Jump to: Page Content, Site Navigation, Site Search,
You are seeing this message because your web browser does not support basic web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.
| The first 100% of the full text of this article appears below. |
EDITOR
Patient satisfaction is increasingly recognised as an important
outcome in trials. Whatever interpretation Ernst and Assendelft place
on changes in the Oswestry score, they did not mention in their
letter1 that significantly more of those patients in our
trial who were treated by chiropractic expressed satisfaction with
their outcome at three years than those treated in
hospital2
84.7% (127/150) v 65.5%
(76/116) for those referred by chiropractors (P<0.0001) and 79.2%
(103/130) v 60.2% (71/118) for those recruited from
hospitals (P=0.001). This aspect was assessed three years after entry
to the trial.
The main stimuli to the Medical Research Council's current trial were
the suggestive results and further questions raised by our initial
observations. Assendelft et al's critique can hardly be considered to
have been one of its starting points.3
| 1. |
Ernst E, Assendelft WJJ.
Chiropractic for low back pain.
BMJ
1999;
318:
261 |
| 2. |
Meade TW, Dyer S, Browne W, Frank AO.
Randomised comparison of chiropractic and hospital outpatient management for low back pain: results from extended follow up.
BMJ
1995;
311:
349-351 |
| 3. | Assendelft WJJ, Bouter LM, Kessels AGH. Effectiveness of chiropractic and physiotherapy in the treatment of low back pain: a critical discussion of the British randomized clinical trial. J Manipulative Physiol Ther 1991; 14: 281-286[Medline]. |