).” “Low-level laser mediated increase in efficiency of the electron carriers in the respiratory chain would increase generation of adenosine triphosphate, which could manifest itself as increased DNA and protein synthesis and result in cell proliferation, as shown in present study.”

    In summary, and consistent with the explanations above, these researchers credited the outcomes of this animal study to laser driven excitation of the cytochrome enzyme terminal electron carriers of the mitochondrial respiratory chain, increasing ATP synthesis and enhancing repair protein production.

    •••••

    Therapeutic low powered lasers are commercially available in many different wavelengths and power outputs. It appears clear that there is no one wavelength that is ideal for all appropriately treated clinical syndromes. Few studies compare the outcome of different wavelengths and exposure fluences on measured outcomes. However, the second reviewed article did just that:

    Comparative Study Using 685-nm and 830-nm Lasers in the Tissue Repair of Tenotomized Tendons in the Mouse

    Photomedicine and Laser Surgery

    December 2006, Volume 24, Number 6, pp. 754–758

    Carrinho PM, Renno ACM, Koeke P, Salate ACB, Parizotto NA, Vidal BC

    In this study, the authors compared the tissue repair of injured mouse tendons when treated with either a 685 nm laser or an 830 nm laser, each at fluences of both 3 J/cm2 and 10 J/cm2. This study used 48 mice that were divided into six experimental groups:

    Group A, tenomized animals, treated with 685 nm laser, at the dosage of

    3 J/cm2.

    Group B, tenomized animals, treated with 685-nm laser, at the dosage of

    10 J/cm2.

    Group C, tenomized animals, treated with 830-nm laser, at dosage of 3 J/cm2.

    Group D, tenomized animals, treated with 830-nm laser, at dosage of 10 J/cm2.

    Group E, injured control (placebo treatment).

    Group F, non-injured standard control.

    Laser irradiation started 24 hours after the tenotomy of the Achilles tendon. A total of 12 laser sessions were performed on consecutive days. The rats were killed on day 13, and the injured tendons were surgically removed and analyzed with polarized light microscopy to analyze the organization and molecular order of the collagen fibers. All laser treated groups showed improved healing when compared to injured control group. The best organization and aggregation of the collagen bundles was shown by the animals of group A (685 nm, 3 J/cm2), followed by the animals of group C (830 nm, 3 J/cm2), and B (685 nm, 10 J/cm2), and finally, the animals of group D (830 nm, 10 J/cm2). The authors concluded:

    “All wavelengths and fluences used in this study were efficient at accelerating the healing process of Achilles tendon post-tenotomy, particularly after the 685-nm laser irradiation, at 3 J/cm2. It suggests the existence of wavelength tissue specificity and dose dependency.”

    Interestingly, in this study, the shorter wavelength was associated with the better healing outcome. Counterintuitively, lesser exposure to laser irradiation resulted in an improved healing outcome than higher doses of exposure. These authors note:

    “The better tissue response was observed after the irradiation with the 685-nm laser, at the dosage of 3 J/ cm2.”

    “The animals irradiated with the 830-nm laser, at the dosage of 10 J/ cm2 presented the weaker response to laser irradiation.”

    “The best tissue response was obtained after the 685-nm laser irradiation, at the dosage of 3 J/cm2.”

    Specifically, the 685-nm laser irradiation at 3 J/cm2 showed (the shortest of the compared wavelengths and the lowest amount of irriadence):

    16% improved tendon healing over the 830-nm laser at 3 J/cm2.

    33% improved tendon healing over the 685-nm laser at 10 J/cm2.

    54% improved tendon healing over the 830-nm laser at 10 J/cm2.

    Compared to the control tendons, the improved tissue response was as follows:

    101% improved tissue response with the 830-nm laser at 10 J/cm2.

    114% improved tissue response with 685-nm laser at 10 J/cm2

    167% improved tissue response with the 830-nm laser at 3 J/cm2.

    208% improved tissue response with 685-nm laser irradiation at 3 J/cm2

    These authors concluded:

    “Our results suggest that laser irradiation produced an increase of cell proliferation through changes in mitochondrial physiology, subsequently affecting RNA synthesis, which, in turn, alters the expression of various cell regulatory proteins.”

    •••••

    In summary, the evidence suggests that low level laser therapy targets the mitochondrial enzyme that is the rate-limiting factor in the production of ATP energy, the cytochrome c oxidase enzyme. The increased production of ATP energy allows the DNA to enhance the replication of repair proteins, accelerating healing and improving symptoms. Since lasers can achieve this without side effects or risks, low-level laser therapy is here to stay. As a consequence, many chiropractors now incorporate low level laser therapy as a component of their patient clinical management, especially of injured patients.

    References:

    Audesirk T, Audesirk G. Biology, Life on Earth Sixth Edition, Prentice Hall 2002.

    Carrinho PM, Renno ACM, Koeke P, Salate ACB, Parizotto NA, Vidal BC; Comparative Study Using 685-nm and 830-nm Lasers in the Tissue Repair of Tenotomized Tendons in the Mouse; Photomedicine and Laser Surgery; December 2006, Volume 24, Number 6, pp. 754–758.

    Champe PC, Havey RA. Lippincott’s Illustrated Reviews: Biochemistry, Second Edition, Lippincoll Eilliams & Wilkins, 1994.

    Giles LGF, Muller R. Chronic Spinal Pain: A Randomized Clinical Trial Comparing Medication, Acupuncture, and Spinal Manipulation. Spine. July 15, 2003; 28(14):1490-1502.

    Jackson, R. The Cervical Syndrome, Fourth Edition, Thomas, 1977.

    Karu T. “Low-Power Laser Therapy” Chapter 48 in Biomedical Photonics Handbook, Tuan Vo-Dinh, CRS Press, 2003.

    Karu T. Ten Lectures on Basic Science of Laser Phototherapy. Prima Books

    2007.

    Kellett, John, “Acute soft tissue injuries-a review of the literature,” Medicine and Science of Sports and Exercise, American College of Sports Medicine, Vol. 18 No.5, (1986), pp 489-500.

    Khan S, Cook J, Gargan MF, Bannister GC. A symptomatic classification of whiplash injury and the implications for treatment. The Journal of Orthopaedic Medicine 21(l) 1999, 22-25.

    Kirkaldy-Willis, W.H., M.D., & Cassidy, J.D., “Spinal Manipulation in the Treatment of Low-Back Pain,” Canadian Family Physician, (1985), 31:535-40.

    Lin, Yueh-Shuang MS; Huang, Mao-Hsiung MD, PhD; Chai, Chee-Yin MD, PhD; Yang, Rei-Cheng MD, PhD, Effects of Helium-Neon Laser on Levels of Stress Protein and Arthritic Histopathology in Experimental Osteoarthritis. American Journal of Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation. 83(10):758-765, October 2004.

    Meade TW, Dyer S, Browne W, Townsend J, Frank AO. Low back pain of mechanical origin: Randomized comparison of chiropractic and hospital outpatient treatment. British Medical Journal. Volume 300, JUNE 2, 1990, pp. 1431-7.

    Oschman, James L, Energy Medicine: The Scientific Basis, Churchill Livingstone, 2000.

    Turner J, Hode L, Laser Therapy Clinical Practice and Scientific Background, Prima Books, 2002.

    Wallace D, Scientific American, Mitochondrial DNA In Aging and Disease, Scientific American, August 1997.

    Weil A. Spontaneous Healing. Ballantine Books, 1996.

    Woodward NM, Cook JHC, Gargan MF, Bannister GC. Chiropractic treatment of chronic ‘whiplash’ injuries. Injury. Volume 27, Issue 9, November 1996, Pages 643-645.

  • Chronic Non-Specific Low Back Pain

    Chronic Non-Specific Low Back Pain

    The headlines in the lay press are troubling and disturbing. A front section full-page in the newspaper Wall Street Journal showing a person clenching their back while proclaiming (1):

    “More Than 100 Million American Adults Live with Chronic Pain”

    Another cover study in the Wall Street Journal quantifying the anatomical regions for American’s chronic pain (2):

    Hip Pain 07.1%

    Finger Pain 07.6%

    Shoulder Pain 09.0%

    Neck Pain 15.1%

    Severe Headache 16.1%

    Knee Pain 19.5%

    Lower-Back Pain 28.1%

    An editorial discussion in the newspaper USA Today, referencing the Institutes of Medicine of the United States noting (3):

     “One hundred sixteen million Americans suffer from chronic pain, costing the US up to $635 billion in treatment and lost productivity. Chronic pain even increases the risk of depression and suicide.”

    These appalling numbers indicate that more than a third of all Americans, and more than half of American adults, suffer from chronic daily pain. More than a quarter of this chronic pain is located in the low back.

    ••••••••••

    For decades, conventional wisdom pertaining to Low Back Pain (LBP) has been that the great majority (90%) of this pain will resolve quickly (within two months) with no treatment or with any form of treatment. This “wisdom” became entrenched in the minds of health care providers, insurance companies, government bodies and practice guidelines after it was succinctly stated by the exceptional spine care pioneer Alf Nachemson, MD, PhD, in the debut issue of the journal SPINE in 1976. Dr. Nachemson stated (4):

     “Irrespective of treatment given, 70% of [back pain] patients get well within 3 weeks, 90% within 2 months.”

    A few years later (1979 first edition, 1990 second edition), the authoritative reference text Clinical Biomechanics of the Spine, is published (5). Written by Harvard’s Augustus White, MD, and Yale’s Manohar Panjabi, PhD, the text reiterates Dr. Nachemson’s message, stating:

    “There are few diseases [low back pain] in which one is assured improvement of 70% of the patients in 3 weeks and 90% of the patients in two months, regardless of the type of treatment employed.”

    Therefore, “it is possible to build an argument for withholding treatment.”

    This “quick recovery regardless of treatment conventional wisdom” pertaining to low back pain was fervently challenged in 1998 by Peter R. Croft, PhD, and colleagues. Dr. Croft is a Professor of Primary Care Epidemiology at KeeleUniversity in Staffordshire, UK. Dr. Croft and colleagues published their work in 1998 in the British Medical Journal in an article titled (6):

    Outcome of Low back Pain in General Practice:

    A Prospective Study

    These authors evaluated the statistics on the natural history of low back pain, noting that it is widely believed that 90% of episodes of low back pain seen in general practice resolve within one month. They consequently investigated this claim by prospectively following 463 cases of acute low back pain for a year.

    These researchers discovered that 92% of these low back pain subjects ceased to consult their primary physician about their low back symptoms within three months of onset; they were no longer going to their doctor for low back pain treatment. Yet, most of them still had substantial low back pain and related disability. Only 25% of the subjects who consulted about low back pain had fully recovered 12 months later; 75% had progressed to chronic low back pain sufferers, but they were no longer going to their doctor!

    This study is adamant that NOT seeing a doctor for a back problem does NOT mean that the back problem has resolved. This study showed that 75% of the patients with a new episode of low back pain have continued pain and disability a year later, even though most are not continuing to go to the doctor. They conclude that the belief that 90% of episodes of low back pain seen in general practice resolve within one month is false.

    The belief that most low back pain episodes will be “short lived and that ‘80-90% of attacks of low back pain recover in about six weeks, irrespective of the administration or type of treatment’” is untrue, false. Many patients seeing their general practitioner for the first time in an episode of back pain will still have pain or disability 12 months later but will not be consulting their doctor about it. Low back pain should be viewed as a chronic problem with an untidy pattern of grumbling symptoms and periods of relative freedom from pain and disability interspersed with acute episodes, exacerbations, and recurrences.

    Important quotes from this article include:

     “It is generally believed that most of these episodes [of low back pain] will be short lived and that ‘80-90% of attacks of low back pain recover in about six weeks, irrespective of the administration or type of treatment.’”

     “By three months after the [initial] consultation with their general practitioner, only a minority of patients with low back pain had recovered.”

     “There was little increase in the proportion who reported recovery by 12 months, emphasizing the recurrent and persistent nature of this [low back pain] problem.”

     “The findings of our interview study are in sharp contrast to the frequently repeated assumption that 90% of episodes of low back pain seen in primary care will have resolved within a month.”

     “However, the results of our consultation figures are consistent with the interpretation that 90% of patients presenting in primary care with an episode of low back pain will have stopped consulting about this problem within three months of their initial visit.”

     “The inference that the patients have completely recovered [because they have stopped going to the doctor] is clearly not supported by our data.”

     “We should stop characterizing low back pain in terms of a multiplicity of acute problems, most of which get better, and a small number of chronic long term problems. Low back pain should be viewed as a chronic problem with an untidy pattern of grumbling symptoms and periods of relative freedom from pain and disability interspersed with acute episodes, exacerbations, and recurrences. This takes account of two consistent observations about low back pain: firstly, a previous episode of low back pain is the strongest risk factor for a new episode, and, secondly, by the age of 30 years almost half the population will have experienced a substantive episode of low back pain. These figures simply do not fit with claims that 90% of episodes of low back pain end in complete recovery.”

    ••••••••••

    In 2003, Lise Hestbaek, DC, PhD, and colleagues from the University of Southern Denmark published a study in the European Spine Journal, titled (7):

    Low back pain: what is the long-term course? A review of studies of general patient populations

    These authors performed a comprehensive review of the literature on this topic, noting “it is often claimed that up to 90% of low back pain (LBP) episodes resolve spontaneously within 1 month.” They used 36 articles that met their criteria. The tabulated results showed that on average 62% (range 42-75%) still experienced pain after 12 months. The authors concluded:

     “The overall picture is that LBP does not resolve itself when ignored.”

     “The overall picture is clearly that LBP is not a self-limiting condition. There is no evidence supporting the claim that 80– 90% of LBP patients become pain free within 1 month.”

    ••••••••••

    Ronald Donelson, MD, is a Board Certified Orthopedic Surgeon and the current Vice President of the American Back Society. Dr. Donelson is associated with the State University of New Youk, in Syracuse. In 2102, Dr. Donelson and colleagues published a study in the journal Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, titled (8):

    Is It Time to Rethink the Typical Course of Low Back Pain?

    The purpose of this study was to determine the frequency and the characteristics of low back pain (LBP) recurrences by asking these questions:

    1) Are low back pain (LBP) recurrences common?

    2) Do episodes worsen with multiple recurrences?

    Questionnaires were given to 589 LBP patients from 30 clinical practices (primary care [7%], physical therapy [67%], chiropractic [19%], and surgical spine [7%]) in North America and Europe. The results were:

    1) Are low back pain (LBP) recurrences common?: [rounded]

    73% had suffered a previous episode of LBP

    54% had experienced ≥10 episodes of prior LBP in their lifetime

    20% had experienced >50 episodes of prior LBP in their lifetime

    27% with a previous episode of LBP had 5 or more episodes of LBP per year

    2) Do LBP episodes worsen with multiple recurrences?: [rounded]

    61% reported in the affirmative

    Dr. Donelson and colleagues are critical of clinical practice guidelines that characterize the typical course of LBP as benign and favorable, stating:

     “It is often stated that LBP is normal; has an excellent prognosis, with 90% of individuals recovering within 3 months of onset in most cases; and is not debilitating over the long term. One guideline states that recovery usually takes place within as little as 6 weeks.”

     “Acute LBP is perceived as largely self-limiting and requiring little if any formal treatment. This benign view justifies what has become the standard clinical guideline recommendation that clinicians often need do nothing more than simply reassure patients that they will likely recover.”

     “In any one year, recurrences, exacerbations, and persistence dominate the experience of low back pain in the community. This clinical picture is very different from what is typically portrayed as the natural history of LBP in most clinical guidelines.”

    They note that few clinicians realize that this positive recovery prognosis was derived from flawed protocols:

    1) When patients with LBP did not return for follow-up assessment, the researchers assumed that the patients had recovered. It is now known that the failure of a patient with acute LBP to return to the same doctor “does not necessarily indicate recovery.” “A patient’s disappearance from the practice is a poor proxy for recovery.” When persistent LBP does not respond to a doctor’s care, the patient tends to drop out of care.

    2) A number of studies used the “ability to return to work” as a proxy for recovery, even if the patient has substantial low back pain.

    Dr. Donelson and colleagues note:

     “Recurrences of back pain are widely recognized as common, reported as occurring in 60%-73% of individuals within 1 year after recovery from an acute episode.”

    “Consistent with many other published studies, the recurrence rate among our respondents with LBP was 73%.”

     “Most persistent disabling back pain is preceded by episodes that, although they may resolve completely, may also increase in severity and duration over time.”

     “Many patients with chronic LBP had prior recurrent episodes that had become longer and more severe until the most recent episode did not resolve and thus became chronic.”

     “The conventional view of the natural history of acute LBP is that it is self-limiting and that 90% of patients experiencing LBP recover within 90 days or less, but there is no evidence to suggest that either of these statements is accurate. In reality, the recovery rates reported in population studies and in our survey data are far less optimistic.”

     “Collectively, our findings, and those of other studies, indicate that it may be inaccurate to characterize LBP as having an excellent prognosis. Recurrences are frequent and are often progressively worse over time. Recovery from acute LBP is not as favorable as is routinely portrayed.”

     “Eventually, there may be no recovery, and the underlying condition may become chronically painful. In light of these characteristics, it seems inappropriate to characterize the natural history of LBP as benign and favorable.”

    ••••••••••

    In 2013, Coen J. Itz, PhD, and colleagues from the Department of Health Service Research, MaastrichtUniversity, The Netherlands, published a study in the European Journal of Pain, titled (9):

    Clinical Course of Non-Specific Low Back Pain: A Systematic Review of Prospective Cohort Studies set in Primary Care

    Dr. Itz and colleagues performed a systematic literature review investigating the clinical course of pain in patients with non-specific acute low back pain that obtained treatment in primary care. All included studies were prospective studies, with follow-up of at least 12 months. Proportions of patients still reporting pain during follow-up were pooled. A total of 11 studies were eligible for evaluation. In the first 3 months, recovery was observed in 33% of patients, but the pooled proportion of patients still reporting pain after 1 year was 71%. These authors state:

     “Non-specific low back pain is a relatively common and recurrent condition for which at present there is no effective cure.”

     “In current guidelines, the prognosis of acute non-specific back pain is assumed to be favorable.”

    These authors conclude:

     “The findings of this review indicate that the assumption that spontaneous recovery occurs in a large majority of patients is not justified.”

    Importantly, these authors emphasize that there should be more focus on intensive follow-up of patients who have not recovered within the first 3 months following an episode of acute low back pain.

    ••••••••••

    Kate Dunn, PhD, is an epidemiologist working at the Arthritis Research UK Primary Care Centre, KeeleUniversity, Staffordshire, UK. In 2013, Dr Dunn and colleagues published a study in the journal Best Practice & Research Clinical Rheumatology, titled (10):

    Low Back Pain Across the Life Course

    Dr. Dunn and colleagues note that people with pain continue to have it on and off for years. They state:

     “Back pain episodes are traditionally regarded as individual events, but this model is currently being challenged in favor of treating back pain as a long-term or lifelong condition. Back pain can be present throughout life, from childhood to older age, and evidence is mounting that pain experience is maintained over long periods.”

    Dr. Dunn and the other articles referenced above all make the same central points. They are, as a rule, acute non-specific low back pain is not self limiting, it is more likely than not to become chronic, when it becomes asymptomatic recurrences are very common, each recurrence tends to become worse, and the solution is to administer a long-term management strategy that alters the pathophysiological process.

    ••••••••••

    SOLUTIONS

    In 2011, Manuel Cifuentes, MD, PhD, and colleagues from the Center for Disability Research at the Liberty Mutual Research Institute for Safety, Hopkinton, MA, USA, published a study in the Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, titled (11):

    Health Maintenance Care in Work-Related Low Back Pain and Its Association With Disability Recurrence

    Dr. Cifuentes and colleagues compared the occurrence of repeated disability episodes across types of health care providers who treat claimants with new episodes of work-related low back pain (LBP). The providers evaluated were medical physicians, physical therapists, and chiropractors. A total of 894 cases were followed for 1-year using workers’ compensation claims data.

    Dr. Cifuentes and colleagues note that low back pain is one of the costliest work-related injuries in the United States in terms of disability and treatment costs. Yet, there has been little success in preventing recurrent LBP. Specifically, as noted in their title, these authors evaluate the efficacy of “heath maintenance” in the prevention of recurrent LBP.

    Health maintenance care is defined as treatment after optimum recorded benefit has already been reached. Health maintenance care can include providing advice, information, counseling, and specific physical procedures. Health maintenance care is “predominantly and explicitly recommended by chiropractors who advocate health maintenance procedures to prevent recurrences.”

    This study showed that in the treatment of Workers Compensation low back injury that:

    1) Chiropractically managed patients are significantly less likely to have a recurrence of low back pain.

    2) Chiropractically managed patients that do have a recurrence of low back pain do so an average of 29 days later than those treated by a physical therapist or medical doctor.

    3) Chiropractically managed patients have shorter periods of disability, meaning they returned to work earlier.

    4) Chiropractic patients had “fewer surgeries, used fewer opioids, and had lower costs for medical care than the other provider groups.”

    5) The reduced recurrence of low back disability is the consequence of “chiropractic treatment.”

    6) Chiropractic patients had “less expensive medical services and shorter initial periods of disability than cases treated by other providers.”

    These authors state:

     “After controlling for demographics and severity indicators, the likelihood of recurrent disability due to LBP for recipients of services during the health maintenance care period by all other provider groups was consistently worse when compared with recipients of health maintenance care by chiropractors.”

     “This clear trend deserves some attention considering that chiropractors are the only group of providers who explicitly state that they have an effective treatment approach to maintain health.”

     “Our results, which seem to suggest a benefit of chiropractic treatment to reduce disability recurrence, imply that if the benefit is truly coming from the chiropractic treatment, there is a mechanism through which care provided by chiropractors improves the outcome.”

     “Our findings seem to support the use of chiropractor services, as chiropractor services generally cost less than services from other providers.”

    Dr. Cifuentes and colleagues speculate that the main advantage of chiropractors could be based on the dual nature of their practice: regular care plus maintenance care.

    ••••••••••

    In 2011, Mohammed K. Senna MD, Shereen A. Machaly, MD, published a study in the journal SPINE, titled (12):

    Does Maintained Spinal Manipulation Therapy for Chronic Nonspecific Low Back Pain Result in Better Long-Term Outcome?

    Randomized Trial

    Drs. Senna and Machaly are “MD certified, well-trained, have been in practice for more than 10 years with good experience in managing LBP, and they are staff members of Rheumatology & Rehabilitation Department, Mansoura University [Egypt].”

    This prospective single blinded placebo controlled study was conducted to assess the effectiveness of spinal manipulation therapy (SMT) for the management of chronic nonspecific low back pain (LBP) and to determine the effectiveness of maintenance SMT in long-term reduction of pain and disability levels associated with chronic low back conditions. The spinal manipulation was defined as a “high velocity thrust to a joint beyond its restricted range of movement.”

    Sixty patients with chronic, nonspecific LBP lasting at least 6 months, were randomized to receive either:

    a) 12 treatments of sham SMT over a 1-month period

    b) 12 treatments consisting of SMT over a 1-month period

    c) 12 SMT treatments over a 1-month period plus maintenance SMT every 2 weeks for the following 9 months

    Follow-up evaluations occurred at 1, 4, 7, and 10-months, assessing:

    a) Pain (Visual Analog Scale [VAS]

    The “VAS is a valid tool to indicate the current intensity of pain.”

    b) Disability [Oswestry Disability Questionnaire]

    The Oswestry disability questionnaire has been shown to be a valid indicator of disability in patients with LBP.

    c) Generic health [SF-36]

    The 36-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36) measures eight dimensions: general health perception, physical function, physical role, bodily pain, social functioning, mental health, emotional role, and vitality. “The SF-36 is a valid and reliable instrument widely used to measure generic health status, particularly for monitoring clinical outcomes after medical interventions.”

    Results:

    Patients receiving real manipulation “experienced significantly lower pain and disability scores” than patients receiving sham manipulation at the end of 1-month. Only the group that was given maintenance spinal manipulations showed more improvement in pain and disability scores at the 10-month evaluation. In the non-maintained SMT group, the mean pain and disability scores returned back near to their pretreatment level. The authors concluded:

    “This study confirms previous reports showing that SMT is an effective modality in chronic nonspecific LBP.”

    “SMT is effective for the treatment of chronic nonspecific LBP. To obtain long-term benefit, this study suggests maintenance SMT after the initial intensive manipulative therapy.”

    “One possible way to reduce the long-term effects of LBP is maintenance care (or preventive care).”

    maintained smt group had less pain over time

    maintained smt group had less disability over time

    ••••••••••

    Nonspecific chronic LBP is not attributable to a recognizable, known specific pathology (such as infection, tumor, osteoporosis, fracture, structural deformity, inflammatory disorder, radicular syndrome, or cauda equina syndrome). It represents about 85% of LBP patients seen in primary care. About 10% of these patients will go on to develop chronic, disabling LBP, using the majority of health care and socioeconomic costs. Eighty-four percent of total medical costs for patients with LBP are related to back pain recurrence. The studies presented support using spinal manipulation for both acute and chronic non-specific low back pain, as well as using maintenance spinal manipulation to reduce the incidence of back pain recurrence and its associated costs.

    •••••

     The Chiropractic Impact Report™ is a monthly publication by myself, Dan Murphy, DC. I am a 1978 graduate of WesternStatesChiropracticCollege in Portland, OR. I have managed about 10,000 whiplash-injury cases. In the past 32 years, I have taught more than 500 12-hour post graduate continuing education classes pertaining to whiplash and spinal trauma, including 21 years of coordinating a year-long certification program in spine trauma, certified through the International Chiropractic Association. Additionally, I am board certified in chiropractic orthopedics (DABCO), and I am on the faculty at Life Chiropractic College West in Hayward, CA (28 years).

    The purpose of The Chiropractic Impact Report™ is to keep you updated as to relevant academic concepts pertaining to whiplash-injured patients. The hope is that the information is useful in terms of enhanced understanding, as well as helping the personal injury attorney deal with insurance claim adjusters and adverse medical experts.

    The chiropractor sending you this Report is well versed and trained in these concepts, and can be a valuable asset in personal injury cases in terms of both academics and treatment. Additionally, these expert chiropractors have access to a monthly phone consultation with me to discuss any pertinent issues that they may be facing on a particular case. I hope that you find this Report and the referring chiropractor a valuable resource.

    Sincerely,

    Daniel J. Murphy DC, DABCO

    REFERENCES

    1) Foreman J; Why Women are Living in the Discomfort Zone; More Then 100 Million American Adults Live with Chronic Pain—Most of them Women. What will it take to bring them relief?; January 31, 2014.

    2) Wang S; Why Does Chronic Pain Hurt Some People More?; Wall Street Journal; October 7, 2013.

    3) Pho, K; USA TODAY, The Forum; September 19, 2011; pg. 9A.

    4) Nachemson, Alf, MD, PhD; The Lumbar Spine, An Orthopedic Challenge; SPINE Volume 1, Number 1, March 1976, Pages 59-71.

    5) White AA, Panjabi MM, Clinical Biomechanics of the Spine, Second Edition, J.B. Lippincott Company, 1990.

    6) Croft PR, Macfarlane GJ, Papageorgiou AC, Thomas E, Silman AJ; Outcome of Low Back Pain in General Practice: A Prospective Study; British Medical Journal; May 2, 1998; Vol. 316, pp. 1356-1359.

    7) Hestbaek L, Leboeuf-Yde C, Manniche C; Low back pain: what is the long-term course? A review of studies of general patient populations; European Spine Journal; April 2003; Vol. 12; No 2; pp. 149-65.

    8) Donelson R, McIntosh G; Hall H; Is It Time to Rethink the Typical Course of Low Back Pain?; Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation (PM&R); Vol. 4; No. 6; June 2012, Pages 394–401.

    9) Itz CJ, Geurts JW, van Kleef M, Nelemans P; Clinical course of non-specific low back pain: a systematic review of prospective cohort studies set in primary care; European Journal of Pain; January 2013;Vol. 17; No. 1; pp. 5-15.

    10) Dunn KM, Hestbaek L, Cassidy JD; Low back pain across the life course;Best Practice & Research Clinical Rheumatology; October 2013; Vol. 27; No. 5; pp. 591-600.

    11) 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; April 14, 2011; Vol. 53; No. 4; pp. 396-404.

    12) Senna MK, Machaly SA; Does Maintained Spinal Manipulation Therapy for Chronic Nonspecific Low Back Pain Result in Better Long-Term Outcome? Randomized Trial; SPINE; August 15, 2011; Volume 36, Number 18, pp. 1427–1437.

    “Authored by Dan Murphy, D.C.. Published ChiroTrust™. This publication is not meant to offer treatment advice or protocols. Cited material is not necessarily the opinion of the author or publisher.”

  • Whiplash Injury and Cervicogenic Headache

    Whiplash Injury and Cervicogenic Headache

    nervous system, side view of head

    Barbara is a 45-year old woman with two adult children. She is employed full-time as a sales clerk at the local mall. Her job is not physically demanding nor is it ergonomically challenging. Her job allows her to assume multiple physical positions throughout the day while she is assisting a variety of customers with a variety of needs. There is no required heavy lifting or prolonged postures.

    Barbara is fit, with good muscle tone and posture. She stands 5 feet 4 inches tall and weight 120 pounds. Her exercise regime consists of walking several miles per day, nearly every day of the week, with a group of her friends.

    Barbara has suffered with chronic headaches for 24 years. In addition, her headaches seemed to make her right shoulder ache.

    Barbara’s headaches began when she was involved in a motor vehicle collision that occurred at 21 years of age. She did not recall many of the details of the collision other than that she was the driver of a vehicle that was struck from the rear. The collision caught her by surprise and she remembers her head being thrown backwards. There was no loss of consciousness, and she did not experience being dazed, confusion, disorientation, or loss of any memory. The damage to her vehicle was minor, and she was able to drive away from the accident scene after exchanging insurance information with the man who was driving the striking vehicle.

    Barbara did not experience pain or any other complaints at the accident scene. However, as the day progressed, she became aware of some minor neck stiffness. The next day was a different story. Barbara recalls that the next morning she was unable to pick her head up off her pillow without using her hands to assist her. Her neck was painful and stiff. And, she had a headache.

    Barbara attributed her neck and head signs and symptoms to a “strain” injury caused by the vehicle collision she was involved in. She took some over-the-counter pain pills, and within a few days she was much improved.

    However, about a week after the collision, Barbara became more aware that she still had a headache, and that it did not appear to be improving. Rather it seemed to be becoming more pronounced. The headache was located at the right upper posterior area of her neck and also around and behind her right eye.

    Since being injured 24 years ago, Barbara has had to constantly deal with her headaches. They occur frequently and range in severity from annoying to debilitating. When she is suffering from a bad headache, she also notices an abnormal sensitivity to bright lights (photophobia). She notes that apparent triggers for her headaches range from certain neck movements to prolonged neck postures. Her headaches are always only on her right side.

    Barbara’s examination shows significantly reduced lateral flexion and rotation of the upper cervical spine on the right side. She is very sensitive to mild/moderate digital pressure applied to the suboccipital region and muscles. Importantly, her right-sided frontal (around her eye) headache can be triggered by sustained deeper pressure at the inferior margin of the right inferior oblique muscle. Recall, the inferior oblique muscle exists between the spinous process of the axis (C2) and the transverse process of the atlas (C1). (Two easily identifiable landmarks for a practicing chiropractor; see drawing page 10).

    Barbara reports that she has consulted a number of medical doctors (general practitioners, not specialists) about these headaches, resulting in her taking a variety of over-the-counter and/or prescription medications. She reports that these drugs definitely help her, especially when her headache is severe. She states that she takes pain medicines for her headache 10-15 days per month. But, after developing some gastrointestinal bleeding from taking over-the-counter drugs, her primary care physician suggested she try the COX-2 inhibitor drug Celebrex. She has now been consuming Celebrex 10-15 days per month, reporting that it is quite helpful when she has a bad headache.

    However, Barbara became concerned after hearing media reports of Celebrex and other pain medicines being associated with an increased risk of heart attacks. In addition, she reported that she was weary of having to consume pain medicines 10-15 days per month to function appropriately in her life. Barbara acknowledges that medicines she had been taking for her headaches were helpful, but that they had not cured her headaches, and her suffering had been going on for 24 years.

    Barbara self referred herself to our office as it was on her way home from work. She had seen no other chiropractors or physical therapists for her headaches. Our office was the first.

    ••••••••••

    It has been written in top, respected journals, since at least the 1940s, that whiplash injury to the neck can cause chronic headaches. Whiplash injury pioneer Ruth Jackson, MD, wrote about this phenomenon as early as 1947.

    Ruth Jackson, MD (1902-1994), was the world’s first female admitted into the American Academy of Orthopedic Surgeons (1937). She began her orthopedic private practice in Dallas in 1932. From 1936 to 1941, Dr. Jackson was Chief of Orthopaedics at Parkland Hospital in Fairmont, Texas. In 1945, she had her own private clinic built in Dallas. In 1956 she published her acclaimed, authoritative book entitled TheCervicalSyndrome. The fourth and final edition of her book was published in 1978 (1). Dr. Jackson retired from clinical practice in 1989 at the age of 87 years.

    In 1947, Dr. Jackson published a study in the Journal of the American Medical Women’s Association titled (2):

     The Cervical Syndrome As a Cause of Migraine

    In this article, Dr. Jackson notes that at least half of patients suffering from cervical syndrome will also complain of headaches as one of their principle symptoms. The cervical syndrome is caused by “cervical nerve root irritation,” and this nerve root irritation can occur as a consequence of whiplash trauma.

    Dr. Jackson noted that irritation of the upper cervical spine nerve roots, C1-C2-C3, are most likely to cause headache, and that it is these upper cervical spine nerve roots that are most vulnerable to whiplash trauma. In addition, these post-traumatic headaches may still be present decades later. (Recall, Barbara’s headaches were triggered by a motor vehicle collision, and she had been suffering with headaches for 24 years).

    •••••

    About a decade later, in the late 1950s, the concept of chronic whiplash-generated headache was supported by the writings of Emil Seletz, MD.

    Dr. Emil Seletz (1907-1999) was a neurosurgeon in Beverly Hills, California. Dr. Seletz worked at the Los Angeles General Hospital, and he was faculty at the University of California, Los Angeles, medical school. He was also chief of neurosurgery at Cedar’s Hospital (now called Cedars-Sinai Medical Hospital) in Los Angeles, and Professor of Neurological Surgery at the University of Southern California School of Medicine. By 1957, Dr. Seletz had treated more than 20,000 injury patients, and he began publishing a series of articles pertaining to whiplash trauma and headaches. These include (3, 4, 5):

    Craniocerebral Injuries and the Postconcussion Syndrome

    Journal of the International College of Surgeons

    January 1957, Vol. 27, No. 1, pp. 46-53

    Headache of Extracranial Origin

    California Medicine

    November 1958, Vol. 89, No. 5, pp. 314-17

    Whiplash Injuries

    Neurophysiological Basis for Pain and Methods Used for Rehabilitation

    Journal of the American Medical Association

    November 29, 1958, pp. 1750-1755

     

    In these articles, Dr. Seletz stressed that the cervical spine causes headaches because of a neuroanatomical relationship between the 2nd cervical nerve root and the trigeminal nerve (cranial nerve V). Dr. Seletz notes that many patients involved in whiplash trauma will develop incapacitating severe headaches that may persist for months or even years following the injury. These headaches are often severe and begin in the suboccipital area and radiate to the vertex or to behind one eye; or they may be frontal or temporal.

    Dr. Seletz believes that the 2nd cervical nerve root is most often involved in the generation of headaches, stating:

    “The 2nd cervical nerve root is more vulnerable to trauma than other nerve roots because it is not protected by pedicles and facets.”

     

    Dr. Seletz emphasizes that a major portion of the headaches associated with the whiplash syndrome are derived from a traction injury to the second cervical nerve root. The second cervical nerve root is particularly vulnerable to injury because it is not protected by pedicles and facets, as are the other cervical nerve roots. Also, the second cervical nerve root exits between the atlas and axis, “the point of greatest rotation of the head on the neck.”

    Dr. Seletz explains that sensory changes in any of the three sensory branches (ophthalmic, maxillary, mandibular) of the trigeminal nerve (cranial nerve V) are capable of producing headaches. He also explains that the three sensory branches of the trigeminal nerve communicate (synapse with) with the 2nd and 3rd cervical nerve roots in the upper neck in a nucleus he calls the spinal fifth tract of the medulla.

    cervicogenic headache pathway

    Dr. Seletz’s model of post-whiplash headache is quite simple:

    1) Whiplash trauma injures the vulnerable 2nd cervical nerve root.

    2) The sensory input change derived from the injured 2nd nerve root synapses in the spinal fifth tract of the medulla where it synaptically communicates with the branches of the trigeminal nerve.

    3) The signal in the spinal fifth tract of the medulla is interpreted as a headache in one or more of the branches of the trigeminal nerve.

    Dr. Seletz explains that the ophthalmic fibers of cranial nerve V descend the deepest into the cervical spine. Consequently, traumatized patients with an irritated 2nd nerve root often perceive their headache in the distribution of the ophthalmic branch, which is around and behind the eye.

    Adding to the mechanism of chronic post-traumatic headache, Dr. Seletz notes that trauma causes hemorrhage, leading to the development of adhesions forming about the upper cervical nerve roots. He states that these nerve root adhesions are visible during surgical exposure. These nerve root adhesions chronically irritate the nerve roots, sending a signal into the spinal fifth tract of the medulla and ultimately causing chronic headache.

    In summary, Dr. Seletz states:

    “The physiological communication between the second cervical and the trigeminal nerves in the spinal fifth tract of the medulla [trigeminal-cervical nucleus] involves the first division of the trigeminal nerve [opthalamic] and thereby gives attacks of hemicrania with pain radiating behind the corresponding eye. This is the mechanism whereby a great many chronic and persistent headaches have their true origin in injury to the second cervical nerve.”

    “Many headaches are not headaches at all, but really a pain in the neck.”

    •••••

    Although Drs. Jackson and Seletz described the neuroanatomical basis of headaches arising from the cervical spine in the 1940s and 1950s, “Cervicogenic Headache” was not officially recognized until 1983 by Sjaastad (6). In his 1983 article titled “Cervicogenic Headache” An Hypothesis, Sjaastad listed the diagnostic criteria for cervicogenic headache as:

    • Precipitation of head pain by neck movement and/or sustained awkward head positioning.
    • Precipitation of head pain by external pressure over the upper cervical or occipital region on the symptomatic side.
    • Restriction of neck range of motion.
    • Ipsilateral neck, shoulder, or arm pain of a rather vague nonradicular nature, or, occasionally, arm pain of a radicular nature.
    • Unilaterality of the head pain, without sideshift.
    • Head pain is moderate-severe, nonthrobbing, and nonlancinating, usually starting in the neck.
    • Occasionally there is nausea, phonophobia, photophobia, dizziness, ipsilateral blurred vision, difficulties on swallowing, ipsilateral edema (mostly in the periocular area).
    • The pain typically starts at the back of the head, spreading to frontal areas.

    A recent (June 2011) PubMed search of the National Library of Medicine database using the key words “cervicogenic headache” listed 744 articles, with publication dates ranging from September 1942 to June 2011.

    •••••

    Perhaps the most detailed anatomical description for the physiological basis for cervicogenic headache was written by Australian physician and clinical anatomist Nikoli Bogduk, MD, PhD, in 1995. Dr. Bogduk published an article in the journal Biomedicine and Pharmacotherapy titled (7):

    Anatomy and Physiology of Headache

    In this article, Dr. Bogduk notes that all headaches have a common anatomy and physiology in that they are all mediated by the trigeminocervical nucleus, and are initiated by noxious stimulation of the endings of the nerves that synapse in this nucleus. “Trigeminocervical nucleus” is contemporary terminology for what Dr. Emil Seletz termed spinal fifth tract of the medulla. The trigeminocervical nucleus is a region of grey matter in the medulla of the brainstem that descends into the upper cervical spinal cord.

    In agreement with Dr. Seletz above, Dr. Bogduk notes that the trigeminocervical nucleus receives afferents from all three branches (ophthalmic, maxillary, mandibular) of the trigeminal nerve (cranial nerve V). In slight variance with Dr. Seletz, Dr. Bogduk’s detailed anatomical sections indicate that the trigeminocervical nucleus receives afferents from nerve roots C1, C2, and C3.cervicogenic headache pathway

     

    Consequently, irritation of any of the upper three cervical nerve roots can cause headaches. In addition, Dr. Bogduk stresses that irritation or injury to any tissue innervated by the upper cervical nerve roots can cause headaches.

    Both Dr. Seletz and Dr. Bogduk indicate that the ophthalmic branch of the trigeminal nerve extends the farthest into the trigeminocervical nucleus, and consequently cervical afferent nerve irritation is most likely to refer pain to the frontal-orbital region of the head.

    Both Dr. Seletz and Dr. Bogduk agree that the C1 and C2 nerve roots are particularly likely to be involved in the genesis of cervicogenic headache because the C1 and C2 spinal nerve roots “do not emerge through intervertebral foramina.” This make these nerve roots more vulnerable to stretch or compressive stresses.

    Dr. Seletz commented that in his surgically managed cervicogenic headache patients he would find scar tissue or adhesions that were responsible for chronic C2 nerve root irritation. Dr. Bodguk’s anatomical sections further isolate these C2 nerve root post-traumatic adhesions at two locations:

    • At the C2 dorsal root ganglion as it crosses the C1-C2 joint capsule.
    • At the under belly of the inferior oblique muscle.

    adhesions interfering with nerve function

    •••••

    In 2005, Dr. David Biondi, an instructor in Neurology at Harvard Medical School, published an article titled (8):

    Cervicogenic Headache:

    A Review of Diagnostic and Treatment Strategies

    Dr. Biondi notes that cervicogenic headache is a relatively common cause of chronic headaches with a prevalence as high as 20%. He notes that post-whiplash cervicogenic headache is particularly porne to chronicity.

    Dr. Biondi notes that in the management of cervicogenic headache, drugs alone are often ineffective. He states, “Many patients with cervicogenic headache overuse or become dependent on analgesics.” He also notes that COX-2 inhibitors cause both gastrointestinal and renal toxicity after long-term use, and they cause an increased risk of cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events.

    Dr. Biondi is an osteopathic physician, and therefore has an understanding of manual and manipulative techniques. He states:

    “All patients with cervicogenic headache could benefit from manual modes of therapy and physical conditioning.”

    Dr. Biondi notes that the treatment of cervicogenic headache usually requires manipulation of the upper cervical facet joints, and that manipulative techniques are particularly well suited for the management of cervicogenic headache, including high velocity, low amplitude manipulation. These techniques are commonly used by chiropractors in the management of cervicogenic headaches.

    In April of this year (2011), Dr. Maurice Vincent published a detailed review article pertaining to the relationship between the cervical spine and headache (9). In the article, Dr. Vincent lists five requirements for the diagnosis of cervicogenic headache. They are:

    1) unilateral pain preponderance

    2) reduction of cervical range of motion

    3) pain in the ipsilateral shoulder or arm

    4) attacks precipitation from triggering spots in the neck

    5) precipitation from awkward neck positions.

    These five requirements are all present in my patient Barbara:

    Barbara was suffering from post-traumatic chronic cervicogenic headache. Recall that her “headache was triggered by sustained deep pressure at the inferior margin of the right inferior oblique muscle.” Consequently, my assessment included that Barbara was suffering from an ectopic depolarization of the C2 nerve root at the inferior margin of the right inferior oblique muscle; the electrical signal communicated with the ophthalmic branch of the trigeminal nerve in the trigeminocervical nucleus, creating a cortical brain perception of a headache around her right eye. As there is a history of trauma and 24 years of chronicity, it seems plausible that the primary nidus of C2 irritation was scar tissue or adhesions at the inferior oblique muscle, consistent with the writings of both Drs. Seletz and Bogduk. The irritation of the C2 nerve root is most likely aggravated by alignment and motion dysfunctions of the upper cervical spinal segments.

    My clinical protocols included the following:

    1) Analysis and chiropractic management of upper cervical spinal segmental alignment.

    2) Analysis and chiropractic management of asymmetry of upper cervical spinal segmental movement.

    3) Manual friction myotherapy at the inferior margin of the inferior oblique muscle. This is done in a effort to reduce the adverseness of adhesions and/or scar tissue that appeared to be irritating the C2 nerve root.

    4) Low level laser therapy (in the office) and cryotherapy (homecare) to reduce inflammation subsequent to tissue work.

    Barbara was so treated three times per week for four weeks, a total of twelve visits. The one-month re-evaluation showed a 100% resolution of both signs and symptoms. Twenty-four years chronicity and suffering resolved within one moth of manual therapy.

    REFERENCES:

    1) Jackson R, The Cervical Syndrome, Thomas, 1978.

    2) Jackson R; The Cervical Syndrome As a Cause of Migraine. Journal of the American Medical Women’s Association. December 1947, Vol. 2, No. 12, pp. 529-534.

    3) Seletz E; Craniocerebral Injuries and the Postconcussion Syndrome; Journal of the International College of Surgeons; January, 1957; 27(1):46-53.

    4) Seletz E; Headache of Extracranial Origin; California Medicine; November 1958, Vol. 89, No. 5, pp. 314-17.

    5) Seletz E; Whiplash Injuries, Neurophysiological Basis for Pain and Methods Used for Rehabilitation; Journal of the American Medical Association; November 29, 1958, pp. 1750 – 1755.

    6) Sjaastad O; “Cervicogenic” Headache: An Hypothesis; Cephalagia; December 1983; 3(4):249-256.

    7) Bogduk N; Anatomy and Physiology of Headache; Biomedicine and Pharmacotherapy; 1995, Vol. 49, No. 10, pp. 435-445.

    8) Biondi DM; Cervicogenic Headache: A Review of Diagnostic and Treatment Strategies; Journal of the American Osteopathic Association; April 2005, Vol. 105, No. 4 supplement, pp. 16-22.

    9) Vincent MB; Headache and Neck; Current Pain Headache Report; April 5, 2011 [Epub].

  • Osteoarthritis

    Osteoarthritis

    November 2, 2010, researchers from the Veterans Affairs Medical Center at the University of California, San Francisco, published a study in the Annals of Internal Medicine titled (1):

    The Epidemiology of Pain During the Last 2 Years of Life

    The study included 4,703 older adults with mean age of 75.7 years at the time of their deaths. These subjects were evaluated for the presence of clinically significant pain, as indicated by a report that the participant was “often troubled” by pain of at least moderate severity. Their records showed that the prevalence of such pain 24 months before death was 26%. The pain prevalence remained flat until 4 months before death, then the pain increased, reaching 46% in the last month of life.

    Importantly, the prevalence of pain in the last month of life was 60% among patients with arthritis versus 26% among patients without arthritis and did not differ by terminal diagnosis category (cancer, heart disease, frailty, sudden death, or other causes).

    The authors concluded:

    “Although the prevalence of pain increases in the last 4 months of life, pain is present in more than one quarter of elderly persons during the last 2 years of life.”

    “Arthritis is strongly associated with pain at the end of life.”

    This study indicates that a non-fatal condition, arthritis, significantly affects the quality of life in the elderly.

    •••••

    A number of well-respected reference texts indicate that the incidence of osteoarthritis is strongly associated with single event macro-trauma, repeated micro-trauma, alignment problems, and age. Such texts include:

    • The Cervical Syndrome by Ruth Jackson (3).
    • Anatomico-Roentgenographic Studies of the Spine by Lee Hadley (4).
    • Managing Low Back Pain by Harry Kirkaldy-Willis (5).
    • Clinical Implications of Normal Biomechanical Stresses on Spinal Function by Herbert Junghanns (6).

    A 1993 study published in the journal Injury (7) showed strong evidence that a single motor vehicle collision accelerates the process of disc degenerative disease of the cervical spine.

    A 1997 study published in the Journal of Orthopedic Medicine (8) showed that a single motor vehicle collision accelerated degenerative changes in the cervical spine by about 10 years earlier compared to the control group.

    A 2004 study published in the European Spine Journal (9) showed that the repetitive heading of soccer balls accelerates degenerative changes in the cervical spine by 10–20 years earlier than that of the normal population.

    A 2009 study published in the Journal of Physical Activity and Health (10) showed that knee and hip arthritis is over 3 times more prevalent in retired NFL players than in the general U.S. population of the same age.

    PATHOPHYSIOLOGY

    An excellent discussion of the pathophysiological process leading to spinal osteoarthritis is presented by the late (d. 2006) William H Kirkaldy-Willis, MD. Dr. Kirkaldy-Willis was Emeritus Professor, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University Hospital, University of Saskatchewan College of Medicine. In his 1988 (second edition) book Managing Low Back Pain, there are 19 international multidisciplinary distinguished contributing authors (5). Dr. Kirkaldy-Willis authored a chapter in the book titled:

    “The Three Phases of the Spectrum of Degenerative Disease”

    Dr. Kirkaldy-Willis describes how spinal segments are comprised of a three-joint complex: the two posterior facet joints and the intervertebral disc. He notes that the three joints always work together. Consequently, injury or stress to any single component of the three-joint complex will mechanically affect the other two components. His breakdown of the three phases of spinal degenerative disease is as follows:

    First Phase of Spondylosis

    “Dysfunction”

    In the first phase, the normal function of the three-joint complex is interrupted as a consequence of injury or chronic stress. This causes the posterior musculature of the involved segment to go into a state of hypertonic contraction. This restricts normal movement. The hypertonic contraction of the muscles also causes muscle ischemia, causing pain. The muscle hypertonicity also causes a slight misalignment of the posterior facet joints, which is known as a “subluxation.” Eventually tissue fibrosis begins to appear.

    Second Phase of Spondylosis

    “Instability”

    If the first phase is allowed to persist, the second phase will eventually ensue. In the second phase, there is abnormal increased movement. Laxity of the posterior joint capsule and of the annulus fibrosus is seen in anatomical sections. Local fibrosis is problematic because “the collagen of scar tissue is not as strong as normal collagen.” Therefore, there is an increased propensity for additional injury, inflammation, pain, and muscle hypertonicity.

    Third Phase of Spondylosis

    “Stabilization”

    If the second phase is allowed to persist, the third phase will eventually ensue. In the third phase, degenerative changes begin to appear. As the degenerative changes advance, the unstable segment regains its stability because of fibrosis and osteophytes form around the posterior joints and within and around the disc. In this stabilization phase, the facet joints will progress through the following sequence:

    Synovitis

    Degeneration of Articular Hyaline Cartilage

     ↓

    Development of Intra-articular Adhesions

     ↓

     Increasing Capsular Laxity

    Subluxation of the Joint Surfaces

     ↓

    Formation of Subperiosteal Osteophytes

     ↓

    Enlargement of Both Inferior and Superior Facets

     ↓

    Ultimately Greatly Reduced Movement

    Simultaneous with this sequence of changes in the facet joints, there are parallel changes in the intervertebral disc. These changes follow this sequence:

    The Development of Small Circumferential Tears in the Annulus Fibrosis

     ↓

    The Circumferential Tears in the Annulus Become Larger and Coalesce to form Radial Tears that Pass From the Annulus to the Nucleus Pulposus

     ↓

    Eventual Internal Disruption of the Disc

     ↓

    Disc Degeneration with Disc Resorption

     ↓

    Peripheral Osteophytes Around the Circumference of the Disc

    Ultimately Greatly Reduced Movement

    Dr. Kirkaldy-Willis notes that the “greatly reduced motion” associated with spinal degenerative disease opens Melzack’s and Wall’s “pain gate,” accounting for the increased pain that is often associated with osteoarthritis (12).

    •••••

    A more recent comprehensive review of osteoarthritis appeared in the American Journal of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation in 2006, titled (11):

    Osteoarthritis

    Epidemiology, Risk Factors, and Pathophysiology

    The authors, Susan V Garstand, MD and Todd P Stitik, MD, are from the University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey. In this article, Drs. Garstand and Stitik note that osteoarthritis is “the clinical and pathologic outcome of a range of disorders that results in structural and functional failure of synovial joints. Osteoarthritis occurs when the dynamic equilibrium between the breakdown and repair of joint tissues is overwhelmed.”

    Drs. Garstand and Stitik note that osteoarthritis is the most prevalent form of arthritis and a major cause of disability in people aged 65 and older. Osteoarthritis affects the majority of adults over age 55.

    Garstand and Stitik note that the incidence of osteoarthritis is influenced by both systemic and local factors:

    Systemic Factors:

     

    • Ethnicity

    • Age: “The presence of radiographic osteoarthritis rises with age at all joint sites.”

    • Gender

    • Hormonal Status

    • Genetic Factors; osteoarthritis has a major genetic component

    • Bone Density

    • Nutritional Factors:

    There is evidence that osteoarthritis is linked to free radicals, and that high dietary antioxidants (especially vitamins C and D) are protective against the development of osteoarthritis. “Chondrocyte senescence is thought to be the result of chronic oxidative stress.”

    Local Factors: Local factors “result in abnormal biomechanical loading of

    affected joints.”

    • Obesity

    • “Altered joint biomechanics”

    • ligamentous laxity

    • malalignment

    • impaired proprioception. With aging, there is a decline in proprioception, causing

    decreased neurologic responses, impairing proprioceptive joint-protective

    mechanisms. Consequently, reduced proprioception advances osteoarthritis.

    • muscle weakness

    • Prior joint injuries

    • Occupational Factors

    • Effects of sports and physical activities

    • Developmental abnormalities

    Garstand and Stitik note that if systemic factors are present, the joints are vulnerable, and thus local biomechanical factors will have more of an impact on joint degeneration and osteoarthritis.

    •••••

    Essential Fatty Acid Connection

    In his 2008 book Toxic Fat, biochemist Barry Sears (13) describes how the omega-6 fatty acid arachidonic acid is biochemically converted into the pro-inflammatory eicosanoid hormone prostaglandin E2 (PGE2).

    COX LOX pathways

    Cyclo-oxygenase (COX)/Lipo-oxygenase (LOX) Pathways

    The conversion of the omega-6 fatty acid arachidonic acid is biochemically converted into the pro-inflammatory eicosanoid hormone prostaglandin E2 (PGE2) and is important in a discussion of osteoarthritis because a number of studies have implicated prostaglandin E2 in the accelerated degradation of cartilage. For example, in 2002 the journal Neurosurgery Focus published a study linking disc degeneration to prostaglandin E2 (14). Later in 2002, the journal Spine published a study linking intervertebral disc herniation to the enzyme cyclo-oxygenase-2, which converts the toxic fat arachidonic acid to prostaglandin E2 (15).

    Also in 2002, the journal Arthritis & Rheumatism (16) published a study showing that the pathologic indicators manifested in human osteoarthritic cartilage could be significantly abrogated by exposure of the cartilage to omega-3 fatty acids. This is important because omega-3 fatty acids, especially the omega-3 eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA), is known to inhibit the conversion of arachidonic acid into prostaglandin E2. Neither omega-6 nor omega-9 (such as olive oil) could stop the cartilage breakdown biomarkers. These authors concluded that omega-3 fatty acids play a role in halting or slowing degradative and inflammatory factors that contribute to the progression of osteoarthritis. Specifically, they state:

    “Dietary supplementation with n-3 PUFA may prove useful in both quiescent and active arthritis.”

     

    “Our findings support the results of epidemiologic and clinical studies that have demonstrated dietary supplementation with omega-3 fatty acids to be beneficial in reducing pain and inflammation in human arthritic diseases.”

     

    “It has long been recognized that dietary supplementation with fish oils that are enriched with n-3 PUFAs can provide benefit in the treatment of arthritis.”

     

    •••••

    Nutritional Management

    In 2006, Leslie Cleland and colleagues published a study pertaining to the utilization of omega-3 fish oil prescription for the purposes of achieving an anti-inflammatory state in arthritis sufferers (17). The pain of arthritis is primarily caused by prostaglandin E2 (PGE2), which is derived from the omega-6 fatty acid arachidonic acid through the activity of the enzyme COX. Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) inhibit the COX enzyme. Dr. Cleland restates that the omega-3 fatty acid found in fish oil, eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA), not only inhibits the conversion of arachidonic acid to the pro-inflammatory eicosanoid prostaglandin E2 (PGE2), but also inhibits the conversion of arachidonic acid into another pro-inflammatory eicosanoid, leukotriene B4 (LTB4). Cleland and colleagues suggest that as a therapeutic agent, EPA should be superior to NSAIDs because NSAIDs do not inhibit the lipoxygenase (LOX) pathway.

    Cleland and colleagues state that in order to achieve an anti-inflammatory state for arthritis patients, they would need to consume a minimum of 2,700 mg of long chain omega-three fatty acids per day, and they would have to do so daily for a minimum of 2-3 months.

    osteoarthritis process

    Also in 2006, Dr. Joseph Maroon, the neurosurgeon for the Pittsburgh Steelers, published a study in the journal Surgical Neurology titled (18):

     

    Omega-3 Fatty acids (fish oil) as an anti-inflammatory:

    An alternative to nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs for discogenic pain

    This paper won first prize in the poster competition at the American Association of Neurological Surgeons Annual Meeting, New Orleans, LA, April 2005. Dr. Maroon is a specialist in the management of degenerative spinal disease in the Department of Neurological Surgery at the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center.

    In this study, Dr. Maroon notes that NSAIDs are the most common cause of drug-related morbidity and mortality reported to the FDA and other regulatory agencies around the world. The use of NSAIDs is associated with extreme complications, including gastric ulcers, bleeding, myocardial infarction, stroke, and even death. “More than 70 million NSAID prescriptions are written each year, and 30 billion over-the-counter NSAID tablets are sold annually.” “The agent best documented by hundreds of references in the literature for its anti-inflammatory effects is omega-3 EFAs found in fish and in pharmaceutical-grade fish oil supplements.”

    In this study, after 75 days on fish oil, 59% of patients who were taking NSAIDs for chronic spinal pain and who had spinal osteoarthritis, were able to discontinue their prescription NSAIDs, and 88% stated they were satisfied with their improvement and that they would continue to take the fish oil. Dr. Maroon concluded:

    “Omega-3 essential fatty acid fish oil supplements appear to be a safer alternative to NSAIDs for treatment of nonsurgical neck or back pain.”

    Mechanical Management

    Drs. Garstand and Stitik (11) indicate that there exists biomechanical factors in the development of osteoarthritis, including altered joint biomechanics, reduced motion, ligamentous laxity, malalignment, impaired proprioception, and muscle weakness. Chiropractic training and clinical practice emphasizes and specializes in the diagnosis and management of these problems.

    Additionally, Dr. Kirkaldy-Willis (5) indicates that it is during the First Phase or Dysfunction Phase of spinal degeneration when most patients experience their first episode of back pain. Importantly, Dr. Kirkaldy-Willis indicates that the pathological changes during the First Phase are minor and potentially reversible. Dr. Kirkaldy-Willis suggests that spinal manipulation is a viable approach for the management of this first phase of spinal degeneration, noting:

    “Manipulation is an art that requires much practice to acquire the necessary skill and competence. Few medical practitioners have the time or inclination to master it. This modality has much to offer to the patient with low back pain, especially in the earlier stages during the phase of dysfunction. The majority of patients are first seen while in this phase. Most practitioners of medicine, whether family physicians, or surgeons, will wish to refer their patients to a practitioner of manipulative therapy with whom they can cooperate, whose work they know, and whom they can trust. The physician who makes use of this resource will have many contented patients and save himself many headaches.”

    Although this quote suggests that joint manipulation is most beneficial during the earliest phases of joint degeneration, a number of studies document that joint manipulation is excellent or even superior in the management of patients suffering from chronic back pain (19, 20, 21). Long-term chronicity of spinal pain (up to 8.3 years, (21)), suggests that these patients are not in earlier phases of spinal degeneration, but are probably more in the phase of stabilization with osteoarthritic changes.

    Summary

    The eicosanoid hormone prostaglandin E2 is best known as a pain mediator, but it is also linked to the development of osteoarthritis. Studies indicate that an effective management for both the pain and the development of osteoarthritis is supplemental omega-3 fatty acid fish oil. Chiropractors are well trained in the biochemistry and application of such omega-3 supplements.

    Biomechanically, spinal osteoarthritis begins as an injury or stress that causes local muscular hypertonicity, segmental joint dysfunction and misalignment. This early stage of pathophysiology is ideally aborted with spinal manipulation. Later stages of the osteoarthritic pathophysiological response, involving altered proprioception, muscle weakness, and reduced mobility from stabilization are also improved with joint manipulation, exercise, and targeted tissue work. The modern chiropractor is well trained in each of these clinical approaches.

    Additionally, today’s modern chiropractor has management skills in several of the systemic factors in osteoarthritis, including obesity, free radical damage, repetitive strains, and ergonomics.

    REFERENCES

    1) Smith AK, Cenzer IS, Knight SJ, Puntillo KA, Widera E, Williams BA, Boscardin WJ, Covinsky KE; Annals of Internal Medicine; The epidemiology of pain during the last 2 years of life; November 2, 2010;153(9):563-9.

    2) Schmoral G, Junghanns H; Schmorl’s and Junghanns’ The Human Spine in Health and Disease; Grune & Stratton; 1971.

    3) Jackson R, The Cervical Syndrome, Thomas, 1978.

    4) Hadley LA, Anatomico-Roentgenographic Studies of the Spine, fourth printing, Charles Thomas, 1979.

    5) Kirkaldy-Willis H; Managing Low Back Pain, Second Edition, Churchill Livingstone, 1988.

    6) Junghanns H; Clinical Implications of Normal Biomechanical Stresses on Spinal Function; Aspen, 1990.

    7) Hamer AJ, Gargan MF, Bannister GC, Nelson RJ. Whiplash injury and surgically treated cervical disc disease. Injury. 1993 Sep;24(8):549-50.

    8) Gargan MF, Bannister GC. The Comparative Effects of Whiplash Injuries. The Journal of Orthopaedic Medicine, 19(1), 1997, pp. 15-17.

    9) Kartal A, Yldran B, Enköylü A, Korkusuz F; Soccer causes degenerative changes in the cervical spine; European Spine Journal, February 2004, 13(1):76-82.

    10) Golightly YM, Marshall SW, Callahan LF, Guskiewicz K; Early-Onset Arthritis in Retired National Football League Players; Journal of Physical Activity and Health, 2009, 6, 638-643.

    11) Garstand SV, Stitik, TP; Osteoarthritis: Epidemiology, Risk Factors, and Pathophysiology; American Journal of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation; November 2006, Vol. 85, No. 11, pp. S2-S11.

    12) Melzack R, Wall PD. Pain mechanisms: a new theory. Science. 1965 Nov 19;150(699):971-9.

    13) Sears B; Toxic Fat; 2008.

    14) Martin MD, Boxell CM, Malone DG; Pathophysiology of lumbar disc degeneration: A review of the literature; Neurosurgery Focus; Vol. 13, No. 2, August 2002.

    15) Miyamoto H, Saura R, Doita M, Kurosaka M, Mizuno K; Role of Cyclo-oxygenase-2 in Lumbar Disc Herniation; Spine; Vol. 27, No. 22, November 15, 2002, pp. 2477-2483.

    16) Curtis CL, Rees SG, Little CB, Flannery CR, Hughes CE, Wilson C, Dent CM, Otterness IG, Harwood JL, Caterson B; Pathologic indicators of degradation and inflammation in human osteoarthritic cartilage are abrogated by exposure to n-3 fatty acids; Arthritis & Rheumatism; Volume 46, Issue 6, 2002, pp 1544-1553.

    17) Cleland LG, James MJ, Proudman SM; Fish oil: what the prescriber needs to know; Arthritis Research & Therapy; Volume 8, Issue 1, 2006.

    18) Maroon JC, Bost JW; Omega-3 Fatty acids (fish oil) as an anti-inflammatory: an alternative to nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs for discogenic pain; Surgical Neurology; 65 (April 2006) 326– 331.

    19) Kirkaldy-Willis WH, Cassidy JD; Spinal Manipulation in the Treatment of Low back Pain; Canadian Family Physician; March 1985, Vol. 31, pp. 535-540.

    20) Meade TW, Dyer S, Browne W, Townsend J, Frank AO; Low back pain of mechanical origin: Randomized comparison of chiropractic and hospital outpatient treatment; British Medical Journal; Volume 300, JUNE 2, 1990, pp. 1431-7.

    21) Giles LGF, Muller R; Chronic Spinal Pain: A Randomized Clinical Trial Comparing Medication, Acupuncture, and Spinal Manipulation; Spine, July 15, 2003; 28(14):1490-1502.

  • Car Accidents, Chiropractic And Children

    Car Accidents, Chiropractic And Children

    In the legal cases I have consulted in, often it is claimed that children cannot be injured in motor vehicle collisions, and therefore they do not require any treatment. To escalate this perspective, I have consulted in cases where the chiropractor treating such a child is accused of committing fraud, a crime. Occasionally, these cases will even progress to courtroom trial.

    Pertaining to the causes of death of our children, the following statistics were compiled from the United States Centers for Disease Control (CDC) National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS).

    Age Group

    Most Prevalent Cause of Death

    Most Prevalent Cause of Accidental Death

    <1

    Birth Defects

    1 – 4

    Accidental

    Motor Vehicle Accident

    5 – 9

    Accidental

    Motor Vehicle Accident

    10 – 14

    Accidental

    Motor Vehicle Accident

    15 – 24

    Accidental

    Motor Vehicle Accident

     

    In addition, the second leading cause for accidental death in children < 1 year of age was motor vehicle accident.

    Based upon these statistics, it seems ludicrous to claim that children cannot be injured in motor vehicle crashes.

    •••••

    Recently, a new-graduate chiropractor asked my advice regarding the management of an infant who had been injured in a motor vehicle collision. The insurance adjuster controlling the case stated: “our chiropractic consultant informs us that it is unlikely that an infant can be injured in a motor vehicle collision and therefore treatment of an infant after a motor vehicle collision is not likely to be reasonable or necessary.” Chiropractors that treat motor vehicle collision injuries, including those to children, are probably familiar with this attitude.

    More than a decade ago, I had the opportunity to testify in a case in which a 7-year-old child and a 22-month-old toddler were injured in a motor vehicle collision. The children were treated successfully by a chiropractor. The mother of the children was adamant that the chiropractic care her children received was necessary for the improvement of their condition caused by the motor vehicle collision. Yet the case went to trial because of the attitude by the insurance company and their chiropractic paper reviewer that the children did not need the amount of care they received; or that the treating chiropractor’s records could not justify the care that he gave to the children.

    One of the consequences of this trial was my generation of a chapter in a book, Pediatric Chiropractic, edited by Claudia Anrig and Greg Plaugher, Williams and Wilkins, 1998. The second edition of this book is due out later this year (2011). I did an extensive review of the literature pertaining to injuries to children from motor vehicle collisions, using more than 200 references. This article is a summary of some of the main principles of child injuries from motor vehicle collisions.

    •••••

    Many of the concepts that pertain to adults in motor vehicle collisions also apply to children, including the basic principles of inertial acceleration/deceleration injuries, patient preparedness prior to impact, and rotation of the head or trunk prior to impact. Overall, studies indicate that the pattern of injury among children in motor vehicle collisions is similar to those of the general population.

    However, injuries to children in motor vehicle collisions can be unique as a consequence of the following reasons:

    1) Child safety seats.

    2) The increased size of the child’s head as a proportion of the overall body mass.

    3) The child’s ability to be restrained while facing rearward.

    4) The use of seat belts that are designed for adults.

    5) The use of lap belts without shoulder harnesses.

    6) The reduced height of the developing pediatric pelvis.

    7) The underdevelopment of the pediatric anterior superior iliac spine.

    8) The higher center of gravity for the pediatric body.

    9) The diminished development and strength of various spinal musculoskeletal components.

    10) The ability to sit on the lap of adults when traveling in a vehicle.

    11) The probability that a child injured in a motor vehicle collision is unprepared for the collision, or caught by surprise.

    12) The more unfavorable head diameter to neck diameter ratio, as compared to adults.

    I believe that each aspect (above) of this uniqueness regarding children injury during motor vehicle collisions should be understood by the health care provider so that he/she can better explain the appropriateness of treatment given to these injured children. Specifically, I believe that the health care provider should:

    1) Understand the biomechanical uniqueness of injury for each age group of children involved in a motor vehicle collision.

    2) Learn how to examine and document pediatric trauma, including daily charting.

    3) Become proficient at the treatment management of injuries in such small bodies.

    I will briefly review these concepts below. A more detailed explanation

    with graphics and references is available in the next edition of Chiropractic Pediatrics, edited by Anrig and Plaugher, 2011.

    •••••

    Anthropometric Variables For Children

    Head Size

    The increased size of the pediatric head as a proportion of the overall body mass influences the location and type of injuries sustained by children involved in a motor vehicle collision. At birth the head is proportionately larger and accounts for approximately 25% of the body length as compared with 15% in the adult. Consequently in motor vehicle collisions it is the head and cervical spine of the newborn that is most likely to be injured in a motor vehicle collision.

    Toddlers up to 3 years of age continue to have disproportionately large head size and higher centers of gravity, and, therefore, also tend to sustain head injuries. Rear facing child safety seats tend to restrict forward head movement and prevent young heads from striking the interior of the vehicle.

    Pelvic Height

    The reduced height of the developing pediatric pelvis predisposes children to unique injury. Every anatomical part of children is reduced in size as compared to the adult, including the height of their pelvis. This reduced height increases the probability for a lap belt to slip over the top of the brim of the pelvis during a motor vehicle collision, resulting in more serious abdominal visceral and lumbar spine fulcrum injuries.

    Anterior Superior Iliac Spine

    The underdevelopment of the pediatric anterior superior iliac spine increases the probability for unique injury for young patients. Children younger than 10 years of age have less development of the anterior superior iliac spine as compared to the adult. This increases the probability for a lap belt to slip over the top of the brim of the pelvis during a motor vehicle collision, resulting in more serious abdominal visceral and lumbar spine fulcrum injuries.

    Center of Gravity

    The higher center of gravity for the pediatric body changes the nature and location of injury. Children have a relatively higher center of gravity and a greater tendency for the lap belt to ride cephalad to across the abdomen as compared to adults. This elevated position allows the child to submarine forward under the belt, increasing injury to the abdomen and/or the spine.

    4-9 year olds have a relatively lower center of gravity in contrast to infants and toddlers, closer to the umbilicus but still above the lap belt. Yet the iliac crests are underdeveloped in this age group and the lap belt tends to slip up over the bony pelvis and onto the abdomen. With a rapid deceleration event, with a greater proportion of body mass above the lap belt and with the lap belt already in contact with the abdomen, “jackknifing” occurs with compression and injury of abdominal viscera. The hallmark indicator of abdominal viscera and mid-lumbar spine injury is abdominal or flank ecchymosis.

    Tissue Strength

    The diminished development and strength of various spinal musculoskeletal components increases the probability of significant tissue injury in children. Children have less well developed muscle and connective tissue, which increases probabilities for spinal joint and neurological injury.

    Submarining:

    Primarily because of the shortness of their pelvis and under development of their anterior superior iliac spine, children, especially those between ages 4-9, have a higher probability of having their torso slip under the lap belt during a motor vehicle collision thus sustaining associated injuries. This is termed submarining. 10-14 year olds have a better developed anterior superior iliac spine, a “taller” pelvis, and consequently experience submarining less often.

    Child on Adult Lap

    A parent should never hold an infant or child on their lap while riding in a motor vehicle. In a front-end collision at 25 miles per hour at impact, the forces on the baby may reach 20 G. If the weight of the baby is 7.5 pounds its effective weight raises to 150 pounds (7.5 lb X 20 G = 150 lb). If the weight of the child is 25 pounds its effective weight raises to 500 pounds (25 lb X 20 G = 500 lb). It is impossible for the adult to hold the baby under those circumstances. To hold a 10-pound infant at 30 mph the adult strength required would be roughly that needed to lift 300 pounds one foot off the ground.

    If the adult holder is also unrestrained, their body may crush the baby against the dashboard or the back of the front seat. When the adult is not restrained, the infant is crushed by a force equal to the mass of the adult multiplied by the square of the speed and divided by two. When the child is held in the arms of an adult and both are not using belt restraints, the weight of the adult is added to the child’s weight as they are thrown forward. The adult will crush the child with an incredible force.

    Studies indicate that many infants under the age of one travel in cars while being carried on adult laps.

    Unrestrained Children

    Careful observation of anthropomorphic video graphically shows that even though the principles of inertia apply to children, they are different, especially when the child is less than 40 lbs. When young children are unrestrained, their entire body functions as a single piece of inertial mass, and will fly through the air during motor vehicle collisions, becoming “human projectiles.” Injuries include crashing through the glass and being thrown from the vehicle, as well as colliding with the inside of the vehicle. In a moving vehicle that is stopped suddenly by an impact, an unrestrained smaller child will continue to move at the original vehicle speed until stopped by the interior of the vehicle. Even in low speed collisions an unrestrained child becomes a human projectile.

    Studies indicate that children run more risk of injury or death traveling unrestrained in a vehicle than by being hit by a vehicle as a pedestrian. It is estimated that disabling to fatal injuries to these children would decrease by 78-91% if the child was using a restraint system during motor vehicle collisions. It is estimated that 49% of child passenger deaths from motor vehicle collisions could have been prevented with appropriate child restraint use. Children not in safety restraint devices are 11 times more likely to die in a motor vehicle collision than children placed in restraints. Unrestrained children are three times more likely to sustain a brain injury than restrained children.

    Children in Restraints

    Reduction In Injuries:

    The April 2011 edition of the journal Pediatrics published the policy recommendations of the Committee on Injury, Violence, and Poison Prevention pertaining to Child Passenger Safety in motor vehicle collisions. This project used twenty-two expert collaborators. The abstract of their work project includes:

    Child passenger safety has dramatically evolved over the past decade; however, motor vehicle crashes continue to be the leading cause of death of children 4 years and older.

    This policy statement provides 4 evidence-based recommendations for best practices in the choice of a child restraint system to optimize safety in passenger vehicles for children from birth through adolescence:

    1) Rear-facing car safety seats for most infants up to 2 years of age.

    2) Forward-facing car safety seats for most children through 4 years of age.

    3) Belt-positioning booster seats for most children through 8 years of age.

    4) Lap-and-shoulder seat belts for all who have outgrown booster seats.

    In addition, a fifth evidence-based recommendation is for all children younger than 13 years to ride in the rear seats of vehicles.

    It is important to note that every transition is associated with some decrease in protection; therefore, parents should be encouraged to delay these transitions for as long as possible.

    The American Academy of Pediatrics urges all pediatricians to know and promote these recommendations as part of child passenger safety anticipatory guidance at every health-supervision visit.

    Injuries from Restraints

    The leading cause of morbidity and mortality in children is trauma and the most frequent mechanism is motor vehicle collisions. Restraining children decreases their chance of injury or death. Seat belts prevent ejections and reduce impact between the child and the interior of the vehicle. Yet serious injury can still occur even when restraining belts are used because the belts themselves can cause harm and injury. The belt systems have their own unique pattern of injury as they change the distribution of forces, especially to the abdominal viscera in a deceleration event. Violent hyperflexion of the child’s torso over the lap belt applies flexion-distraction forces to the spine. Submarining, or slipping of the child underneath the lap belt can occur and predispose the child to additional abdominal trauma. Children at maximum risk are those too large to be in a safety seat yet too small for the available restraint belt system which are designed for adults (transition age from above). In spite of the drawbacks, adult seat belts are recommended over no restraint at all as they reduce injury and death.

    Seat belts may cause injuries from the neck to the pelvis. The probability of seat belt induced injuries increases when the restraint device is not used properly. Common errors in restraint use include:

    • The child is placed in a restraint not designed for his/her size or weight.
    • The child restraint is not properly anchored to the vehicle.
    • The restraint is not properly applied to the child.

    Children and Lap Belt Injuries

    Lap belt injuries are usually associated with children between ages 4-9, as these children are too large to use restraint seats and are too small to safely use adult lap belts. Children in this age group have special and unique anatomical characteristics that increase their vulnerability to lap belt injuries. Children have relatively larger heads and less well developed spinal musculature than adults, putting children at greater risk of hyperflexion injuries. The immature pelvis is more likely to slip below the seat belt creating fulcrum load injuries to the abdomen.

    Conventional lap restraints do not properly restrain or protect children because the anterior superior iliac spine is under developed in this population. The belt rides up onto the abdomen and chest and may itself cause significant injury. If the vehicle rapidly decelerates the child may whip forward with increased force than an adult because of the child’s higher center of gravity and greater body mass above the waist. Children have greater probability of lap belt induced abdominal and spinal injuries because of their greater percentage of body mass above the umbilicus, the poorly developed anterior superior iliac spine, and the frequent lack or misuse of the shoulder harness for children. Children lap belt syndrome injuries typically have an abrasion or contusion across the abdomen, created by the lap belt. These children may suffer from fracture, dislocations, neurologic damage, and significant intra-abdominal injuries.

    A 1986 report from the National Transportation Safety Board suggested that the use of rear seat lap belts may be more harmful than no seat belt use at all for children, stating: “In many cases, the lap belts induced severe to fatal injuries that probably would not have occurred if the lap belts had not been worn.” Although rear seat lap belts do not meet the special needs of children, most agree that restraining a child with a lap belt is preferable to having no restraint at all.

    Children and Shoulder Harness Injury

    Children between ages 4-9 are generally too large to use a restraint seat and yet are too small to safely use an adult shoulder harness restraint. If such children use an improperly fitting adult shoulder harness across their neck or face, serious and fatal injuries have been reported. As the neck / face position for the shoulder harness is uncomfortable for these children, they often will modify its placement by putting the shoulder harness behind their back or under their arm.

    Infants and Air Bags

    The deployment of air bags occurs at high velocity and creates a serious hazard for children as a result of “bag slap.” The air bag mushrooms out in a fraction of a second, reaching speeds up to 200 mph. Because the rear of the infant child restraint seat is close to the air bag compartment, it will receive a tremendous force from air bag deployment, resulting in serious head injuries to the child. Therefore, rear-facing infant seats should be used only in the back seat of vehicles that have front passenger air bags.

    Types of Injuries to Children

    As noted, both injury and death are frequently reported in children who are involved in motor vehicle crashes. Injury risk and seriousness is greatest when the child is unrestrained or improperly restrained. However, serious injury and death routinely occurs in properly restrained children. The injuries best documented in the literature include:

    Brain Injury

    Facial Fractures

    Cervical Spine Injuries

    Upper Cervical Injury

    Cervical Disc Injury

    Apophysis (growth center)Injury

    Cervical Spinal Cord Injury

    The Gamete of Soft Tissue Injuries

    Seat Belt Syndrome Abdominal Injuries

    Psychological Injury

    •••••

    Summary

    Children are injured in motor vehicle collisions, and it is not a small problem; rather, it is a huge problem. Motor vehicle collisions have consistently proven to be the number one reason for both mortality and morbidity in children younger than 25 years of age.

    The bodies of children younger than one year of age function as a single piece of inertial mass during motor vehicle collisions. Children in this age group have a proportionately larger head size as compared to overall body mass. Consequently, when they are unrestrained during a motor vehicle collision, they tend to “lead” with their head. Their heads and bodies will collide with the interior of the vehicle, and ejections of their bodies are known to occur. Such unrestrained children sustain serious head, brain, and cervical spinal cord injuries, leading to death and significant lifelong disabilities.

    When children younger than one year of age are restrained in a child restraint seat and that child restraint seat is not securely attached to the vehicle seat with the appropriate adult restraint belt, the child’s body and the restraint seat together will function as a single piece of inertial mass. Once again the child will sustain serious head and brain injuries. Not securing the child safety seat to the vehicle is considered to be misuse of the safety device.

    When children younger than one year of age are properly restrained in a forward facing child safety seat, and that child safety seat is properly secured to the vehicle with the adult restraint belt, serious head, brain, and cervical spinal cord injuries are largely avoided. Yet, in this forward facing position the properly restrained child has increased vulnerability to cervical spine injury, especially in frontal impacts. This is because the restraints immobilize the child’s body, yet their head remains moveable. With this young child’s proportionately larger head size as compared to overall body mass, and with the child’s poorly developed strength of the cervical spine musculoskeletal tissues, significant cervical spine soft tissues occur.

    Most serious injuries to restrained children younger than one year of age occur during a frontal impact collision. These serious injuries can be reduced by placing the child restraint seat in a rearward facing direction, and then properly securing this child restraint seat to the vehicle using the adult restraint belts. Serious injuries are reduced as the forces of the frontal impact are dispersed over a broader surface area of the child; over the back of the skull, the thoracic cage, and the pelvis. There is no doubt that a child of this age group who is properly restrained in the rearward facing position has the best chance of avoiding injury in a motor vehicle collision, and especially in serious frontal impact collisions.

    When children younger than one year of age are restrained in a child safety seat that is properly secured to the vehicle by the adult belt, but the crotch strap of the child safety seat is not properly attached, the child’s body will “submarine” under the waist strap, catching the child under the chin. The results are serious cervical spine injury, including fracture of the odontoid process or a bipedicular (hangman’s) fracture of C2. An adult must always properly secure the crotch strap portion of the child restraint seat for children in this age group.

    Children younger than one year of age should not be restrained in a child safety seat in the rearward facing position in the front seat of a vehicle that has a passenger side air bag. In this position, the closeness of the child to a rapidly outwardly exploding air bag can launch the safety seat and child at an extremely high velocity, resulting in serious head and brain injury.

    Children between 1 – 4 years of age are similar to children younger than age one in that their heads are proportionately larger as compared to overall body mass, the strength of their musculoskeletal spinal tissues are not as developed as those of the adult. When they are unrestrained they tend to “lead” with their heads sustaining serious head, brain, and cervical spinal cord injuries after colliding with the interior of the vehicle, and are at risk of ejection. Recent retrospective statistical studies show that the children in this age group are least injured when they are properly restrained in a child safety seat facing the rearward direction. When children in this age group are properly restrained and facing the forward direction, they sustain significant cervical spine soft tissue injury during frontal collisions. Contrary to common practice, it is recommended that children remain in child restraint seats facing the rearward position for a long as possible as they age, ideally to approximately age 4.

    Caution should be used when restraining children between 1- 4 years of age in an adult lap belt. The pelvis of children in this age group is much shorter in height, and the anterior superior iliac spine is grossly underdeveloped as compared to that of the adult, increasing the tendency for the lap belt to slip up over the top of the pelvis rim and to be in contact with the abdomen and its contents. Because of the shorter stature of these children, in a frontal impact their face or chest will not collide with the dashboard or with the seat in front of them. This results in a serious rapid flexion of the child’s torso around the adult lap belt, or “jackknifing.” Serious and fatal abdominal viscera and mid lumbar spinal injuries result.

    Children between ages 4 – 9 years have the greatest difficulty with motor vehicle collision safety. Children in this age group face forward nearly always and are restrained in the adult seat belt. Unfortunately, adult seat belts do not meet the special needs of this group of children. Often they are riding in the rear seat of the vehicle, and there are still many vehicles that do not have shoulder harness restraints available for rear seat passengers. As the developing pelvis remains short in height with an underdeveloped anterior superior iliac spine in this age group, it is once again common for the adult lap belt restraint to slip over the rim of the pelvis and to come into contact with the abdomen and its contents. The center of gravity for these children is higher as compared to that of the adult, superior to the lap belt. This proportionately increases the fulcrum stress above the lap belt in a frontal impact or during a rebound flexion following a rear impact. Again, this results in serious injuries to the abdominal viscera and mid lumbar spine, including Chance fractures. Depending on the stature of these children, their face/head may impact the dashboard or the seat in front of them, resulting in significant face, head, brain, and cervical spinal cord injuries. It is, therefore, recommended that whenever possible, children of this age group should be restrained in a lap belt shoulder belt combination.

    Children between ages 4 – 9 years also have unique problems when using the recommended adult lap belt with shoulder harness combination. Because of their short stature, the shoulder harness does not fit their body adequately. For many children in this age group, the shoulder harness will cut across their cervical spine or face rather than their chest. When left in this position, the shoulder harness can cause serious and fatal cervical spine and facial injuries. Also, because of the uncomfortable annoyance of the shoulder belt crossing the neck or face, many children of this age group will simply place the shoulder strap behind their back, rendering them susceptible to the lap belt injuries noted above. Other children will place the shoulder harness under the arm. This position is also quite dangerous, as the thoracic cage is not capable of handling the forces of a frontal collision during this age of skeletal maturation that are generated by the shoulder harness. The stresses imparted to the child can seriously injure the thoracic cage, including imparting cardiac and pulmonary trauma. The proper shoulder harness placement for this age is across the chest, over the clavicle, but remaining off the cervical spine and face. This is best accomplished by using a booster seat that effectively increases the height of the child, or by using a device that lowers the shoulder harness away from the face and neck and into the proper position and secures it in place by attaching to the lap belt.

    Very young children cannot communicate to their parents or health care providers the location or nature of their injuries. Even non-life threatening injuries in children should be documented and properly managed.

     

    REFERENCES

    Boyd, William, M.D., Pathology, Lea & Febiger, (1952).

    Buckwalter J, Effects of Early Motion on Healing of Musculoskeletal Tissues, Hand Clinics, Volume 12, Number 1, February 1996.

    Cohen, I. Kelman; Diegelmann, Robert F; Lindbald, William J; Wound Healing, Biochemical & Clinical Aspects, WB Saunders, 1992.

    Cyriax, James, M.D., Orthopaedic Medicine, Diagnosis of Soft Tissue Lesions, Bailliere Tindall, Vol. 1, (1982).

    Fischgrund, Jeffrey S, Neck Pain, monograph 27, American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons, 2004.

    Gargan, MF, Bannister, GC, Long-Term Prognosis of Soft-Tissue Injuries of the Neck, Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, September, 1990.

    Gunn, C. Chan, Pain, Acupuncture & Related Subjects, C. Chan Gunn,

    (1985).

    Gunn, C. Chan, Treating Myofascial Pain: Intramuscular Stimulation (IMS) for Myofascial Pain Syndromes of Neuropathic Origin, University of Washington, 1989.

    Hodgson, S.P. and Grundy, M., Whiplash Injuries: Their Long-term Prognosis and Its Relationship to Compensation, Neuro-Orthopedics, (1989), 7.88-91.

    Jonsson H, Cesarini K, Sahlstedt B, Rauschning W, Findings and Outcome in Whiplash-Type Neck Distortions; Spine, Vol. 19, No. 24, December 15, 1994, pp. 2733-2743.

    Kannus P, Immobilization or Early Mobilization After an Acute Soft-Tissue Injury?; The Physician And Sports Medicine; March, 2000; Vol. 26 No 3, pp. 55-63.

    Kellett J; Acute soft tissue injuries-a review of the literature; Medicine and Science of Sports and Exercise, American College of Sports Medicine, Vol. 18 No.5, (1986), pp. 489-500.

    Kirkaldy-Willis, W.H., M.D., Managing Low Back Pain, Churchill Livingston, (1983 & 1988).

    Kirkaldy-Willis, W.H., M.D., & Cassidy, J.D.,”Spinal Manipulation in the Treatment of Low-Back Pain,” Can Fam Physician, (1985), 31:535-40.

    Majno, Guido and Joris, Isabelle, Cells, Tissues, and Disease: Principles of General Pathology, Oxford University Press, 2004.

    Mealy K, Brennan H, Fenelon GCC; Early Mobilization of Acute Whiplash Injuries; British Medical Journal, March 8, 1986, 292(6521): 656-657.

    Oakes BW. Acute soft tissue injuries. Australian Family Physician. 1982; 10 (7): 3-16.

    Omoigui S; The biochemical origin of pain: The origin of all pain is inflammation and the inflammatory response: Inflammatory profile of pain syndromes; Medical Hypothesis; 2007, Vol. 69, pp. 1169-1178.

    Oschman, James L, Energy Medicine: The Scientific Basis, Churchill Livingstone, 2000.

    Rogier M. van Rijn, Anton G. van Os, Roos M.D. Bernsen, Pim A. Luijsterburg, Bart W. Koes, Professor, Sita M.A. Bierma-Zeinstra; What Is the Clinical Course of Acute Ankle Sprains? A Systematic Literature Review; The American Journal of Medicine; April 2008, Vol. 121, No. 4, pp. 324-331.

    Rosenfeld M, Gunnarsson R, Borenstein P, Early Intervention in Whiplash-Associated Disorders, A Comparison of Two Treatment Protocols; Spine, 2000;25:1782-1787.

    Roy, Steven, M.D., and Irvin, Richard, Sports Medicine: Prevention, Evaluation, Management, and Rehabilitation, Prentice-Hall, Inc. (1983).

    Salter R, Continuous Passive Motion, A Biological Concept for the Healing and Regeneration of Articular Cartilage, Ligaments, and Tendons; From Origination to Research to Clinical Applications, Williams and Wilkins, 1993.

    Seletz E; Whiplash Injuries; Neurophysiological Basis for Pain and Methods Used for Rehabilitation; Journal of the American Medical Association; November 29, 1958, pp. 1750-1755.

    Schofferman J, Bogduk N, Slosar P; Chronic whiplash and whiplash-associated disorders: An evidence-based approach; Journal of the American Academy of Orthopedic Surgeons; October 2007;15(10):596-606.

    Stonebrink, R.D., D.C., “Physiotherapy Guidelines for the Chiropractic Profession,” ACA Journal of Chiropractic, (June1975), Vol. IX, p.65-75.

    Stearns, ML, Studies on development of connective tissue in transparent chambers in rabbit’s ear; American Journal of Anatomy, vol. 67, 1940, p. 55.

    Sturzenegger M, DiStefano G, Radanov BP, Schnidrig A. Presenting symptoms and signs after whiplash injury: the influence of accident mechanisms. Neurology. April 1994;44(4):688-93.

    Sturzenegger M, Radanov BP, Di Stefano G. The effect of accident mechanisms and initial findings on the long-term course of whiplash injury. Journal of Neurology. July 1995;242(7):443-9.

    Wyke, B.D., Articular neurology and manipulative therapy, Aspects of Manipulative Therapy, Churchill Livingstone, 1980, pp.72-77.

    Woo, Savio L.-Y.,(ed.), Injury and Repair of the Musculoskeletal Soft Tissues, American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons,(1988), p.18-21; 106-117; 151-7; 199-200; 245-6; 300-19; 436-7; 451-2; 474-6.

  • Soft Tissue Injury and Repair

    Soft Tissue Injury and Repair

    HISTORY:

    Mandy, a 50-year-old female, was injured in a motor vehicle collision.

    Her stationary vehicle was struck from the rear by a vehicle of similar mass that was traveling at a speed of approximately 20 miles per hour at the time of collision. Damage to her vehicle was judged to be $6,600.

    The collision caught Mandy by surprise, and she was looking left at the moment of impact. This is important because there is good evidence (Sturzenegger 1994, Sturzenegger 1995) that factors associated with greater initial injury and a worse outcome one year after injury are (in descending order):

    1) Being involved in a collision in which the patient is caught by surprise.

    2) Being involved in a collision in which the patient’s head is rotated.

    3) Being involved in a collision in which the impact is from a rear-end direction.

    Although dazed, Mandy did not lose consciousness. An ambulance did take her to the emergency department of her own HMO, which was geographically close by.

    At the hospital, Mandy was evaluated and radiographs were taken. There were no broken bones, signs of instability, congenital anomalies, or degenerative disease. She was told she had suffered a soft tissue injury and that it would get better in a few days to a few weeks.

    For treatment, Mandy’s doctors put her into a soft cervical spine collar, she was prescribed a nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug, and given a heat pack for home use. She was advised to return for a follow-up visit if she was having continuing problems. Mandy was advised to continue to work in her usual occupation as a real estate agent.

    Mandy began wearing her cervical spine soft collar most of the time. Although the anti-inflammatory medicines and the hot pack seemed to help her (this seems

    paradoxical), she did not seem to be making overall relevant improvement. She continued to have significant neck pain and stiffness with an occasional headache.

    Mandy did continue to work and actually missed no work at all. However, her neck was sore and stiff making her grumpy, and she became fatigued easily.

    Mandy wore her cervical collar nearly constantly for about two weeks, then she reduced its usage to only when she was engaging in more strenuous activities, such as driving or shopping, and during certain activities at work. She liked her hot pack and she used it on average 3-4 times per day. She still needed her pain medicine, taking them a few times daily.

    After about two months of being essentially unchanged, Mandy returned to her HMO physician and asked him if there was anything else she could do for her neck pain with occasional headaches. Her doctor authorized for Mandy to see one of the HMO’s physical therapists. She was prescribed one physical therapy session per week for the next four weeks.

    Mandy’s physical therapist talked to her about her posture and gave her some exercises. He evaluated the ergonomics of her desk, primarily as related to when she was doing work on her computer.

    After her four physical therapy visits, Mandy had incorporated his advice and exercises into her routine. Yet, she continued to suffer from neck pain and stiffness with occasional headaches.

    Nine months after being injured, Mandy was still suffering and she could not go a full day without taking pain medications. Mandy needed to do something different.

    Mandy became my patient nine months after being injured.

    •••••

    There is a common misconception that injured soft tissues will heal in a period of time between four and eight weeks. It is frequently claimed that injured soft tissues will heal spontaneously, leaving no long-term residuals, and that treatment is not required. This type of information is misleading and confusing because it is not true. As an example, in 2008, The American Journal of Medicine published a systemic review of the literature evaluating the clinical course of acute ankle sprain (Rijn 2008). The authors conducted a database search in MEDLINE, CINAHL, PEDro, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Controlled trial register. They found 31 studies that met their inclusion criteria. Their findings include:

    • 5% to 33% of patients still experienced ankle pain after 1 year.
    • The studies reported an incidence of subjective instability of their injured ankle in up to 53% patients.
    • 15% to 64% had not fully recovered at 3 years.
    • The incidence of re-sprains ranged from 3% to 34% of the patients.

    Most of my med-legal experience is with whiplash injury. Often, insurance defense personnel and their chiropractic/medical experts make an analogy between the whiplash-injured neck and a sprained ankle. Their classic claim is that a sprained ankle will heal spontaneously (without any treatment) and quickly (weeks), and there are no long-term residuals.

    This article by Rijn presents a much different reality pertaining to the healing of the sprained ankle: at 3 years up to 64% have not fully recovered, up to 33% have residual pain, up to 53% suffer from residual instability, and up to 34% suffer from re-injury. It appears that 15% to 64% have some degree of permanent injury. Additionally, the severity of ankle injury is not a strong predictor for the ultimate clinical outcome. It appears that trauma from ankle sprain and whiplash have a number of shared characteristics: significant residual pain, instability, re-injury rates, permanent injury residuals, and the severity of injury not being a predictor for the ultimate clinical outcome.

    Consequently, I believe that the most important question is:

    Is there an approach to the management of injured soft tissues that improves the timing and quality of the healing outcome?

    •••••

    Published articles and books concerning the healing of injured soft tissues (Oakes 1982; Roy and Irving 1983; Kellett 1986; Buckwalter/Woo 1988, Majno 2004) indicate that the time frame for soft healing is approximately one year.

    The healing of injured soft tissues takes place in three specific phases. The first phase is called the acute inflammatory phase. This phase will last approximately 72 hours. During this phase, after the initial injury, an electrical current is generated at the wound, called the “current of injury.” This “current of injury” attracts fibroblasts to the wound (Oschman, 2000). During this phase there is also initial bleeding and continual associated inflammation of the injured tissues. Because of the increasing inflammatory cascade during this period of time, it is not uncommon for the patient to feel worse for each of the first three days following injury. Because there is disruption of local vascular supplies, there is insufficient availability of substrate (glucose,

    oxygen, etc.) to produce large enough quantities of ATP energy to initiate collagen protein synthesis to repair the wound.

    Experience and published studies (Kellett 1996) indicate that the best management of soft tissue injuries during the acute inflammatory phase is ice therapy. Ice therapy during the first 72 hours following injury reduces pain and swelling, and minimizes the formation of scar tissue that often causes prolonged disability (Seletz 1958). [Unfortunately for Mandy, during this phase of soft tissue healing, she was prescribed and used heat].

    After 72 hours following injury, the damaged blood vessels have mended. The resulting increased availability of glucose and oxygen elevates local ATP levels and collagen repair begins by the fibroblasts that accumulated during the acute inflammatory phase. This second phase of healing is called the phase of regeneration. During the regeneration phase the disruption in the injured muscles and ligaments is bridged. Some references call the regeneration phase the phase of repair, which creates confusion about the timing of healing (Jackson, 1977). “Repair” connotation is that the process has completed, which, as we will see, is not the case. The fibroblasts manufacture and secrete collagen protein glues that bridge the gap in the torn tissues. This phase will last approximately 6-8 weeks (Jackson, 1977). At the end of 6-8 weeks, the gap in the torn tissues is more than 90% bridged; more than 90% of the collagen that is laid down in the breach occurs during this second phase of healing. Consequently, many will erroneously claim this to be the end of healing. However, it clearly is not.

    Experience and published studies (Stearns 1940, Seletz 1958, Cyriax 1982, Roy 1983, Kellett 1986, Mealy 1986, Cohen 1992, Salter 1993, Jonsson 1994, Buckwalter 1996, Kannus 2000, Rosenfeld 2000) document that the best management of soft tissue injuries during the second phase of healing is early, persistent, controlled mobilization. In contrast, immobilization is harmful, leading to increased risk of slowed healing and chronicity (Stearns 1940, Mealy 1986, Cohen 1992, Salter 1993, Jonsson 1994, Kannus 2000, Rosenfeld 2000, Schofferman 2007). [Unfortunately for Mandy, during this second phase of soft tissue healing, she was prescribed and used a cervical collar].

    There is a third and final phase of healing. This phase is called the phase of remodeling.

    The phase of remodeling starts near the end of the phase of regeneration. During the phase of remodeling the collagen protein glues that have been laid down for repair are remodeled in the direction of stress and strain. This means that the fibers in the tissue will become stronger, and will change their orientation from an irregular pattern to a more regular pattern, a pattern more like the original undamaged tissues. Proper treatment during this remodeling phase is very necessary if the tissues are to get the best end product of healing. It is during this remodeling

    phase that the tissues regain strength and alignment. Remodeling takes approximately one year from the date of injury. It is established that remodeling takes place as a direct byproduct of motion. Chiropractic healthcare puts motion into the tissues in an effort at getting them to line up along the directions of stress and strain, thereby giving a stronger, more elastic end product of healing.

    Stages of Healing Following Soft Tissue Injury

    Stages of Healing Following Soft Tissue Injury

    Possible Residual Fibrotic Changes

    Traditional chiropractic joint manipulation healthcare is directed towards putting motion into the periarticular paraphysiological space. The concept of paraphysiological joint motion was first described by Sandoz in 1976, and is explained well by Kirkaldy-Willis 1983 and 1988, by Kirkaldy-Willis/Cassidy 1985, and in the 2004 monograph on Neck Pain (edited by Fischgrund) published by the American Academy of Orthopedic Surgeons (see picture). These discussions clearly show that there is a component of motion that cannot be properly addressed by exercise, massage, etc., and that this component of motion can be properly addressed by osseous joint manipulation. Therefore, traditional chiropractic osseous joint manipulation adds a unique aspect to the treatment and the remodeling of periarticular soft tissues that have sustained an injury.

    During this third phase of healing, the phase of remodeling, Mandy continued to wear a cervical collar, especially during high-demand activities. Although she did add some exercises to her management, which is helpful, she employed no management aspects that would have introduced motion into the periarticular paraphysiological

    space. As Schofferman and Bogduk state in their 2007 article titled: Chronic whiplash and whiplash-associated disorders: An evidence-based approach,

    “exercise alone is rarely curative”

    Additionally, Drs. Schofferman and Bogduk suggest there is value in spinal manipulation in the management of chronic whiplash patients (Schofferman, 2007).

    •••••

    Mandy’s whiplash soft tissue injury management that included heat, immobilization and limited exercises did not result in an acceptable clinical outcome. Nine months after being injured, she was suffering from chronic neck pain, weakness, and occasional headaches.

    My approach to her management included:

    • Regular and strenuous resistive effort exercises of the muscles of her cervical and thoracic spines.
    • No more use of a cervical collar.
    • Transverse friction myotherapy to reduce the adverseness of post-traumatic muscular adhesions and fibrosis (Cyriax, 1982).
    • Specific osseous joint manipulation to the joints that were reduced in the symmetry and/or magnitude of normal motion. Such manipulations will reduce articular adhesions, remodel periarticular fibrosis, reduce muscle hypertonicity and spasm, and close the “pain gate” (Kirkaldy-Willis, 1983, 1985, 1988).
    • Specific chiropractic postural correctional techniques. Improved posture reduces stresses in both soft tissues, muscles, and articulations.

    Mandy remained under my care for a period of 4 months, and she was seen a total of 32 visits at our clinic. Her progress was steady and progressive. When she was released from additional regularly scheduled treatment, she was instructed to continue to do her prescribed exercises. Mandy’s symptoms were not completely resolved, but she judged her clinical status to be 85% improved as compared to when she first entered our clinic.

    •••••

    There are some problems associated with the healing of injured soft tissues. Microscopic histological studies show that the repaired tissue is different than the original, adjacent, undamaged tissues. During the initial acute inflammatory phase there is bleeding from the damaged tissues and consequent local inflammation. This progressive bleeding releases increased numbers of fibroblasts into the surrounding tissues. Chemicals that are released trigger the inflammation response that is noted in cases of trauma. Subsequent to the inflammatory response and to the number of fibrocytes that are released into the tissues, the healing process is really a process of fibrosis. In 1975, Stonebrink addresses that the last phase of the pathophysiological response to trauma is tissue fibrosis. Boyd in 1953, Cyriax in 1983, and Majno/Joris in 2004 note that there is tissue fibrosis subsequent to trauma. This fibrosis of repair subsequent to soft tissue trauma creates problems that can adversely affect the tissues and the patient for years, decades, or even forever.

    Fibrosed tissues are functionally different from the adjacent normal tissues. The differences fall into two main categories:

    Category 1: The repaired tissue is weaker and less strong than the undamaged tissues. This is because the diameter of the healing collagen fibers are smaller, and the end product of healing is deficient in the number of crossed linkages within the collagen repair.

    Category 2: The repaired tissue is stiffer or less elastic than the original, undamaged tissues. This is because the healing fibers are not aligned identically to that of the original. Examination range of motion studies will indicate that there are areas of decrease of the normal joint ranges of motion.

    In addition, Cyriax notes “fibrous tissue is capable of maintaining an inflammatory response long after the initial cause has ceased to operate.” Since inflammation alters the thresholds of the nociceptive afferent system (Omoigui 2007), physical examinations in these cases will show these fibrotic areas display increased sensitivity, and digital pressure may show hypertonicity and spasm. This increased sensitivity can be documented with the use of an algometer, which is a device that uses pressure to determine the initiating threshold of pain.

    Because the fibrotic residuals have rendered the tissues weaker, less elastic, and more sensitive, the patient will have a history of flare-ups of pain and/or spasm at times of increased use or stress. These episodes of pain and/or spasm at times of increased use or stress of the once damaged soft tissues is the rule rather than the exception, and a problem that the patient will have to learn to live with. It is likely that the patient will continue to have episodes of pain and/or spasm for an indefinite period of time in the future. It is probable that the patient will have a need for continuing care subsequent to these episodes of pain and/or spasm.

    Consistent with these concepts, a study by Hodgson in 1989 indicated that 62% of those injured in automobile accidents still have significant symptoms caused by the accident 12 1/2 years after being injured; and that of the symptomatic 62%, 62.5% had to permanently alter their work activities and 44% had to permanently alter their

    leisure activities in order to avoid exacerbation of symptoms. One of the conclusions of the article is that these long-term residuals were most likely the result of post-traumatic alterations in the once damaged tissues.

    A study by Gargan in 1990 indicated that only 12% of those sustaining a soft tissue neck injury had achieved a complete recovery more than ten years after the date of the accident. One of the conclusions of this study is that the patient’s symptoms would not improve after a period of two years following the injury.

    It is established neurologically (Wyke 1985, Kirkaldy-Willis and Cassidy 1985) that when a chiropractor adjusts (specific directional spinal manipulation) the joints in the region of pain and/or spasm, that there is a depolarization of the mechanoreceptors that are located in the facet joint capsular ligaments, and that the cycle of pain and/or spasm can be neurologically aborted. This is why many patients feel better after they receive specific joint manipulation from a chiropractor following an episode of increased pain and/or spasm.

    What is the basis for the chronic post-trauma pain syndromes that so many patients suffer from? A good explanation is found from Gunn (1978, 1980, 1989). He refers to this type of pain as supersensitivity. The supersensitivity type pain is a residual of the scarring or the fibrosis that was created by the injuries sustained in this accident. The treatment that we give to the patient for the injuries sustained in an accident is really not designed to heal the sprain or strain but rather, to change the fibrotic nature of the reparative process that has left the patient with residuals that are weaker, stiffer, and more sore. The actual diagnosis for this type of problem is initial sprain/strain injuries of the paraspinal soft tissues with fibrotic residuals subsequent to the fibrosis of repair of once damaged soft tissues that have left these tissues weaker, stiffer, and more sensitive as compared to the original tissues. The majority of our efforts in the treatment of post-traumatic chronic pain syndrome patients is in dealing with the residual fibrosis of repair and its associated mechanical and neurological consequences. These residuals to some degree are most probably permanent. The patient will have to learn to deal with the long-term residuals and the occasional episodes of pain and/or spasm. However, as noted above, occasional specific joint manipulation in the involved areas can neurologically inhibit muscle tone, improve ranges of motion, disperse accumulated inflammatory exudates, and the patient will have less pain and improved function.

    The concepts briefly discussed above are frequently not understood or appreciated. There is a tendency for healthcare providers to not properly examine the patient in order to document these regions of tissue fibrosis and its consequent mechanical and neurological consequences and, therefore, to quote Stonebrink, the real problem is missed.

    •••••

    I believe that for Mandy, her poor early management resulted in excessive tissue fibrosis, and as noted above, that was the basis for her chronicity. Our management of her problems reduced the magnitude of her fibrotic residuals and their adverseness. Her cervical spine range of motion increased, her posture improved, her muscle strength increased and her musculoskeletal fatigue resolved. She no longer used her cervical collar and she did not need any pain medications. Her residual symptoms were manageable and tolerable with continuing cervical spine exercise. It is probable that some of her fibrotic residuals were not reducible, creating the pathoanatomical basis for her residual symptoms (Josson 1994).

    Addendum

    Three months after Mandy was released from treatment, she was involved in another similar motor vehicle collision. She sustained significant soft tissue injuries of her cervical and thoracic spines, essentially in the exact locations of the collision she had sustained approximately nineteen months prior.

    The day of this second injury, Mandy presented herself to our clinic for management.

    Our acute care protocol included recumbent traction (for 20 minutes) with a cervical pillow and ice pack. This was done four times per day, once in the office and three times at home. She was initially seen in our office daily for the first three weeks following her injury. Low-level laser therapy was applied for 20 minutes daily to her injured spinal regions in an effort to elevate ATP levels, accelerating the healing process.

    On the fourth day, we added to her management a passive motion protocol to the joints of the cervical and thoracic spines; each of her joints were carefully pushed into the passive range of motion (see picture below) while using the laser with an anti-inflammatory setting. This is done in an effort to disperse inflammation and thereby reduce long-term scarring (fibrosis). It also puts tension in the developing granulation tissue, improving alignment and strength. This is a benefit that cannot be achieved by exercise alone.

    At two weeks, we began to provide specific joint manipulation (adjustments) to the articulations that showed reduced and/or altered motion patterns. Simultaneously, postural corrections, transverse friction myotherapy and resistive effort exercises were initiated.

    Mandy’s entire trauma management program lasted eighteen weeks; she was seen in our office a total of 34 times. When she was released from additional regularly scheduled treatment, she reported to be 100% resolved of all signs and symptoms. This means that the residuals she had from her prior accident had completely resolved. I believe that the second accident had re-torn the fibrotic residuals she retained from her prior collision. The magnitude of the second collision was such that

    it reduced fibrotic residuals that I was unable to reduce therapeutically. But I now had the opportunity to manage her new acute injuries with a different, superior approach. The results were gratifying for both Mandy and myself.

    Joint Ranges of Motion

    Joint Ranges of Motion

    REFERENCES

    Boyd, William, M.D., Pathology, Lea & Febiger, (1952).

    Buckwalter J, Effects of Early Motion on Healing of Musculoskeletal Tissues, Hand Clinics, Volume 12, Number 1, February 1996.

    Cohen, I. Kelman; Diegelmann, Robert F; Lindbald, William J; Wound Healing, Biochemical & Clinical Aspects, WB Saunders, 1992.

    Cyriax, James, M.D., Orthopaedic Medicine, Diagnosis of Soft Tissue Lesions, Bailliere Tindall, Vol. 1, (1982).

    Fischgrund, Jeffrey S, Neck Pain, monograph 27, American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons, 2004.

    Gargan, MF, Bannister, GC, Long-Term Prognosis of Soft-Tissue Injuries of the Neck, Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, September, 1990.

    Gunn, C. Chan, Pain, Acupuncture & Related Subjects, C. Chan Gunn,

    (1985).

    Gunn, C. Chan, Treating Myofascial Pain: Intramuscular Stimulation (IMS) for Myofascial Pain Syndromes of Neuropathic Origin, University of Washington, 1989.

    Hodgson, S.P. and Grundy, M., Whiplash Injuries: Their Long-term Prognosis and Its Relationship to Compensation, Neuro-Orthopedics, (1989), 7.88-91.

    Jonsson H, Cesarini K, Sahlstedt B, Rauschning W, Findings and Outcome in Whiplash-Type Neck Distortions; Spine, Vol. 19, No. 24, December 15, 1994, pp. 2733-2743.

    Kannus P, Immobilization or Early Mobilization After an Acute Soft-Tissue Injury?; The Physician And Sports Medicine; March, 2000; Vol. 26 No 3, pp. 55-63.

    Kellett J; Acute soft tissue injuries-a review of the literature; Medicine and Science of Sports and Exercise, American College of Sports Medicine, Vol. 18 No.5, (1986), pp. 489-500.

    Kirkaldy-Willis, W.H., M.D., Managing Low Back Pain, Churchill Livingston, (1983 & 1988).

    Kirkaldy-Willis, W.H., M.D., & Cassidy, J.D.,”Spinal Manipulation in the Treatment of Low-Back Pain,” Can Fam Physician, (1985), 31:535-40.

    Majno, Guido and Joris, Isabelle, Cells, Tissues, and Disease: Principles of General Pathology, Oxford University Press, 2004.

    Mealy K, Brennan H, Fenelon GCC; Early Mobilization of Acute Whiplash Injuries; British Medical Journal, March 8, 1986, 292(6521): 656-657.

    Oakes BW. Acute soft tissue injuries. Australian Family Physician. 1982; 10 (7): 3-16.

    Omoigui S; The biochemical origin of pain: The origin of all pain is inflammation and the inflammatory response: Inflammatory profile of pain syndromes; Medical Hypothesis; 2007, Vol. 69, pp. 1169-1178.

    Oschman, James L, Energy Medicine: The Scientific Basis, Churchill Livingstone, 2000.

    Rogier M. van Rijn, Anton G. van Os, Roos M.D. Bernsen, Pim A. Luijsterburg, Bart W. Koes, Professor, Sita M.A. Bierma-Zeinstra; What Is the Clinical Course of Acute Ankle Sprains? A Systematic Literature Review; The American Journal of Medicine; April 2008, Vol. 121, No. 4, pp. 324-331.

    Rosenfeld M, Gunnarsson R, Borenstein P, Early Intervention in Whiplash-Associated Disorders, A Comparison of Two Treatment Protocols; Spine, 2000;25:1782-1787.

    Roy, Steven, M.D., and Irvin, Richard, Sports Medicine: Prevention, Evaluation, Management, and Rehabilitation, Prentice-Hall, Inc. (1983).

    Salter R, Continuous Passive Motion, A Biological Concept for the Healing and Regeneration of Articular Cartilage, Ligaments, and Tendons; From Origination to Research to Clinical Applications, Williams and Wilkins, 1993.

    Seletz E; Whiplash Injuries; Neurophysiological Basis for Pain and Methods Used for Rehabilitation; Journal of the American Medical Association; November 29, 1958, pp. 1750-1755.

    Schofferman J, Bogduk N, Slosar P; Chronic whiplash and whiplash-associated disorders: An evidence-based approach; Journal of the American Academy of Orthopedic Surgeons; October 2007;15(10):596-606.

    Stonebrink, R.D., D.C., “Physiotherapy Guidelines for the Chiropractic Profession,” ACA Journal of Chiropractic, (June1975), Vol. IX, p.65-75.

    Stearns, ML, Studies on development of connective tissue in transparent chambers in rabbit’s ear; American Journal of Anatomy, vol. 67, 1940, p. 55.

    Sturzenegger M, DiStefano G, Radanov BP, Schnidrig A. Presenting symptoms and signs after whiplash injury: the influence of accident mechanisms. Neurology. April 1994;44(4):688-93.

    Sturzenegger M, Radanov BP, Di Stefano G. The effect of accident mechanisms and initial findings on the long-term course of whiplash injury. Journal of Neurology. July 1995;242(7):443-9.

    Wyke, B.D., Articular neurology and manipulative therapy, Aspects of Manipulative Therapy, Churchill Livingstone, 1980, pp.72-77.

    Woo, Savio L.-Y.,(ed.), Injury and Repair of the Musculoskeletal Soft Tissues, American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons,(1988), p.18-21; 106-117; 151-7; 199-200; 245-6; 300-19; 436-7; 451-2; 474-6.

  • Whiplash Update Two Important Studies And Their Clinical Applications

    Whiplash Update Two Important Studies And Their Clinical Applications

    BACKGROUND INFORMATION FROM DAN MURPHY

     

    • All pain has an inflammatory component. In his 2007 article, Omoigui, concludes:

    “The origin of all pain is inflammation and the inflammatory response.”

    “Irrespective of the type of pain, whether it is acute or chronic pain, peripheral or central pain, nociceptive or neuropathic pain, the underlying origin is inflammation and the inflammatory response.”

    “Activation of pain receptors, transmission and modulation of pain signals, neuroplasticity and central sensitization are all one continuum of inflammation and the inflammatory response.”

    “Irrespective of the characteristic of the pain, whether it is sharp, dull, aching, burning, stabbing, numbing or tingling, all pain arises from inflammation and the inflammatory response.”

    • Post-traumatic inflammation is often the consequence of the membrane release of arachidonic acid fat cascading into the pro-inflammatory hormone prostaglandin E2 (PGE2). In his 2010 article, Maroon states:

    “A major component of the inflammatory pathway is called the arachidonic acid pathway because arachidonic acid is immediately released from traumatized cellular membranes.”

    Cell membrane trauma releases arachidonic acid. Arachidonic acid is then transformed into the pro-inflammatory hormones prostaglandins and thromboxanes through the enzymatic action of cyclooxygenase.

    This is why omega-6/omega-3 fatty acid balancing is an important clinical strategy in the management of patients suffering from pain syndromes (Boswell, 2006).

    • Inflammation alters the pain threshold and increases pain perception (Omoigui, 2007; Boswell, 2006; Maroon, 2006; Cleland, 2006; Goldberg 2007; Maroon, 2010). In 2007, Omoigui states:

    The unifying Law of Pain indicates that there is an inflammatory soup of biochemical mediators that are present in all pain syndromes.

    • The resolution of inflammation is fibrosis or scar tissue (Manjo, 2004). In 2004, Manjo states:

    “After a day or two of acute inflammation, the connective tissue—in which the inflammatory reaction is unfolding—begins to react, producing more fibroblasts, more capillaries, more cells—more tissue. In other words, granulation tissue arises from normal connective tissue, but it cannot be mistaken for normal connective tissue, because its fibroblasts are plump and activated.”

    “Fibrosis means an excess of fibrous connective tissue. It implies an excess of collagen fibers, with a varying mixture of other matrix components. It can be a local phenomenon, as an end result to chronic inflammation and of wound healing.”

    “When fibrosis develops in the course of inflammation it may contribute to the healing process.” “By contrast, an excessive or inappropriate stimulus can produce severe fibrosis and impair function.”

    “Why does fibrosis develop? In most cases the beginning clearly involves chronic inflammation. Fibrosis is largely secondary to inflammation.”

    • Fibrotic granulation tissue is capable of maintaining an inflammatory response long after the completion of the healing process, a component of chronic pain (Cyriax, 1982). In 1982, Cyriax states:

    “Fibrous tissue appears capable of maintaining an inflammation, originally traumatic, as the result of a habit continuing long after the cause has ceased to operate.”

    “It seems that the inflammatory reaction at the injured fibers continues, not nearly during the period of healing, but for an indefinite period of time afterwards, maintained by the normal stresses to which such tissues are subject.”

    • Tension within the scar granulation tissue initiates remodeling, reducing inflammation. [Supports the need for early persistent mobilization and chiropractic adjustments]. Once again, in 1982 Cyriax states:

    “Tension within the granulation tissue lines the cells up along the direction of stress. Hence, during the healing of mobile tissues, excessive immobilization is harmful. It prevents the formation of a scar strong in the important direction by avoiding the strains leading to due orientation of fibrous tissue and also allows the scar to become unduly adherent, e.g. to bone.”

    ••••••••••

     Americans eat a lot of fat. This is important in a trauma clinical practice because one particular type of fat is linked to both acute and chronic pain. In fact, this fat was the central theme of the 1982 Nobel Prize in Medicine/Physiology, which pertained to pain.

    Our bodies have somewhere around 75 trillion cells. The cell membranes are composed primarily of fat, and it is the fat that we habitually eat. Trauma/injury to tissues disrupts the cell membranes, releasing the fat and activating enzymes that metabolize those fats (Maroon, 2010).

    There is a type of dietary fat that is linked to inflammation and pain. If people eat this pro-inflammatory pain producing fat, then it is that fat that is released as a consequence of trauma/injury. This fat is not a saturated fat. It is a poly-unsaturated fatty acid called arachidonic acid. Arachidonic acid is an omega-6 fat. Our bodies have enzymes that convert arachidonic acid into pro-inflammatory hormones (leukotrienes, thromboxanes, prostaglandins); and these pro-inflammatory hormones are linked to pain (Omoigui, 2007; Boswell, 2006; Maroon, 2006; Cleland, 2006; Goldberg 2007; Maroon, 2010).

    inflammation

    The primary American source of dietary arachidonic acid is eating meat. Meat is not bad per se. Meat becomes bad when the animal is fed junk food that makes it fat and sick. Economically, our food animals are fed the food that is most fattening. That’s because they are sold by the pound. Fatter animals are worth more in the marketplace. Our food animals are proven to become really fat on a diet of corn and/or soybeans.

    Of course, fattening animal feed is a poor economic choice unless it is also cheap feed. In today’s political environment, the cheapest feed is the food that is subsidized by the taxpayers; and it makes so much sense: lobbying our politicians to use taxpayer dollars to grow corn and soybeans creates a win-win situation for all, cheap meat (this is sarcasm, as noted below).

    Meat, a source of complete proteins, historically was an expensive and therefore rare commodity (at least since the Agricultural Revolution, beginning about 10,000 years ago). Animals become big and fat on a corn/soybean diet, and if the taxpayers subsidize these crops, the corn and soybeans also become much cheaper. By extension, the taxpayers (and the Chinese, or whoever is buying our debt) are subsidizing the cost of meat, making it so that nearly all Americans can afford to eat meat daily (if they choose to do so).

    Recent evidence suggests that nearly 100% of our chickens and 93% of our cows are exclusively fed corn (USA Today, 2008). A major source of feed for our farmed fish is soybeans (Greenberg, 2010). Sadly, when these food animals are fed corn and/or soybeans, they have enzymes that convert the fat found in these crops (linoleic acid) into the pro-inflammatory hormone precursor fat, arachidonic acid.

    These pro-inflammatory fats are in the omega-6 family. One hundred years ago, the amount of omega-6 fats consumed by Americans was about 2 pounds per year. Today, as a consequence of politics and economics, consumption of omega-6 fats has increased to about 25 pounds (Boswell, 2006). In contrast, the quantity of anti-inflammatory omega-3 fats in our diets had decreased substantially.

    Paleolithic humans evolved with a ratio of omega-6/omega-3 fats of about 1/1; the average modern ratio is about 25/1 (Boswell, 2006). This means that the average American is prone to pain syndromes as a consequence of dietary choices and habits. At any given moment, 28% of Americans are suffering from pain (Krueger, 2008); the omega-6/omega-3 ratio is critical. The sarcastic downside from the win-win of cheap fat meat is that it predisposes the consumers, Americans, to pain syndromes. This has resulted in Americans consuming more than 70 million nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) prescriptions every year; and 30 billion over-the-counter NSAID tablets are sold annually (Maroon, 2006). The cost is $17 billion per year (Krueger, 2008). Michael Pollan states in his 2008 book In Defense of Food “The billions we spend on anti-inflammatory drugs such as aspirin, ibuprofen, and acetaminophen is money spent to undo the effects of too much omega-6 in the diet.”

    Dietary strategies to rebalance the omega-6/omega-3 ratio have proven to prevent an/or reverse many of these pathological syndromes. Such strategies have proven to be more effective than pain medications about 88% of the time (Maroon, 2006).

    ••••••••••

    This month (August 2011), primary research from the Department of Bioengineering and the Department of Neurosurgery, University of Pennsylvania, provides some of the most important insights into the patho-biomechanics of chronic whiplash injury to date. The study was published in the journal Annals of Biomedical Engineering, and titled (Quinn, 2011):

    Detection of Altered Collagen Fiber Alignment in the Cervical Facet Capsule After Whiplash-Like Joint Retraction

    The authors review that the cervical facet joint is the primary source of pain in patients with whiplash-associated disorders; yet, most clinical studies show no radiographic or MRI evidence of tissue injury. To evaluate this puzzle, these authors used quantitative polarized light imaging to assess the potential for altered collagen fiber alignment in human cadaveric cervical facet capsule specimens during and after a joint retraction simulating whiplash exposure.

    The authors document that the whiplash mechanism involves a retraction event to the facet joint capsular ligaments. Although no evidence of ligament damage was detected during whiplash-like retraction, mechanical and microstructural changes of the facet joint capsular ligaments were identified following these whiplash loadings. The retraction experience produced significant decreases in ligament stiffness and increases in ligament laxity. The strained capsule regions showed altered fiber alignment, “suggesting the altered mechanical function may relate to a change in the tissue’s fiber organization.” The altered capsular ligament fiber alignment occurred without any tears that would classically be identified with diagnostic imaging, including radiographs and/or MRI. Consequently, the authors indicate that whiplash kinematics is a potential cause of microstructural damage that is not detectable using standard clinical imaging techniques.

    The authors make these key points:

    1) This is the first study that has assessed changes in tissue microstructural organization of the facet capsule following whiplash-like loading.

    2) “Whiplash is a common cause of chronic neck pain, and the cervical facet joint has been identified as the site of pain in the majority of these cases.”

    3) “Up to 62% of people affected by whiplash injuries report pain lasting 2 years or more after injury.”

    4) Facet joint injuries cannot be imaged in most whiplash patients with x-rays or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI).

    5) “The lack of any definitive evidence of facet capsular ligament damage following whiplash, despite the high incidence of facet-mediated pain, suggests radiographic and MRI techniques may lack the resolution or contrast to identify these subtle injuries.”

    6) Low-speed rear-end impact collision causes the lower cervical spine to undergo a combination of compression, posterior shear, and extension. “This combination of forces and moments primarily induces a retraction of each vertebra in the posterior direction relative to its adjacent inferior vertebra in the lower cervical spine prior to head-headrest contact.” The facet capsular ligaments are at risk for excessive motion during this vertebral retraction, creating subfailure injuries to the facet capsule. “The facet capsular ligament may sustain partial failures and/or unrecovered deformation during whiplash.”

    7) Facet joint injury causes altered collagen fiber organization and facet capsular ligament laxity that may produce persistent pain. “Neither partial failure nor capsule rupture is required to initiate facet-mediated pain, suggesting painful facet joint injuries cannot be identified through traditional load-based or medical imaging techniques.”

    8) Prior to ligament visible rupture or mechanical failure, there is an anomalous fiber realignment, which may be used as a marker for subfailure capsule injury.

    9) The retraction caused permanent deformation of ground substance materials of the ligament, leading to altered collagen fiber organization. This tissue damage may be sufficient to induce an inflammatory response or nociceptor firing in the ligament.

    10) “These findings would suggest that radiographic or MRI diagnostic approaches may lack the resolution to detect the microstructural changes that can occur in the facet capsule without overt capsule rupture after a whiplash exposure.”

    11) “Facet joint displacements that produce persistent pain symptoms also induce laxity in the capsular ligament and collagen fiber disorganization.”

    12) “The detection of altered fiber alignment and unrecovered strain observed after facet retraction in the current study would suggest that whiplash-like loading may be sufficient to generate facet-mediated pain.”

    This study indicates that whiplash injury causes microstructural changes, anomalous fiber realignment and laxity of the facet capsular ligaments. These injuries may cause permanent deformation of ground substance of the ligament, leading to altered collagen fiber organization. These injuries are subfailure in magnitude, but are capable of causing pain and permanent alterations in capsular mechanics. These injuries are not identifiable clinically, with x-ray, or MRI imaging. The tissue damage may be sufficient to induce an inflammatory response and/or nociceptor firing.

    The anomalous fiber realignment noted in this study is probably

    analogous to the writings of Cyriax when he stated that fibrotic granulation tissue is capable of maintaining an inflammatory response long after the completion of the healing process. This inflammatory granulation tissue becomes a factor in the initiation of chronic pain perception. Consequently, Cyriax also states “…that the scar tissue remains painful whenever tension is put upon it, perhaps for decades.”

    This is an important study advancing the understanding of whiplash injury pathoanatomy, yet I believe there is still a missing piece. The authors document post-traumatic anomalous fiber realignment, but they only speculate that it is associated with pain producing inflammation. They offer no evidence for the existence of an actual inflammatory process. Fortunately, the next study does just that.

    ••••••••••

    Clas Linnman (from Harvard Medical School) and an international team of colleagues published a study in April of this year (2011) titled:

    Elevated [11C]-D-Deprenyl Uptake in Chronic Whiplash Associated Disorder Suggests Persistent Musculoskeletal Inflammation

    These authors note that there are few diagnostic tools for chronic musculoskeletal pain, and especially for whiplash injury. In agreement with Quinn above, they note that structural imaging methods seldom reveal pathological alterations that can account for a patient’s ongoing pain. Therefore, they sought to visualize inflammatory processes in the neck region by means of Positron Emission Tomography (PET) using an inflammatory marker, 11C-D-deprenyl, or DDE. They evaluated 22 patients with chronic pain after a rear impact car accident and 14 healthy controls. The whiplash-injured subjects had pain and reduced motion but no neurological signs.

    The whiplash-injured patients displayed significantly elevated inflammatory tracer uptake in the neck, suggesting that whiplash patients have signs of local persistent peripheral tissue inflammation. The authors concluded that inflammation and its associated pain in the periphery could be objectively visualized and quantified with PET using the inflammatory tracer DDE. Key points from this study include:

    1) “Chronic musculoskeletal pain syndromes are common, cause extensive individual suffering and place a large burden on health care in society. Yet, pain remains notoriously difficult to visualize and diagnose objectively.”

    2) “The pathophysiology of persistent pain is elusive and there is a great need for ways to visualize and quantify pain mechanisms.”

    3) In a sub-portion of the population, “whiplash injuries proceed to chronic debilitating pain.”

    4) “Structural imaging does not capture on-going biological processes; where as molecular imaging with positron emission tomography (PET) has the potential to visualize such mechanisms.”

    5) The authors present evidence that shows “DDE can be used to visualize chronic inflammatory processes.”

    6) The site of inflammation “appeared to be localized to adipose tissue surrounding deep cervical muscles.” “The tracer retention observed in fatty regions surrounding deep cervical muscle may indicate that adipose tissue is actively involved in the inflammatory process.”

    7) Patients displayed elevated DDE retention in cervical soft tissue, suggesting that localized chronic inflammation is apparent in many chronic pain whiplash patients.

    8) “A large subset of patients with chronic pain after a whiplash injury displayed elevated DDE retention, suggestive of persistent peripheral tissue inflammation.”

    9) “The possibility to visualize and quantify sites of inflammation in chronic pain may be very useful in diagnosis and treatment monitoring.”

    SUMMARY POINTS:

    • All pain has an inflammatory component.

    • Post-traumatic inflammation is often the consequence of the membrane release of the arachidonic acid fat cascading into pro-inflammatory hormones, including prostaglandin E2 (PGE2). [Therefore omega-6/-3 balancing is an important clinical strategy].

    • Inflammation alters the pain threshold and increases pain perception.

    • The resolution of inflammation is granulation, fibrosis, or scar tissue.

    • Fibrotic granulation tissue is capable of maintaining an inflammatory response long after the completion of the healing process, a component of chronic pain.

    • Whiplash trauma can create anomalous fiber alignment and granulation tissue.

    • From whiplash, granulation tissue and inflammation occurs as a consequence of subfailure injuries. Therefore, these injuries cannot be visualized with either x-rays or MRI.

    • Persistent post-traumatic inflammation has been linked to chronic pain syndrome. This inflammation can be documented with PET using the inflammatory tracer DDE.

    • Tension within the scar granulation tissue initiates remodeling, reducing inflammation. This supports the need for early persistent mobilization, exercise, and chiropractic adjustments.

    • I believe that anti-inflammatory omega-6/omega-3 balancing is critical in chronic pain management.

    Dan Murphy, DC, DABCO

    REFERENCES

    Omoigui S; The biochemical origin of pain: The origin of all pain is inflammation and the inflammatory response: Inflammatory profile of pain syndromes; Medical Hypothesis; 2007, Vol. 69, pp. 1169 – 1178.

    Maroon J, Bost JW, Maroon A; Natural anti-inflammatory agents for pain relief; Surgical Neurological International; December 2010.

    Boswell M, Cole EB; American Academy of Pain Management; Weiner’s Pain Management: A Practical Guide for Clinicians; Seventh Edition, 2006, pp.584-585.

    Maroon JC, Bost JW; Omega-3 Fatty acids (fish oil) as an anti-inflammatory: an alternative to nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs for discogenic pain; Surgical Neurology; 65 (April 2006) 326– 331.

    Cleland LG, James MJ, Proudman SM; Fish oil: what the prescriber needs to know; Arthritis Research & Therapy; Volume 8, Issue 1, 2006, pp. 402.

    Goldberg RJ, Katz J; A meta-analysis of the analgesic effects of omega-3 polyunsaturated fatty acid supplementation for inflammatory joint pain; Pain; May 2007, 129(1-2), pp. 210-223.

    Manjo G, Joris I; Cells, Tissues, and Disease, Principles of General Pathology; Second Edition; Chapter 13: “Chronic Inflammation: Defense at a Price”; Oxford University Press; 2004.

    Cyriax, James, M.D., Orthopaedic Medicine, Diagnosis of Soft Tissue Lesions, Bailliere Tindall, Vol. 1, (1982).

    USA Today, November 12, 2008, quoting Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

    Greenberg P; Four Fish, The Future of the Last Wild Food; The Penguin Press, New York, 2010.

    Krueger AB, Stone AA; Assessment of pain: a community-based diary survey in the USA; Lancet; 2008 May 3;371(9623):1519-25.

    Pollan, M; In Defense of Food; 2008, pg. 131.

    Quinn KP, Winkelstein BA; Detection of Altered Collagen Fiber Alignment in the Cervical Facet Capsule After Whiplash-Like Joint Retraction; Annals of Biomedical Engineering; August 2011, Vol. 39, No. 8, pp. 2163–2173.

    Linnman C, Appel L, Fredrikson M, Gordh T, Soderlund A, Langstrom B, Engler H; Elevated [11C]-D-Deprenyl Uptake in Chronic Whiplash Associated Disorder Suggests Persistent Musculoskeletal Inflammation; Public Library of Medicine (PLoS) ONE; April 6, 2011, Vol. 6 No. 4, pp. e19182.

  • The Double Crush Nerve Syndrome Often Overlooked As A Possible Answer For Patients With Unyielding Upper Extremity Pain, Numbness Or Discomfort

    The Double Crush Nerve Syndrome Often Overlooked As A Possible Answer For Patients With Unyielding Upper Extremity Pain, Numbness Or Discomfort

    In 1973, physicians Adrian Upton and Alan McComas introduced a concept suggesting that undiagnosed cervical spine problems could increase the incidence of extremity peripheral entrapment syndromes. They referred to this new concept as the:

    Double Crush in Nerve-Entrapment Syndromes

    Drs. Upton and McComas published their initial study on this Double Crush Nerve-Entrapment Syndrome in the journal The Lancet, August 18, 1973 (1). Since the introduction of this Double Crush Syndrome concept, numerous studies have supported it, and are reviewed below.

    In their original article, Drs. Upton and McComas performed a comprehensive electromyographic study of 115 patients with carpal-tunnel syndromes and lesions of the ulnar nerve at the elbow. In 81 cases (70%) they found electrophysiological evidence, often supported by clinical symptoms, of associated neural lesions in the neck. They concluded that the association between carpel-tunnel syndromes, elbow ulnar nerve lesions, and electrophysiological abnormalities of the cervical spine were not “fortuitous, but rather the result of serial constraints of axoplasmic flow in nerve fibers.”

    Drs. Upton and McComas note that in carpal tunnel syndrome, fibers of the median nerve are compressed beneath the transverse carpal ligament.

    At surgery the median nerve can be seen:

    1) To be flattened or narrowed

    2) To be swollen and pink

    3) To have thickened synovial sheaths around the wrist flexor tendons

    Precipitating factors to developing carpal tunnel syndrome include:

    1) Heavy manual work

    2) Obesity

    3) Diabetes

    4) Rheumatoid arthritis

    5) Prior wrist injury

    However, many patients who develop carpal tunnel syndrome have none of these classical precipitating factors. Drs. Upton and McComas note that:

    “Many patients with clinical and electromyographic evidence of a carpal tunnel syndrome feel some pain in the forearm, elbow, upper arm, shoulder, and front and back of the chest.”

    Upton and McComas make an argument why these symptoms may not be referred from the wrist, as they are commonly believed to be, but rather represent symptoms that are proximal, especially from lesions in the cervical spine. They note:

    “Not all patients lose the numbness in their fingers or regain strength in their thenar muscles after surgical decompression of the median nerve” even though the diagnosis was correct and the surgical decompression was adequate.

    Additionally, at times, the severity of symptoms is not proportional to the compressive pathology seen at surgery. They cite a surgical study of carpal tunnel syndrome where 29% (61/212) of the nerves showed no evidence of compression.

    In their 1973 study, “in no fewer than 81 (70%) of the 115 patients with an electrophysiological-proven entrapment neuropathy there was evidence of a cervical root lesion.”

    The evidence for cervical root lesion included:

    1) Radiological evidence of cervical spondylosis.

    2) Complaints of neck pain and stiffness.

    3) “A previous history of neck injury, commonly of the hyperextension ‘whiplash’ type sustained in a rear-end motor vehicle accidents.”

    4) “Clinical evidence of a sensory abnormality corresponding to a dermatomal rather than a peripheral nerve distribution.”

    5) Electromyographic evidence of denervation of other muscles that are supplied by the nerve root.

    Drs. Upton and McComas state:

    “Most patients with carpal tunnel syndromes or ulnar neuropathies not only have compressive lesions at the wrist or elbow, but they also have evidence of damage at the level of the cervical roots.”

    A cervical lesion would explain the presence of pain in the shoulder and upper arm, the variable nerve pathology seen at the wrist, and the surgical failure of cases with adequate wrist nerve decompression. Neural function is impaired because “single axon compression at one region becomes especially susceptible to damage at another [peripheral] site.” Slight degrees of nerve compression may cause no symptoms, but reduce the axoplasmic flow of trophic substances, so that a slight distal compression may add to the reduction of axoplasmic flow of trophic substances, causing symptoms.

    Even though Drs. Upton and McComas refer to such a phenomenon as a “double crush,” they “accept” that “in some patients, especially those with a history of neck injury, the proximal lesion may have been excessive stretch, rather than compression, of the nerve fibers.”

    Drs. Upton and McComas end their study by noting:

    “Treatment, rather than being directed at a single site, should be applied to all vulnerable points along the course of the nerve—i.e., to both the neck and to the wrist or elbow, depending on the nerve involved.”

    The Double Crush Nerve-Entrapment Syndrome is an important concept for all providers that treat peripheral entrapment syndromes, such as carpel tunnel syndrome. It indicates that a majority of such patients may also have proximal neurological lesions that also require treatment, starting at the level of the cervical nerve roots. A summary of the key points from this study by Drs. Upton and McComas include:

    1) The DOUBLE CRUSH SYNDROME is: serial constraints of axoplasmic flow in nerve fibers increasing the susceptibility of distal axons, of that nerve, to compression syndromes and symptomatology.

    2) Surgical decompression of the wrist clearly does not fix all the patients with carpal tunnel syndrome.

    3) In this study, 70% of the patients with an electrophysiological-proven entrapment neuropathy had evidence of a cervical nerve root lesion.

    4) The most common history for those with a double crush syndrome is that of “A previous history of neck injury, commonly of the hyperextension ‘whiplash’ type sustained in a rear-end motor vehicle accident.”

    5) The most common non-local complaint for those with a double crush syndrome is neck pain and stiffness.

    6) The most common examination finding for those with a double crush syndrome is evidence of cervical spondylosis.

    7) “Most patients with carpal tunnel syndromes or ulnar neuropathies not only have compressive lesions at the wrist or elbow, but they also have evidence of damage at the level of the cervical roots.”

    8) Even though these authors refer to such a phenomenon as a “double crush,” they “accept” that “in some patients, especially those with a history of neck injury, the proximal lesion may have been excessive stretch, rather than compression, of the nerve fibers.”

    9) In the treatment of peripheral neuropathies (such as carpal tunnel syndrome) “treatment, rather than being directed at a single site, should be applied to all vulnerable points along the course of the nerve—i.e., to both the neck and to the wrist or elbow, depending on the nerve involved.”

    In 1975, the International Conference on the Approaches to the Validation of Manipulation Therapy was held at the University of California, Irvine. •••••• renowned international spinal experts contributed to the conference. The Proceedings from the conference were published in 1977 (2). Chapter 7 of the book is authored by Dr. Adrian Upton, one of the originators of the Double Crush Hypothesis. In his chapter, Dr. Upton restates his Double Crush Hypothesis as follows:

    “Serial lesions along the course of nerve axons may predispose to nerve damage more distally, possibly by serial constraints on axoplasmic flow; hence the proximal symptoms in a patient with carpal tunnel syndrome may be due to nerve root impairment which has predisposed them to a distal entrapment neuropathy.”

    And

    “Serial constraints on axoplasmic flow may be responsible for increasing the susceptibility of nerve axons to distal impairment.”

    In his discussion, Dr. Upton includes not only the median nerve as related to

    carpal tunnel syndrome, but also extends his discussion to include the ulnar nerve as well as the sciatic nerve.

     

    More than a decade after the original study of the Double Crush Nerve-Entrapment Syndrome by Drs. Adrian Upton and Alan McComas, a follow-up study was published in the British Journal of Hand Surgery, titled (3):

    The relationship of the double crush to carpal tunnel syndrome

    (an analysis of 1,000 cases of carpal tunnel syndrome)

    In this study, the authors reviewed 1,000 cases of carpal tunnel syndrome and found that in 888 patients (89%), “there is a statistically significant incidence of bilaterality in patients with cervical arthritis.” They note that their findings “lend further support to Upton’s Double Crush hypothesis.”

    Additionally, these authors note that in those suffering from the double crush syndrome subsequent to cervical spine lesions, there is an increased probability that the carpel tunnel syndrome will exist bilaterally. They also note that bilateral carpel tunnel syndrome subsequent to cervical spine Double Crush is associated with a worse prognosis for clinical recovery. This may be an explanation for some of the failures following carpal tunnel surgery, and surgeons to look for associated mechanical blocks (Double Crush Syndrome), “when attempting to alleviate recalcitrant symptoms.”

    This article also makes a special note of the finding that systemic diseases, especially diabetes mellitus, can predispose an individual to both peripheral entrapment syndromes as well as to “Double Crush Syndromes.”

    Three years later, in 1988, Dr. Osterman from the Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, published in the journal Orthopedic Clinics of North America an article titled (4):

    The Double Crush Syndrome

    In this article, Dr. Osterman makes the following points:

    • “Multilevel lesions along a peripheral nerve trunk do occur.”
    • “In the double crush syndrome as postulated by Upton and McComas, the presence of a more proximal lesion does seem to render the more distal nerve trunk more vulnerable to compression.”
    • “While the exact pathophysiologic mechanism of this interaction is not yet elucidated, it most likely relates to disturbances in axonal flow kinetics and the disruption of the neurofilament architecture.”
    • “On a practical level our studies show that given a more proximal root compression less involvement of the median nerve across the carpal tunnel was required to produce symptoms.”
    • “Furthermore, the surgical outcome of carpal tunnel release in this double crush group was poorer than in that group with isolated carpal tunnel involvement.”
    • “It is important to preoperatively identify those patients who may have double crush lesions and thus anticipate a less than optimal result from surgical release of the peripheral nerve.”
    • “When the double crush syndrome is present, both entrapments may require treatment for optimal results.”

    This article adds to the literature supporting the existence of a double crush

    peripheral nerve entrapment syndrome. Additionally, this author stresses the need to treat the proximal neurological lesion in an effort to achieve maximum benefit of peripheral management, including surgery. In essence, if the cervical spine is involved in a double crush capacity, it should be appropriately treated.

    Primary experimental evidence to support the double crush hypothesis was presented in 1991 (5) by Drs. Dellon and Mackinnon from the Division of Plastic Surgery, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. Their paper was published in the Annals of Plastic Surgery, and titled:

    Chronic nerve compression model for the double crush hypothesis

    In this article, Drs. Dellon and Mackinnon make the following points:

    • “’Double crush hypothesis’ is a phrase that has entered clinical use based on a hypothesis presented by Upton and McComas in 1973.”
    • “Although clinical examples of the double crush are appearing more frequently, there has been no experimental proof of this hypothesis as it relates to chronic nerve compression.”
    • “This study used a model of sciatic nerve minimal banding in the rat to investigate the effect on electrophysiological function of single or double band placement, concurrently or separated in time.”
    • “This study confirms that the existence of two sites of simultaneous compression, or a second (later) site of compression, placed either proximal or distal to the first (earlier) site of compression, will result in significantly poorer neural function than will a single site of compression.”

    This experimental animal study is the first to offer viable evidence that there

    is a scientific basis for the Double Crush Syndrome that had been used to describe observations on human subjects.

    In 1994, Drs. Raps and Rubin from the Department of Neurology, Hospital for Special Surgery, New York, NY, published an article that consisted of two case studies of proximal median neuropathy associated with cervical radiculopathy which they diagnosed in their EMG laboratory. Their paper was published in the journal Electromyography and Clinical Neurophysiology (6), and titled:

    Proximal median neuropathy and cervical radiculopathy:

    double crush revisited

    In their paper, Drs. Raps and Rubin note:

    • “’Double crush’” refers to the hypothesis that a single lesion along the course of a nerve predisposes that nerve to a second lesion further along its course.
    • “Considering the extreme rarity of proximal median neuropathy, its association in both cases with cervical root disease supports the notion that the cervical radiculopathy may have predisposed the nerve to a second lesion along its course, resulting in the so called double crush syndrome, and that this syndrome may therefore be a true entity.”

    In 1999, Drs. from St. Mary’s Hospital associated with Yale University School of Medicine in Waterbury, CT, presented two cases of nerve compression consistent with the Double Crush Syndrome. Their paper was published in Connecticut Medicine (7), and titled:

    The double-crush phenomenon:

    an unusual presentation and literature review

    As noted, in their review of the literature, the authors made the following points:

    • “The double-crush syndrome was initially described by Upton and McComas in 1973.”
    • “They postulated that non-symptomatic impairment of axoplasmic flow at more than one site along a nerve might summate to cause a symptomatic neuropathy.”
    • “This was suggested by their clinical observation that the majority of their patients had a median or ulnar neuropathy associated with evidence of cervico-thoracic root lesions.”
    • “Other researchers have since reported series of patients supporting the frequent association of a proximal and distal nerve compression syndrome, including carpal tunnel syndrome associated with cervical radiculopathy, brachial plexus compression, and diabetic neuropathy.”

    Importantly, this 1999 article reiterates the relevance of cervical and/or thoracic spinal problems adversely affecting the nerve roots as contributing to the peripheral double crush phenomenon. It also reiterates the issue of systemic metabolic problems, such as diabetes.

    More recently, in 2003, Drs. Pierre-Jerome and Bekkelund from the Department of Radiology, Ulleval University Hospital, Oslo, Norway, published a study in the Scandinavian Journal of Plastic and Reconstructive Hand Surgery (8), and titled:

    Magnetic resonance assessment of

    the double-crush phenomenon in patients with

    carpal tunnel syndrome: a bilateral quantitative study

    In this paper, Drs. Pierre-Jerome and Bekkelund assessed the coexistence of narrowed cervical foramens and cervical canal stenosis in patients with carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS). They took magnetic resonance (MR) images of 120 wrists and 480 foramens in 60 age and sex matched subjects: 30 patients with CTS and 30 controls without CTS. For each subject, the authors performed nerve conduction velocity tests, measured the volume of the carpal tunnel canal bilaterally, quantified the cross-sectional areas of the cervical foramens on both sides from C4 to T1, measured the diameter of the cervical central canal, and documented the prevalence and location of cervical spondylosis and disc prolapse.

    The authors concluded “there was no correlation between the symptoms and the reduced carpal canal volume.” However, cervical spondylosis and disc prolapse were more common in the patients than the controls at the C5-C6 and C6-C7 levels, and their locations were usually on the same side as the symptoms in the wrist(s). Therefore, they concluded:

    “The higher incidence of narrowed cervical foramens in the patients and its concordance with affected nerve roots on the same side as the CTS symptoms support the hypothesis of a double-crush phenomenon.”

    Importantly, this study adds to the evidence that cervical spine spondylosis,

    disc degenerative disease, and disc prolapse, increase the incidence of peripheral neuropathy at the wrist. This adds to the perspective that in patients with peripheral neurological problems, especially at the wrist, the cervical spine should be examined and appropriately treated if consistent findings are found.

    Two years ago, in 2006, Drs. Flak, Durmala, Czernicki and Dobosiewicz, from the Department of Medical Rehabilitation, School of Healthcare, Medical University of Silesia, Katowice, Poland, published a study in the journal Studies in Health Technology Information, titled (9):

    Double crush syndrome evaluation in the median nerve in clinical, radiological and electrophysiological examination

    In this study, the authors evaluated the Double Crush Syndrome hypothesis of the median nerve on the basis of available diagnostic methods. Specifically, they examined 30 patients with coexisting carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS) and cervical radiculopathy (CR), along with a control group that consisted of 40 healthy volunteers. The medical evaluation comprised clinical examination, X-ray and MR imaging of the cervical spine, electroneurography (ENG) with F-wave and somatosensory evoked potentials (mSEPs) of median nerves.

    In clinical examination 96.6% of patients suffered from cervical spine pain and nocturnal paresthesies of at least one hand. Muscular atrophy was present in 43.3% in the proximal and in 70% in the distal part of the upper extremity. 30.3% of patients presented with a thoracic scoliosis.

    On X-ray examination, all patients showed cervical discopathy, mostly C5-C6

    (70%) and C6-C7 (53.3%).

    On MR investigation, the narrowing of intervertebral foramina was present in

    81.25%, and narrowing of central vertebral canal was present in 37.5%.

    On ENG all patients presented with CTS, and it was bilateral in 73.3%.

    The F wave was abnormal in 73.3% and mSEPs in 66.7% of patients. The

    coincidence of MR and mSEPs in view of lateralization was found in 71.4%. Based upon the results of this study, these authors concluded:

    • “Double crush syndrome was first described by Upton and McComas who proposed that focal compression of an axon often occurs at more than one level.”
    • “Results [from this study] supported the Double Crush Syndrome hypothesis.”
    • “Double Crush Syndrome evaluation requires both structural and functional diagnosis of peripheral neurons using MRI and electrophysiological examination.”

    Once more, evidence is presented supporting the concept that cervical

    spine structural problems can adversely affect the exiting nerve roots, increasing the incidence of peripheral entrapment neuropathy. These authors note that the best structural evaluation of the cervical spine in these suspected Double Crush cases is magnetic resonance imaging of the cervical spine.

    In a study published earlier this year (January 2008), Smith, Sawyer, Sizer, and Brismee, from the Center of Rehabilitation Research, Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center, Lubbock, Texas, evaluated the incidence of Double Crush as related to ulnar nerve neuropathy in a group of cyclists. They published their work in the Clinical Journal of Sports Medicine, titled (10):

    The double crush syndrome: a common occurrence in

    cyclists with ulnar nerve neuropathy: a case-control study

    In this study, the authors evaluated the incidence of double crush syndrome

    in the upper limbs of 70 cyclists (140 upper limbs) with clinical diagnosis of ulnar nerve neuropathy. The cyclists were examined clinically for the presence of proximal neurological dysfunction using the following testing:

    (1) Thoracic outlet syndrome provocation testing

    (2) Documenting the presence of an elevated first rib

    (3) Documenting the presence of proximal symptoms, such as reports of neck pain and shoulder pain.

    The results of their study showed a significantly greater number of upper limbs of cyclists with ulnar nerve neuropathy presented with positive provocative testing for thoracic outlet syndrome than did the upper limbs of cyclists without ulnar nerve neuropathy.

    Cyclists with ulnar nerve neuropathy were three times more likely to have

    neck pain, five times more likely to have shoulder pain, and twelve times more likely to have an elevated first rib as compared to the group that did not have an ulnar nerve neuropathy.

    These authors concluded:

    “A statistically significant greater number of the upper limbs of cyclists with clinical diagnosis of ulnar nerve neuropathy presented with proximal dysfunctions suggestive of double crush syndrome.”

    Importantly, this study not only adds to the evidence supporting a double

    crush mechanism in peripheral neuropathy, but it specifically adds that thoracic outlet is a viable location for the proximal lesion. This would argue that in patients with peripheral neuropathy, both the cervical spine and the thoracic outlet should be thoroughly examined, even potentially be subject to diagnostic imaging, when evaluating patients with peripheral compressive neuropathy.

    Also in January of this year (2008), Drs. Moghtaderi, Izadi, from the Neurology Department, Zahedan University School of Medicine, Khatam Teaching Hospital, Zahedan, Iran, published a paper in the journal Clinical Neurology and Neurosurgery titled (11):

    Double crush syndrome:

    an analysis of age, gender and body mass index

    In this study, these authors evaluated the role of age, gender, body mass index (BMI), wrist ratio and median sensory nerve conduction velocity as independent risk factors for double crush syndrome. They used 142 patients with carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS) and 109 controls.

    The results of this study showed that increasing age and male gender increased the probability that patients with carpal tunnel syndrome would also have a double crush component. The authors concluded:

    “Our study confirms that male gender and increased age are independent risk factors for Double Crush Syndrome.”

    These authors also suggested that in elderly men presenting with CTS, electrophysiologic screening for cervical radiculopathy should be considered because the treatment of Double Crush Syndrome CTS differs from the treatment for pure CTS.

    CONCLUSIONS

    The basic premise of the Double Crush Syndrome, as succinctly stated by Dr. Adrian Upton in 1977 (2), is:

    “Serial constraints on axoplasmic flow may be responsible for increasing the susceptibility of nerve axons to distal impairment.”

    Studies supporting the existence of the Double Crush Syndrome have appeared in the literature for 35 years. Most studies supporting the existence of the Double Crush Syndrome pertain to the cervical spine and the upper extremity, primarily to the median nerve and carpal tunnel syndrome. The “serial constraints” mentioned by Dr. Upton in 1977 include metabolic disorders (primarily diabetes), stretch injuries or chronic nerve stretch, and compressive disorders. Most importantly, and as succinctly stated by Drs. Upton and McComas in the original study in 1973 (1):

    “Treatment, rather than being directed at a single site, should be applied to all vulnerable points along the course of the nerve—i.e., to both the neck and to the wrist or elbow, depending on the nerve involved.”

    Recognition that patients with symptoms and diagnosis of peripheral entrapment neuropathy often have proximal contributing lesions in the spine is important. Treatment of the spinal problems in such patients will improve clinical outcomes.

    References

    1) Upton A and McComas A; The Double Crush in Nerve-Entrapment Syndromes; The Lancet; August 18, 1973, pp. 359-362.

    2) Buerger AA and Tobis JS, editors; Approaches to the Validation of Manipulation Therapy; Thomas; 1977.

    3) Hurst LC, Weissberg D, Carroll RE; The relationship of the double crush to carpal tunnel syndrome (an analysis of 1,000 cases of carpal tunnel syndrome);

    Journal of Hand Surgery [British]; June 1985;10(2):202-4.

    4) Osterman AL; The double crush syndrome; Orthopedic Clinics of North America; January 1988;19(1):147-55.

    5) Dellon AL, Mackinnon SE; Chronic nerve compression model for the double crush hypothesis; Annals of Plastic Surgery; March 1991;26(3):259-64.

    6) Raps SP, Rubin M; Proximal median neuropathy and cervical radiculopathy: double crush revisited; Electromyography and Clinical Neurophysiology; June 1994;34(4):195-6.

    7) Zahir KS, Zahir FS, Thomas JG, Dudrick SJ; The double-crush phenomenon: an unusual presentation and literature review; Connecticut Medicine; September 1999;63(9):535-8.

    8) Pierre-Jerome C, Bekkelund SI; Magnetic resonance assessment of the double-crush phenomenon in patients with carpal tunnel syndrome: a bilateral quantitative study; Scandinavian Journal of Plastic and Reconstructive Hand Surgery; 2003;37(1):46-53.

    9) Flak M, Durmala J, Czernicki K, Dobosiewicz K; Double crush syndrome evaluation in the median nerve in clinical, radiological and electrophysiological examination; Studies in Health Technology Information; 2006;123:435-41.

    10) Smith TM, Sawyer SF, Sizer PS, Brismée JM; The double crush syndrome: a common occurrence in cyclists with ulnar nerve neuropathy-a case-control study; Clinical Journal of Sport Medicine; January 2008;18(1):55-61.

    11) Moghtaderi A, Izadi S; Double crush syndrome: an analysis of age, gender and body mass index; Clinical Neurology and Neurosurgery; January 2008;110(1):25-9.

  • The Vertebral Artery

    The Vertebral Artery

    The brain is supplied by blood from two arterial sources: the paired internal carotid arteries and the paired vertebral arteries. The blood supply to brain from the carotid arteries is referred to as the anterior circulation to the brain. The blood supply to brain from the vertebral arteries is referred to as the posterior circulation to the brain.

    The vertebral arteries are exceptionally unique: they ascend to the brain through an opening, a foramen, in the transverse process of the cervical vertebrae.

    This opening is called the foramen transversarium. The foramen transversarium exists in the cervical vertebrae C6-C1. The vertebral arteries ascend in the foramen transversarium before entering the skull through the foramen magnum.

    After entering the skull, the paired vertebral arteries merge to become the singular basilar artery (drawing from reference 1).

     singular basilar artery

            The singular basilar artery ascends along the anterior surface of the brain stem, supplying its vascular needs through the pontine arteries. The basilar artery ends when it bifurcates into the paired posterior cerebral arteries (drawing from reference 1).

      The singular basilar artery ascends along the anterior surface of the brain stem, supplying its vascular needs through the pontine arteries. The basilar artery ends when it bifurcates into the paired posterior cerebral arteries

            The posterior cerebral arteries form the posterior aspect of the Circle of Willis. The Circle of Willis is the unique anatomical location where the posterior circulation (originates with the vertebral arteries) and the anterior circulation (originates with the internal carotid arteries) to the brain amalgamate together.Circle of Willis

    The atlas-axis (C1-C2) vertebral articulation of the cervical spine is mechanically unique. It is designed for the function of rotational motion. When one maximally turns one’s head, approximately 55% of that motion occurs at the atlas-axis articulation. The vertebral artery in the foramen transversarium between the atlas and axis must accommodate this rotational motion. This places the vertebral artery at increased risk of tractional types of stress and potential injury as a consequence of a variety of upper cervical spine mechanical loads.

    The potential tractional injury to the vertebral artery is a dissection, and usually referred to as vertebral artery dissection, or VAD.

    Right cervical spine (head) rotation, showing the tension on the left vertebral artery between the atlas and axis (drawing from reference from 1).

     Right cervical spine (head) rotation, showing the tension on the left vertebral artery between the atlas and axis

    Cervical arterial dissection is one of the main causes of ischemic stroke in young adults. Cervical arterial dissections can be categorized as traumatic or spontaneous. Cervical artery dissections occur when a tear forms in the tunica intima and blood enters into the space between intima and media. This can lead to a complete occlusion of the vessel lumen, which is mostly followed by recanalization after several months (2).

    Approximately 2/3 of cervical artery dissections are spontaneous and approximately 1/3 of them are posttraumatic. The overall annual incidence of spontaneous and posttraumatic dissections of the carotid artery is 26 / 1 million. The incidence of vertebral arterial dissection (spontaneous and posttraumatic) is 15 / 1 million. As noted, spontaneous cervical artery dissections occur twice as often as posttraumatic cervical artery dissections (2).

    Signs and symptoms that would warn of a possible vertebral artery dissection with ischemia are often summarized as the 5 Ds And the 3 Ns (1):

    Dizziness (vertigo, light-headedness)

    Drop attacks

    Diplopia (or other visual problems)

    Dysarthria [Speech Disorder]

    Dysphagia [Difficult or Painful Swallowing]

    Ataxia of gait (Hemiparesis)

    Nausea (possibly with vomiting)

    Nystagmus

    Numbness (hemianesthesia)

    A history that would warn of a possible vertebral artery dissection with ischemia involves a sudden onset of severe head and/or neck pain, which is like no other pain the patient has previously suffered. This is especially important if the patient can isolate the pain to the suboccipital region (1).

    According to a review of the literature by Alan Terrett (1), a number of non-manipulative mechanical events have been linked to vertebral artery dissections. These mechanical events usually involve rotation and/or extension, and include:

    Childbirth

    By Surgeon or Anesthetist During Surgery

    Calisthenics, Athletics, Fitness Exercise

    Yoga

    Overhead Work, Painting a Wall

    Hanging Out the Washing

    Neck Extension during Radiography

    Neck Extension for a Bleeding Nose

    Turning the Head while Driving a Vehicle

    Tonic Clonic Convulsive Seizure

    Amusement Park Ride

    Protracted Dental Work

    Archery

    Sneezing/Nose Blowing/Coughing

    Wrestling

    Emergency Resuscitation

    Star Gazing, Watching Aircraft

    Sleeping Position

    Swimming

    Break Dancing

    Football

    Beauty Parlor Stroke, Sitting in a Barber’s Chair

    Tai Chi

    Sexual Intercourse

    With respects to risk of vertebral artery dissection associated with cervical manipulation, all chiropractors are well aware of the issue. Vertebral artery dissection is extensively discussed in both chiropractic undergraduate and post graduate continuing educational programs. Entire books are written on the subject and are a part of core curriculum at chiropractic colleges (1). Chiropractors are well schooled on the pertinent anatomy, signs/symptoms, clinical presentations, examination findings, and procedures that may possibly be associated with increased risk. Although the risk of vertebral artery dissection is quite rare (as infrequent as 1/ 3,800,000 cervical manipulations in one study (4)), it appears to have a higher risk with the coupling of rotation with extension of the atlas (C1) on the axis (C2).

    In an important article published in 1995 (3), Alan Terrett reviewed the published literature pertaining to the incidence of reported adverse events associated with chiropractic spinal adjusting (manipulation). Astonishingly, his results revealed that in many of the published adverse events ascribed to chiropractic manipulation were, in fact, not associated with chiropractic in any manner. Apparently, the authors of the articles assumed “chiropractic” and “manipulation” were synonyms. When untrained laypersons or physicians performed a manipulation resulting in a reported adverse event, authors would claim that the manipulation was performed by a chiropractor. The list of discovered manipulators included:

    A Blind Masseur

    An Indian Barber

    A Wife

    A Kung-Fu Practitioner

    Self Manipulation

    Often the manipulation was performed by a medical doctor, an osteopath, a naturopath, or a physical therapist.

    Dr. Terrett concluded:

    “This study reveals that the words chiropractic and chiropractor commonly appear in the literature to describe spinal manipulative therapy, or practitioner of spinal manipulative therapy, in association with iatrogenic complications, regardless of the presence or absence of professional training of the practitioner involved.”

     “The words chiropractic and chiropractor have been incorrectly used in numerous publications dealing with spinal manipulative therapy injury by medical authors, respected medical journals and medical organizations.”

     “In many cases, this is not accidental; the authors had access to original reports that identified the practitioner involved as a non-chiropractor. The true incidence of such reporting cannot be determined.”

     “Such reporting adversely affects the reader’s opinion of chiropractic and chiropractors.”

     “It has been clearly demonstrated that the literature of medical organizations, medical authors and respected, peer-reviewed, indexed journals have, on numerous occasions, misrepresented the facts regarding the identity of a practitioner of manual therapy associated with patient injury.”

     “Such biased reporting must influence the perception of chiropractic held by the reader, especially when cases of death, tetraplegia and       neurological deficit are incorrectly reported as having been caused by chiropractic.”

     “Because of the unwarranted negative opinion generated in medical readers and the lay public alike, erroneous reporting is likely to result in hesitancy to refer to and underutilization of a mode of health care delivery.”

    In 2002, Dr. Scott Haldeman from the Department of Neurology, University of California, Irvine, and colleagues, published a study titled (5):

    “Unpredictability of cerebrovascular ischemia associated with cervical spine manipulation therapy: a review of sixty-four cases after cervical spine manipulation”

            The study, published in Spine, was a retrospective review of 64 medicolegal records describing cerebrovascular ischemia after cervical spine manipulation. The authors note, that up to 2002, only about “117 cases of post-manipulation cerebrovascular ischemia have been reported in the English language literature.”

    The authors further indicate that proposed risk factors for cerebrovascular ischemia secondary to spinal manipulation include age, gender, migraine headaches, hypertension, diabetes, birth control pills, cervical spondylosis, and smoking, and that it is often assumed that these complications may be avoided by clinically screening patients and by pre-manipulation positioning of the head and neck to evaluate the patency of the vertebral arteries. However, after an extensive review, these authors conclude:

    “This study was unable to identify factors from the clinical history and physical examination of the patient that would assist a physician attempting to isolate the patient at risk of cerebral ischemia after cervical manipulation.”

    “Cerebrovascular accidents after manipulation appear to be unpredictable and should be considered an inherent, idiosyncratic, and rare complication of this treatment approach.”

    In 2008, Dr. David Cassidy and colleagues published the most comprehensive study to date pertaining to the risk of vertebral artery dissection as related to chiropractic cervical spine manipulation (6). The article was published in Spine, and titled:

    “Risk of Vertebrobasilar Stroke and Chiropractic Care:

    Results of a Population-Based Case-Control and Case-Crossover Study”

    Key points from this article include:

    1)     “Vertebrobasilar artery stroke is a rare event in the population.”

    2)     “We found no evidence of excess risk of vertebral artery stroke associated chiropractic care.”

    3)     “Neck pain and headache are common symptoms of vertebral artery dissection, which commonly precedes vertebral artery stroke.”

    4)     “The increased risks of vertebral artery stroke associated with chiropractic and primary care physicians visits is likely due to patients with headache and neck pain from vertebral artery dissection seeking care before their stroke.”

    5)     Most cases of vertebral arterial dissection occur spontaneously.

    6)     “Because patients with vertebrobasilar artery dissection commonly present with headache and neck pain, it is possible that patients seek chiropractic care for these symptoms and that the subsequent vertebral artery stroke occurs spontaneously, implying that the association between chiropractic care and vertebral artery stroke is not causal.”

    7)     “Since it is unlikely that primary care physicians cause stroke while caring for these patients, we can assume that the observed association between recent primary care physician care and vertebral artery stroke represents the background risk associated with patients seeking care for dissection-related symptoms leading to vertebral artery stroke. Because the association between chiropractic visits and vertebral artery stroke is not greater than the association between primary care physicians visits and vertebral artery stroke, there is no excess risk of vertebral artery stroke from chiropractic care.”

    8)     Neck manipulation “is unlikely to be a major cause” of these rare vertebral artery stroke events.

    9)     “Our results suggest that the association between chiropractic care and vertebral artery stroke found in previous studies is likely explained by presenting symptoms attributable to vertebral artery dissection.”

    10)    “There is no acceptable screening procedure to identify patients with neck pain at risk of vertebral artery stroke.”

    In 2004, the American Academy of Orthopedic Surgeons published a monograph titled Neck Pain (7). The second to last chapter in the monograph, chapter 7, is titled:

    “Manual Therapy Including Manipulation For Acute and Chronic Neck Pain”

            The editor of the monograph is Jeffery Fischgrund, MD, from the Department of Orthopaedic Surgery at William Beaumont Hospital in Royal Oaks, Michigan. This monograph has twelve respected contributors, including the authors of chapter 7, Scott Haldeman, Clinical Professor of Neurology at the University of California, Irvine, and Eric Hurwitz, Associate Professor of Epidemiology at the University of California, Los Angeles. With respect to the safety of spinal manipulation, the authors make the following comments:

    “Major complications from manual therapies are extremely rare but, nonetheless, have been a source of much discussion.”

    “Estimates of vertebral artery dissections or stroke rates associated with cervical manipulation have ranged form 1 per 400,000 to 1 per 10 million manipulations.”

    “An estimate of 1 per 5.85 million manipulations, based on 1988 to 1997 medical record and chiropractic malpractice data from Canada, reflects the experience of practitioners of manipulation.”

    “No serious complications from spinal manipulation or other chiropractic forms of manual treatment have been reported from any of the published clinical trials involving manipulation or mobilization for neck pain.”

    “It should be noted that complications rates from medications, surgery, and most other neck pain treatments for which data are available are estimated to be higher than those from manual and manipulative therapies.”

    Whiplash Trauma and Vertebral Artery Dissection

    On January 1, 2011, I performed a PubMed search of the National Library of Medicine database using the words “whiplash AND vertebral artery” and 60 titles were produced. The first published study was dated in 1961.

    A 1991 study reported on three cases of posttraumatic vertebral artery dissection (8). All patients were young or middle-aged (range 27 to 49 years). Pain preceded neurological symptoms from hours to six weeks.

    In 1995, a study from Jefferson Medical College assessed the occurrence rate for vertebral artery injury after acute cervical spine trauma using MR angiography (9). The authors found that 24% (9/37) of those suffering from acute nonpenetrating cervical spine trauma had sustained vertebral artery injuries. The authors concluded:

    “Vertebral artery injuries due to major cervical spine trauma as determined by MR angiography are common. Although these vascular abnormalities usually remain clinically occult, a small percentage of patients may suffer devastating neurologic complications of posterior fossa infarction. Noninvasive assessment of the vertebral arteries by means of MR imaging should be an integral part of the evaluation of the acutely injured cervical spine.”

    Also in 1995, a study published in the journal Stroke reports on a case of lethal basilar thrombotic embolus that occurred 2 months after the patient’s injury in a vehicle collision (10). His complaints were headache and episodic visual disturbances. Two months after the accident he suddenly lost consciousness and died. The autopsy revealed a lesion of the right vertebral artery was found at the level of the atlantoaxial joint. The authors concluded:

    “We suggest that in patients with disturbances of the vertebrobasilar circulation, attention should be paid to occurrence of [whiplash] neck trauma in the preceding 3 months. Further, anticoagulant therapy should particularly be considered in patients who after suffering neck injuries develop signs of transient ischemic attacks with origin from the posterior cerebral circulation.”

    In 1997, researchers from Yamaguchi University School of Medicine in Japan showed that cadaver vertebral arteries sustain significant stretch and elongation during the whiplash trauma (11). The vertebral artery was shown to exceed its physiological range at even low levels of acceleration.

    A year later, 1998, researchers from Yale University School of Medicine confirmed that whiplash mechanics persistently and quickly causes excessive elongation of the vertebral artery (12).

    In 2000, the European Journal of Emergency Medicine presented a case study of a patient who had headache and neck pain after whiplash injury and subsequently developed cerebellar infarction due to vertebral artery dissection (13). This patient’s pain was out of proportion to his apparent injury and it was a clue to the final diagnosis. The authors opined that gross motor examination for spinal cord injury may not be adequate for patients with minor neck trauma because of the risk of vertebral artery dissection, and therefore detailed cranial nerve and cerebellar examination should be performed for detection of circulatory insufficiency.

    In 2002, the journal Neurological Research (14) published an investigational study of the incidence of vertebral artery dissection following minor whiplash trauma. The authors found the incidence to be 24% (7/29).

    In 2006, researchers from Yale University School of Medicine exposed cadaver cervical spines to rear-end low acceleration mechanical events (15). They determined that “Elongation-induced vertebral artery injury is more likely to occur in those with rotated head posture at the time of rear impact, as compared to head-forward.”

    In 2007, researchers once again from Yale University School of Medicine exposed cadaver cervical spines to frontal and side impact low acceleration mechanical events (16). They determined that “Elongation-induced vertebral artery injury is more likely to occur during side impact as compared with frontal impact.”

    Last year (2010), a study published in the journal European Neurology retrospectively analyzed the data on 500 consecutive patients with whiplash injury and discovered that the incidence of cervical arterial dissections in patients with whiplash injury was much higher than the overall incidence of cervical arterial dissections in the general population (17). They conclude that there is a “causal relationship between arterial dissection and cervical spine distortion injury.”

    The authors noted that cervical arterial dissection can become symptomatic months after a whiplash injury. In this study, 37.5% occurred between 4 -12 months post whiplash injury.

    These authors make these comments:

    “Whiplash trauma in a road traffic accident can lead to cervical arterial dissection, which initially is asymptomatic.”

    “Most clinicians are not aware that patients with arterial dissections are still at risk of cerebrovascular events months after the dissection.”

    “Dissections of cervical arteries following car accidents are often not recognized by clinical examination.”

    “Many dissections of cervical arteries remain clinically asymptomatic, and the association with a car accident is not recognized.”

    “The clinical implementation of this finding should be that the patients with whiplash injury acquired in a car accident are screened for arterial dissections. In case of clinically suspected cervical arterial dissection, each patient should receive Doppler sonography.”

    “Initial MRI of the cervical spine and follow-up investigations after 1–3 months should be considered in patients with whiplash trauma in order to detect vascular, osseous, ligamentous and nerve injuries.”

    In this study, the authors found that head-on collisions and rear-end collisions were equally likely to produce a cervical artery dissection; and that low speed collisions were just as likely as higher speed collisions to create a post-traumatic cervical artery dissection. Most importantly, they found that there is an increased risk of posttraumatic cervical artery dissection within 12 months after whiplash injury by about 400 times compared to the uninjured population. Car accidents are an important risk factor for arterial dissections. The victims of car accidents should be screened for arterial dissections.

    Lastly, in 2005, Drs. Michael Haneline and John Triano published a review of the literature comparing the incidence of cervical artery dissection between cervical chiropractic manipulation versus whiplash motor vehicle collision. They conclude:

    “Long-lasting abnormalities of blood flow velocity within the vertebral artery have been reported in patients following common whiplash injuries, whereas no significant changes in vertebral artery peak flow velocity were observed following cervical chiropractic manipulative therapy.”

    “Perceived causation of reported cases of cervical artery dissection is more frequently attributed to chiropractic manipulative therapy procedures than to motor vehicle collision related injuries, even though the comparative biomechanical evidence makes such causation unlikely.”

    “The direct evidence suggests that the healthy vertebral artery is not at risk from properly performed chiropractic manipulative procedures.”

    SUMMARY

            No therapeutic intervention is without risk. The risk of vertebral artery dissection as a consequence of upper cervical spine manipulation is extremely rare. When untrained individuals attempt spinal manipulation, there is an increased incidence of adverse events. For decades, chiropractors have been taught about the potential for vertebral artery injury with certain manipulative maneuvers, and are extremely well trained in the effective delivery of safe spinal manipulations. Newer evidence has even questioned if there is any increased risk of cervical artery dissection as a consequence of chiropractic cervical spine manipulation, yet they remind the practitioner that the symptoms associated with spontaneous vertebral artery dissection may bring the patient into their offices (6).

    In contrast, there is significant evidence that a much greater risk for vertebral artery dissection (400 times higher) exists as a consequence of whiplash motor vehicle collisions (17). The evidence clearly shows that during whiplash mechanics, the vertebral artery sustains significant abnormal stretch and injurious elongation. Post-whiplash vertebral artery injury can be asymptomatic for months following the collision, yet it can result in catastrophic outcomes, including death. The evidence supports that all whiplash-injured patients should be observed for symptoms and/or signs of vertebral-basilar insufficiency for months following injury; if any such symptoms and/or signs present, additional diagnostics are warranted, and the statistical etiology should be understood.

    REFERENCES

    1)                 Terrett AGJ; Current Concepts in Vertebrovascular Complications Following Spinal Manipulation; Second Edition; NCMIC Group, 2001.

    2)                 Hauser V, Zangger P, Winter Y, Oertel W, Kesselrin J; Late Sequelae of Whiplash Injury with Dissection of Cervical Arteries; European Neurology; August 18, 2010, Vol. 64, No. 4, pp. 214–218.

    3)                 Terrett AG; Misuse of the literature by medical authors in discussing spinal manipulative therapy injury; Journal of Manipulative and Physiological Therapeutics; 1995 May;18(4):203-10.

    4)                 Carey PF; A report on the occurrence of cerebrovascular accidents in chiropractic practice; Journal of the Canadian Chiropractic Association; June 1993, Vol. 37, No. 2, pp. 104-106.

    5)                 Haldeman S, Kohlbeck FJ, McGregor M; Unpredictability of cerebrovascular ischemia associated with cervical spine manipulation therapy: a review of sixty-four cases after cervical spine manipulation; Spine; 2002 Jan 1;27(1):49-55.

    6)                 Cassidy, J David DC, PhD; Boyle, Eleanor PhD; Côté, Pierre DC, PhD; He, Yaohua MD, PhD; Hogg-Johnson, Sheilah PhD; Silver, Frank L. MD; Bondy, Susan J. PhD; Risk of Vertebrobasilar Stroke and Chiropractic Care: Results of a Population-Based Case-Control and Case-Crossover Study; Spine; Volume 33(4S), February 15, 2008 pp S176-S183.

    7)                 Fischgrund, JS; Neck Pain, American Academy of Orthopedic Surgeons, 2004.

    8)                 Hinse P, Thie A, Lachenmayer L. Dissection of the extracranial vertebral artery: report of four cases and review of the literature. Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery and Psychiatry. 1991 Oct;54(10):863-9.

    9)                 Friedman D, Flanders A, Thomas C, Millar W. Vertebral artery injury after acute cervical spine trauma: rate of occurrence as detected by MR angiography and assessment of clinical consequences. American Journal of Roentgenology. 1995 Feb;164(2):443-7.

    10)             Viktrup L, Knudsen GM, Hansen SH. Delayed onset of fatal basilar thrombotic embolus after whiplash injury. Stroke. 1995 Nov;26(11):2194-6.

    11)             Nibu K, Cholewicki J, Panjabi MM, Babat LB, Grauer JN, Kothe R, Dvorak J. Dynamic elongation of the vertebral artery during an in vitro whiplash simulation. European Spine Journal. 1997;6(4):286-9.

    12)             Panjabi MM, Cholewicki J, Nibu K, Grauer JN, Babat LB, Dvorak J. Mechanism of whiplash injury. Clinical Biomechanics (Bristol, Avon). 1998 Jun;13(4-5):239-249.

    13)             Chong CL, Ooi SB. Neck pain after minor neck trauma–is it always neck sprain? European Journal of Emergency Medicine. 2000 Jun;7(2):147-9.

    14)             Chung YS, Han DH. Vertebrobasilar dissection: a possible role of whiplash injury in its pathogenesis. Neurological Research. 2002 Mar;24(2):129-38.

    15)             Ivancic PC, Ito S, Tominaga Y, Carlson EJ, Rubin W, Panjabi MM. Effect of rotated head posture on dynamic vertebral artery elongation during simulated rear impact. Clinical Biomechanics (Bristol, Avon). 2006 Mar;21(3):213-20.

    16)             Carlson EJ, Tominaga Y, Ivancic PC, Panjabi MM. Dynamic vertebral artery elongation during frontal and side impacts. Spine Journal. 2007 Mar-Apr;7(2):222-8.

    17)             Vital Hauser, Peter Zangger, Yaroslav Winter, Wolfgang Oertel, Jung Kesselrin; Late Sequelae of Whiplash Injury with Dissection of Cervical Arteries; European Neurology; August 18, 2010, Vol. 64, No. 4, pp. 214–218.

    18)             Haneline M, Triano J. Cervical artery dissection. A comparison of highly dynamic mechanisms: manipulation versus motor vehicle collision. Journal of Manipulative Physiological Therapeutics. 2005 Jan;28(1):57-63.

  • Chronic Pain Syndrome And Vitamin D

    Chronic Pain Syndrome And Vitamin D

    Humans evolved outdoors, in the sunshine. Exposure to the sun’s ultraviolet radiation produces a hormone known as “vitamin D”. Vitamin D is critical for human health. The nucleus of all of our cells have vitamin D receptors. There is evidence that vitamin D influences the expression of about 10% of human genes.

    With very rare exceptions, humans cannot achieve optimal levels of vitamin D through diet alone. Although some foods are fortified with vitamin D, consumption of large amounts of such foods will not achieve optimal levels. To achieve and maintain optimal levels of vitamin D, we must either use vitamin D supplements or use the sun.

    The sun showers onto earth a large range of radiation, including ultraviolet radiation (UV). UV radiation has three wavelengths, as follows:

    Ultraviolet A (UVA): 320-400 nm

    UVA has the longest wavelength and therefore it penetrates deepest into the skin. The most superficial layer of skin cells is the squamous cells. Deeper to the squamous cells are the basal cells. Below the basal cells are the melanocytes. Because UVA penetrates deepest into the skin, it is the primary UV influence on the melanocytes. Melanocytes produce the dark colored skin pigment melanin. This means that it is UVA that is primarily responsible for skin tanning. Sadly, damage to these same melanocytes increases the risk of the deadly skin cancer melanoma. UVA radiation is also primarily responsible for skin wrinkles.

    Ultraviolet B (UVB): 280-319 nm

    UVB should be subcategorized: 280-289 nm and 290-319 nm

    • 280-289 nm UVB radiation is absorbed by the atmosphere and therefore does not influence human physiology, neither positively nor negatively.
    • 290-319 UV radiation is most important. This range of UVB is primarily responsible for burning of the skin with excess sun exposure. Because of its shorter wavelength (as compared to UVA), it is less likely to affect the deeper melanocytes, and therefore is less associated with deadly melanoma. Older sunscreens (UVB blockers only) and contemporary non-broad-spectrum sunscreens (UVB and UVA blockers) only blocked the skin burning UVB radiation, allowing the user to spend more time in the sun without burning. Ironically, this increased the sunscreen user’s exposure to the dangerous wrinkle and melanoma producing UVA radiation.

    To add to the irony, it is UVB radiation in the 290-319 nm wavelength that starts the production of vitamin D, as detailed below.

    Consequently, older sunscreens (UVB blockers only) reduced skin burning, reduce the skin production of vitamin D, increase skin wrinkles, and increase deadly melanomas.

    Ultraviolet C (UVC): 200-280 nm

    UVC has the shortest wavelength and therefore it does not penetrate well. In fact, it is unable to penetrate the earth’s atmosphere, where it is 100% absorbed.

    •••••

    James Dowd, MD, is an Associate Professor of Medicine at Michigan State University. He is also the founder and director of both the Arthritis Institute of Michigan and the Michigan Arthritis Research Center. He is board certified in internal medicine, adult rheumatology and pediatric rheumatology.

    In 2008, Dr. Dowd published a book titled The Vitamin D Cure: Five Steps to Heal Your Pain and Improve Your Mood.

    Dr. Down states that the optimal level of vitamin D is between 50-70 ng/ml.

    PAIN

    In his book, Dr. Dowd states:

    “Research tells us that a lack of vitamin D makes us ache. Symptoms that point to vitamin D deficiency are muscle spasms, bone pain, and joint pain.”

    “Doctors often mistake vitamin D deficiencies for fibromyalgia, rheumatoid arthritis, and lupus.”

    “Because I’m a rheumatologist, people come to me because they want solutions for the pain they’re experiencing in their joints, tendons, ligaments, muscles, and bones. They typically have at least one disease involving muscles, ligaments, joints, and bones, but all of the aches and pains they have are actually connected to their vitamin D levels and what they eat.”

    Dr. Dowd explains how joint cartilage integrity is dependent upon the quality of the bone the cartilage sits upon, stating:

    “The bone that lies under the joint cartilage keeps the cartilage stable, functioning, and durable.” “You will speed up the rate of your cartilage breaking down when anything destabilizes the bone below the cartilage, such as poor bone development or increased bone turnover caused by vitamin D deficiency.”

    Dr. Dowd notes that there is a 2-3 fold faster rate of osteoarthritis progression in those with the lowest 20% of vitamin D levels compared to those with the highest levels.

    Dr. Dowd notes that adequate vitamin D supplementation can eliminate chronic back pain symptoms in nearly all patients, stating:

    “Those who took vitamin D supplements saw dramatic resolution of pain, muscle fatigue and muscle cramps.”

    MAGNESIUM

    Dr. Dowd emphasizes that there is an important relationship between vitamin D and magnesium, stating:

    1) Magnesium is critical for one’s body to produce the active form of vitamin D.

    2) The receptor that vitamin D uses in the nuclear membrane is poorly expressed when one is magnesium deficient.

    3) Magnesium is required for vitamin D to function properly.

    Dr. Dowd further explains that magnesium is low when the body becomes acidic. He notes that the two main causes of an acidic body are the consumption of grains and dairy products, so he discourages both. He states that the most abundant and absorbable source for magnesium is the consumption of green leafy vegetables.

    •••••

    The world’s leading authority on vitamin D is Michael F. Holick, PhD, MD. Dr. Holick is a professor at Boston University Medical Center and the director of the university’s General Clinical Research Unit, Bone Health Clinic, and the Heliotherapy, Light, and Skin Research Laboratory. A search of the National Library of Medicine using the PubMed search engine identified 345 articles using the key words “holick mf AND vitamin d”.

    Dr. Holick is the discoverer of the active form of vitamin D (1,25, dihydroxy vitamin D). In his 2010 book titled The Vitamin D Solution; A 3-Step Strategy to Cure Our Most Common Health Problems, Dr. Holick details these steps to the formation of the active form of vitamin D:

    STEP #1

    Our skin cells contain a molecule called

    7-dehydrocholesterol = provitamin D3

    which absorbs ultraviolet light B (UVB, wavelength 290-319 nm)

    STEP #2

    The absorption of UVB by provitamin D3

    produces

    pre-vitamin D3

    within the skin cells

    STEP #3

    Our body heat

    converts

    pre-vitamin D3

    into

    vitamin D3

    within the skin cell

    (this is the same molecule as supplemental vitamin D3)

    STEP #4

    Vitamin D3

    exits the skin cell into the blood stream

    and

    travels to the liver

    where

    25-hydroxy vitamin D (calcidrol) is produced

    STEP #5

    25-hydroxy vitamin D

    leaves the liver

    into the blood stream

    to the kidney

    STEP #6

    The kidney makes the active form of vitamin D

    1, 25 dihydroxy vitamin D

    (this is the active form of vitamin D that was discovered by Dr. Holick)

    STEP #7

    This active form of vitamin D (1, 25 dihydroxy vitamin D)

    circulates throughout the body

    binding to receptors in the nucleus of the cell

    influencing gene expression

    Dr. Holick discusses the following FACTS pertaining to vitamin D:

    1) Humans evolved in a manner as to be dependent upon sunshine for life and health.

    2) There has been a 22% reduction of vitamin D levels in the US population in the last 10 years.

    3) In the United States vitamin D insufficiency occurs in:

    • 70% of Whites
    • 90% of Hispanics
    • 97% of Blacks

    4) The activated form of vitamin D that is found in your blood is produced in the kidneys. However, some other tissues also make the activated form of vitamin D. These include the prostate, breast, lungs, colon and brain. The activated vitamin D formed in these tissues does not enter the blood stream, but remains in those specific tissues.

    5) “You could easily consume 5,000 IU of vitamin D a day, probably forever,” without overdosing.

    6) The assay for 25-vitamin D is the most ordered assay in the United States. This is the form of vitamin D that exists after the liver but before the kidney.

    7) It is more difficult to synthesize the active form of vitamin D as one ages. A 70-year old person is 75% less efficient in synthesizing vitamin D as compared to a 20-year old person.

    8) Neither calcium levels nor activated vitamin D levels (1, 25 dihydroxy vitamin D) levels are indicative of one being vitamin D deficient or not. The only acceptable measure for vitamin D deficiency is 25-vitamin D (made in the liver). Dr. Holick states:

    “Do not accept any other marker no matter what your doctor tells you.”

    Dr. Holick discusses the following MYTHS pertaining to vitamin D:

    1) It is a myth that one can wash vitamin D off from the skin shortly after being in the sun. Dr. Holick says this is not true because vitamin D3 is actually produced inside the skin cell itself, and therefore cannot be washed off.

    2) Vitamin D2 does not work or is inferior to vitamin D3. Dr. Holick says it is now proven and understood that vitamin D2 works just as well as vitamin D3.

    3) One can obtain adequate activated vitamin D from eating a good diet. Dr. Holick disagrees with this. He is adamant that one can only achieve adequate levels of vitamin D by being exposed to sufficient sunshine or by supplementation. He further notes that one cannot obtain optimal levels of vitamin D by consuming vitamin D fortified foods or by taking a multiple vitamin supplement, as the levels of vitamin D are too low.

    PAIN

    In 2007, Dr. Sota Omoigui states:

    “The origin of all pain is inflammation and the inflammatory response.”

    “Irrespective of the type of pain, whether it is acute or chronic pain, peripheral or central pain, nociceptive or neuropathic pain, the underlying origin is inflammation and the inflammatory response.”

    “Activation of pain receptors, transmission and modulation of pain signals, neuroplasticity and central sensitization are all one continuum of inflammation and the inflammatory response.”

    “Irrespective of the characteristic of the pain, whether it is sharp, dull, aching, burning, stabbing, numbing or tingling, all pain arises from inflammation and the inflammatory response.”

    Dr. Holick details how vitamin D has substantial anti-inflammatory properties.

    •••••

    Dr. Holick notes that osteomalacia is a known widespread chronic pain syndrome that is caused by vitamin D deficiency. Dr. Holick states:

    “Osteomalacia is characterized by vague but often intense bone and muscle aches and is frequently misdiagnosed as fibromyalgia, chronic fatigue syndrome, or arthritis.”

    Dr. Holick estimates that 40 – 60% of those diagnosed with fibromyalgia or chronic fatigue syndrome are actually suffering from osteomalacia subsequent to a massive vitamin D deficiency.

    Dr. Holick notes that when a patient has a deficiency of vitamin D, there also exists a deficiency of calcium mineralization in the bones. Poorly mineralized bones consist of a “Jell-O-like” collagen matrix that expands with pressure, abnormally stretching the highly innervated periosteal coverings. The result is a throbbing, aching bone pain. Dr. Holick states:

    “When people are sitting with aches in their hips or lying in bed with throbbing aches in their bones, it can be very hard for physicians to immediately think of vitamin D deficiency. But often that’s exactly what’s causing the problem.”

    •••••

    Dr. Holick notes that 93% of those suffering from nonspecific muscular and skeletal aches and pains are shown to be vitamin D deficient.

    RECENT SUPPORTIVE STUDIES

    In 2009, Gerry Schwalfenberg, MD from the Department of Family Medicine, University of Alberta, Canada, published an article in the Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine, titled:

    Improvement of Chronic Back Pain or

    Failed Back Surgery with Vitamin D Repletion: A Case Series

    In this study, Dr. Schwalfenberg describes 6 cases of improvement/resolution of chronic back pain or failed back surgery after vitamin D repletion in a Canadian family practice. He notes that vitamin D insufficiency is common; repletion of vitamin D to normal levels in patients who have chronic low back pain or have had failed back surgery may improve quality of life or, in some cases, result in complete resolution of symptoms. In this report, there were 4 patients who had chronic back pain for more than a year and 2 patients who suffered for more than 3 years from failed back surgery.

    In this study, Dr. Schwalfenberg makes the following key points:

    “Back pain is the most common neurological complaint in North America, second only to headache.”

    “Low back pain (LBP) and proximal myopathy are common symptoms of vitamin D deficiency and osteomalacia.”

    “Vitamin D is required for the differentiation, proliferation, and maturation of cartilage cells and for the production of proteoglycan synthesis in articular chondrocytes.”

    “Patients who have chronic, nonspecific LBP or have had failed back surgery may have an underlying vitamin D insufficiency/deficiency.”

    “All patients had tried various pain treatments, including physiotherapy, visiting a chiropractor, acupuncture, or visit to a pain management clinic, all without much benefit.”

    “Repletion of inadequate vitamin D levels demonstrated significant improvement or complete resolution of chronic LBP symptoms in these patients.”

    Physicians should have a high index of suspicion for low vitamin D levels in patients with LBP.

    “The patients in this study who responded best used between 4000 and 5000 IU of vitamin D3/day.”

    “This case series supports information that has recently become apparent in the literature about vitamin D deficiency and its influence on back pain, muscle pain, and failed back surgery. Doses in the range of 4000 to 5000 IU of vitamin D3/day may be needed for an adequate response.”

    •••••

    In 2009, (Straube) a study was published in the journal Pain, titled:

    Vitamin D and Chronic Pain

    The authors reviewed 22 studies that indicated a strong association between vitamin D deficiency and chronic pain.

    •••••

    In 2010, JoAnn Manson, MD from the Division of Preventive Medicine, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Harvard Medical School, published an article in the journal Metabolism, titled:

    Pain: sex differences and implications for treatment

    In this study, Dr. Manson found that women have a higher prevalence than men of several clinical pain conditions and of inflammation-mediated disorders. Given the important role of inflammation in mediating pain, nutritional factors that modulate the inflammatory response offer a promising and exciting new avenue for the prevention and treatment of chronic pain disorders. Of particular interest is the potential role of moderate- to high-dose vitamin D and omega-3 fatty acid supplements, both of which have powerful anti-inflammatory effects. These nutritional interventions, which influence cytokine, leukotriene, and prostaglandin pathways, may be of particular benefit to women due to their higher prevalence of inflammatory chronic pain disorders.

    In this study, Dr. Manson makes the following key points:

    Inflammation increases the incidence of pain. Both vitamin D and omega-3 fatty acids “have powerful anti-inflammatory effects.”

    “Women tend to have a heightened inflammatory response compared with men. This enhanced inflammatory response may contribute to the substantially higher risk of painful inflammatory autoimmune conditions in women compared with men, including rheumatoid arthritis, lupus and other collagen vascular disorders, and osteoarthritis.”

    Two very promising nutritional interventions for pain management are moderate- to high-dose vitamin D and the marine omega-3 fatty acids (eicosapentaenoic acid + docosahexaenoic acid).

    Vitamin D and omega-3 fatty acids “reduce levels of circulating pro-inflammatory cytokines, decrease chronic joint pain, and may reduce the risk of autoimmune diseases.”

    “Vitamin D, in addition to its role in calcium homeostasis, has powerful effects on the immune system, inhibiting proinflammatory cytokines such as interleukin-6 and tumor necrosis factor–alpha and reducing C-reactive protein.”

    Vitamin D deficiency increases chronic widespread pain and/or fibromyalgia, especially in women.

    A high level of vitamin D reduces knee and hip osteoarthritis and pain.

    Given the important role of inflammation and cytokines in mediating and modulating pain, there is a “promising role of moderate- to high-dose vitamin D and omega-3 fatty acid supplementation in preventing and treating inflammation and chronic pain disorders. These nutritional interventions may be of particular benefit to women due to their higher prevalence of inflammatory chronic pain disorders.”

    •••••

    In October 2010, (Heidari) a study was published in the journal International Journal of Rheumatic Disease, titled:

    Association between nonspecific skeletal pain and vitamin D deficiency

    The authors detail the evidence on how deficiency of vitamin D is reported in patients in many types of musculoskeletal pain. Their study evaluated 276 chronic skeletal pain sufferers and 202 control subjects to add to the evidence that vitamin D deficiency is associated with chronic nonspecific skeletal pain.

    •••••

    In November 2010 (Bhatty) a study published in the journal Journal of the Pakistan Medical Association, titled:

    Vitamin D Deficiency in Fibromyalgia

    The authors assessed 40 female patients diagnosed with fibromyalgia from Karachi, Pakistan. They found that 100% of these woman had suboptimal levels of vitamin D. Specifically, they found that 80% had vitamin deficiency (averaging about 15 ng/ml) and 20% had vitamin D insufficiency (below 30 ng/ml). The authors concluded that vitamin D deficiency is frequently seen in patients with fibromyalgia and nonspecific musculoskeletal pain syndromes.

    •••••

    In April 2011, (Arnson) an editorial appeared in the journal Israeli Medical Association Journal, titled:

    Is Vitamin D a New Therapeutic Agent in

    Auto-inflammatory and Pain Syndromes?

    The authors note that “hypovitaminosis D is a worldwide epidemic, due to insufficient intake and inadequate sunlight exposure,” estimating that worldwide 40-90% of older persons are vitamin insufficient. They recommend that all chronic pain persons be assessed for vitamin D levels.

    •••••

    In September 2011, Tague and colleagues from the University of Kansas Medical Center published a study in the Journal of Neuroscience, titled:

    Vitamin D deficiency Promotes Skeletal

    Muscle Hypersensitivity and Sensory Hyperinnervation

    The authors note that “musculoskeletal pain affects nearly half of all adults and most of them are vitamin D deficient.” They also know that nociceptors express vitamin D receptors, and that a lack of vitamin D can cause nociceptive hyperinnervation of skeletal muscles, contributing to muscular hypersensitivity and pain.

    •••••

    In 2011, the editorial of the Scandinavian Journal of Primary Health Care (Kragstrup) is titled:

    Vitamin D Supplementation for Patients with Chronic Pain

    In this editorial Dr. Kragstrup reviews the epidemiological studies that link low levels of vitamin D to chronic pain. He advocates both testing for and supplementing of vitamin D in chronic pain sufferers.

    •••••

    Also in 2010, Joseph Pizzorno, ND, the Editor in Chief of the journal Integrative Medicine, published an editorial in his journal titled:

    What We Have Learned About Vitamin D Dosing?

    In this article, Dr. Pizzorno makes the following key points:

    1) “Over the past several years, the surprising prevalence of vitamin D deficiency has become broadly recognized.”

    2) Vitamin D deficiency is linked to:

    • Osteoporosis
    • Cardiovascular disease
    • Cancer
    • Autoimmune diseases
    • Multiple sclerosis
    • Pain
    • Loss of cognitive function
    • Decreased strength
    • Increased rate of all-cause mortality

    3) “Deficiency of vitamin D is now recognized as a pandemic, with more than half of the world’s population at risk.”

    4) Approximately 50% of the healthy North American population and more than 80% of those with chronic diseases are vitamin D deficient.

    5) 80% of healthy Caucasian infants are vitamin D deficient. [And the rate of vitamin D deficiency tends to be greater in African American and Hispanic children].

    6) Those with vitamin D deficiency experience 39% higher annual healthcare costs than those with normal levels of vitamin D.

    7) The minimum blood levels of vitamin D [25(OH)D3] is 32 ng/ml; the optimal level is 50-70 ng/ml.

    8) Prolonged intake of 10,000 IU of supplemental vitamin D3 “is likely to pose no risk of adverse effects in almost all individuals.”

    9) The recommended loading dose of supplemental vitamin D3 should be about 20,000 IU/day for 3 – 6 months with a maintenance dose of 5,000 IU/day. Those taking this amount of supplemental vitamin D3 should periodically have their serum 25(OH)D3 levels measured.

    SUMMARY:

    • All chronic pain patients should have their 25 hydroxy vitamin D levels checked.
    • If a patient’s 25 hydroxy vitamin D levels are below 50 ng/ml, and especially if they are below 30 mg/ml, the patient needs more UVB sun exposure without sunscreen, or they need to supplement with 5,000 IU of vitamin D3 per day until optimal levels are achieved.

    •••••

    REFERENCES:

    Arnson Y, Amital H; Is Vitamin D a New Therapeutic Agent in Auto-inflammatory and Pain Syndromes?; Israeli Medical Association Journal; Vol. 13, April 2011; pp. 234-235.

    Bhatty SA, Shaikh NA, Irfan M, Kashif SM, Vaswani AS, Sumbhai A, Gunpat; Vitamin D Deficiency in Fibromyalgia; Journal of the Pakistan Medical Association; November 2010; Vol. 60; No. 11; pp. 949-951.

    Cedric F. Garland, Christine B. French, Leo L. Baggerly and Robert P. Heaney; Vitamin D Supplement Doses and Serum 25-Hydroxyvitamin D in the Range Associated with Cancer Prevention; Anticancer Research; February 2011; Vol. 31; No. 2; pp. 617-622.

    Heidari B, Shirvani JS, Firouzjahi A, Heidari P, Hajian-Tilaki KO; Association between nonspecific skeletal pain and vitamin D deficiency; International Journal of Rheumatic Disease; October 2010; Vol. 13. No. 4; pp. 340-346.

    Kragstrup TW; Vitamin D Supplementation for Patients with Chronic Pain; Scandinavian Journal of Primary Health Care; 2011, 29: pp. 4-5.

    Manson JE; Pain: sex differences and implications for treatment; Metabolism; October 2010, Volume 59, Supplement 1, pp. S16-S20.

    Omoigui S; The biochemical origin of pain: The origin of all pain is inflammation and the inflammatory response: Inflammatory profile of pain syndromes; Medical Hypothesis; 2007, Vol. 69, pp. 1169–1178.

    Pizzorno J; What We Have Learned About Vitamin D Dosing?; Integrative Medicine; Vol. 9, No. 1, Feb/Mar 2010.

    Schwalfenberg G; Improvement of Chronic Back Pain or Failed Back Surgery with Vitamin D Repletion: A Case Series; Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine; January–February 2009; Vol. 22; No. 1; pp. 69 –74.

    Straube S, Andrew Moor R, Derry S, McQuay HJ, Thomas A; Vitamin D and chronic pain; Pain; 2009; 141: pp. 10-13.

    Tague SE, Clarke GL, Winter MK, McCarson KE, Wright DE, Smith PG; Vitamin D deficiency Promotes Skeletal Muscle Hypersensitivity and Sensory Hyperinnervation; Journal of Neuroscience; September 2011; Vol. 31; No. 39; pp. 13728-38.