Skip to main content

Advertisement

Table 3 Evidence Table: Cohort Studiesa

From: The safety of spinal manipulative therapy in children under 10 years: a rapid review

Author(s), YearSource PopulationSample CharacteristicsExposureOutcomesConfoundersKey Findings
Saedt et al., 2018 [33]Infants < 27 wks, referred w/ indications of upper cervical dysfunction, w/o causative concomitant pathology, potential underlying pathology, &/or red flags; NetherlandsMean age: 11.2 wks62.3% male
Reasons for seeking care: clear positional preference, restlessness and abnormal head position; n = 307
Mild mobilization techniques focusing on atlas (C1) in relation to C0-C2. Average impulse of 11–20 N.Harms recorded by manual therapists via questionnaire and physical exam post-exam:
Mild: transient side effect lasting < 24 h
Moderate: requiring medical and/or general practitioner tx
Severe: requiring hospital tx, AE
N/ASevere: 0%
Moderate: 0%
Mild: Vegetative responses after mobilization were reported:
- Flushing: 17.8% (14.03, 22.59)
- Hyper-extension: 4.3% (2.49, 7.11)
- Perspiration: 3.6% (2.01, 6.30)
- Gastro-esophageal reflux: 0.3% (0.06, 1.82)
Short breathing pattern changes: 9.2% (6.39, 12.87)
  1. AE Adverse events, D/t Due to, FU Follow-up, HA Headache, HVLA high velocity low amplitude, SMT spinal manipulative therapy, Months mos, N/A not applicable, RR relative risk, Tx Treatment, W/o Without, W/ With, Wks Weeks
  2. aData reported in this table only relates to adverse events, not benefits of treatment