Skip to main content

Table 1 Description of 14 studies published between 2008 and 2018, included in a systematic review on chiropractic Maintenance Care

From: Chiropractic maintenance care - what’s new? A systematic review of the literature

Author Year of publication

Design of study

Population

Sample size

Response rate

Research question explored

Axén 2008 [8]

Survey

Chiropractors

N = 59

60%

Indications for Maintenance Care

Prevalence of Maintenance Care

Axén 2009 [10]

Focus group + Survey

Chiropractors

N = 36

N = 129

22%

77%

Indications for Maintenance Care

Chiropractors’ belief in Maintenance Care

Møller 2009 [11]

Survey with open-ended question

Chiropractors

N = 11

NA, selected group

Definition of concept

Indications for Maintenance Care

Prevalence of Maintenance Care

Consultation patterns

Malmqvist 2009 [12]

Structured workshop, a focus group discussion

Chiropractors

N = 15

NA

Indications for Maintenance Care

Sandnes 2010 [13]

Observation in clinics

Chiropractors

N = 868

NA

Prevalence of Maintenance

Care Consultation patterns

Decision making

Hansen 2010 [15]

Survey

Chiropractors

N = 297

72%

Indications for Maintenance Care

Prevalence of Maintenance Care

Chiropractor-related factors associated with Maintenance Care

Senna 2011 [18]

RCT

Patients from specialized hospital clinic

N = 60

65%

Efficacy of intense follow up with SMT compared to a) SMT without follow up and b) sham SMT without follow up

Martel 2011 [19]

RCT

Chiropractic

Patients

N = 98

93%

Efficacy of SMT compared to a) SMT plus exercise and b) attention

Cifuentes 2011 [21]

Observational, database

Patients with workers’ compensation claims

N = 894

NA, selected group

Health care use for chiropractic patients compared to physician- and physical therapist- patients

Bringsli 2012 [10]

Observational +

Survey

Chiropractors

+

Chiropractic Maintenance Care-patients

N = 178

N = 373

NA

Not known

Rationale

Consultation patterns

Content

Axén 2013 [9]

Observational

Chiropractors

N = 252

96%

Indications for Maintenance Care

Myburgh 2013 [14]

Interview study

Chiropractors

N = 10

NA

Definition of concept

Indications for Maintenance Care Consultation patterns

Content Decision making

Eklund 2018 [16]

RCT

Chiropractic patients

N = 319

97%

Efficacy of pre-scheduled treatments compared to treatments when needed.

Maiers 2018 [17]

RCT

Chiropractic patients

N = 180

90%

Efficacy of SMT and exercises for 36 weeks compared to SMT and exercises for 12 weeks.

  1. SMT Spinal Manipulative Therapy, NA Not applicable, RCT Randomized controlled trial