Wednesday, December 28, 2011



Laser Therapy and Pain Relief
By James White, DC and Kendra Kaesberg-White, DC

Light amplification of stimulated emission of radiation (laser) is a light beam from the electromagnetic spectrum. Unlike conventional light sources a laser beam travels in only one direction and is monochromatic with its photons (little packets of energy) which are all identical in size, traveling equidistant in time and space.
Low-level laser therapy (LLLT) has been investigated and used clinically for over 30 years, mostly in Eastern Europe and Asia. The ability of lasers to cut, cauterize and destroy tissue is well known. These same or similar lasers at lower powers can nonthermally and nondestructively alter cellular function. This phenomenon, known as laser biostimulation, is the basis for the current use of lasers to treat a variety of articular, neural and soft tissue conditions.1
A variety of names have been used to describe the same type of low-level laser: biostimulation, low energy, low reactive, low intensity, soft and or cold laser. In current practice, LLLT uses low output levels (15100 mW), short treatment times (10-240 seconds), and low energy levels (1-4 J/cm2).1

The mechanism and effectiveness of LLLT has been compared with ultrasound therapy,2 and should be considered as an extension to the accepted physiotherapy modalities that currently utilize parts of the electromagnetic spectrum, such as shortwaves, microwaves, infrared, and ultraviolet therapy.1

Lasers produce nonionizing, electromagnetic radiation that is extremely monochromatic, polarized and coherent.3 Laser light has been reported to penetrate human tissue in the ranges of .8-15mm,4,5 but the majority of the light will be absorbed within the first 4mm.6,7 Although this may seem superficial, it should be noted that chemical processes may be initiated and mediate physiological effects at a deeper level.8

The initial studies utilizing LLLT on nerve tissue produced mixed results regarding nerve conduction velocity and distal latency. These earlier studies utilized low powered HeNe lasers (<=1mW) and resultant low energy densities (<=.012 J/cm2).1 More recent studies utilizing higher energy densities and deeper penetrating lasers have found alterations in distal nerve latency and conduction velocity by a few to many percent, and which can last for periods of 30 minutes or greater.1,9-11

It appears that nerve tissue has a photosensitive component, which results in a biostimulation blockade response following laser exposure.12 It is felt that LLLT reduces the excitability of the nerve cells by an interruption of the fast pain fibers with a resultant reduction in pain.12-15 LLLT has also been shown to accelerate the repair process of crush damaged nerves and improve function in both the CNS and peripheral nerves after injury.1,16-18 Laser Safety LLLT is a relatively safe procedure. Due to the low level, nonthermal nature of the laser, there is no tissue destruction or other hazards that you would find associated with the higher powered lasers. The FDA has classified the most commonly used low level lasers as a class III, nonsignificant risk, medical device for investigations use only.19 Because of the coherent nature of the laser beam, ocular damage is the main concern for the LLLT user. The operator should not attempt to stare directly into the beam. Suitable goggles to attenuate the wavelengths would be used by both the operator and patient.20 Other suggested contraindications would be to avoid exposure to sensitive tissue such as fetus, gonads and malignancy.20 Clinical Studies A number of papers have shown a reduction of pain with laser treatments directed over acupuncture points.21-24 Altered skin resistance with a reduction of pain were also noted in subjects who receive LLLT over muscular trigger points.25-26 A group of subjects with chronic tendinopathies, that had been previously treated unsuccessfully with physical therapy, NSAIDS, local injections, and or surgery, had an 87 percent success rate in pain reduction following the application of LLLT.27 In a study involving over 4,000 subjects who had suffered from conditions such as degenerative arthritis; muscle pain; tendinitis and tension myalgia. More than 80 percent of the subjects found a marked lessening of their symptoms following irradiation with an IR laser.28-30 In a study involving a total of 69 subjects and 302 total laser treatment sessions, more that 80 percent of the subjects with chronic radiculopathies and over 90 percent of the subjects with chronic neuropathies experienced a greater than 50 percent total relief of pain following LLLT.14

In a similar study involving 60 total patients and 111 total laser treatments, it was shown that LLLT produced an immediate reduction of pain in 79 percent of the subjects.15 In a study involving over 100 subjects and over 500 laser treatments, it was observed that acute soft tissue pain syndromes showed a dramatic response following the initial laser treatment with a marked reduction in tissue swelling, bruising and good pain relief.31 Subsequent treatments (2-3) produced further improvement.31 It was also noted that chronic pain syndromes were slower to respond to LLLT (average of eight treatments), although 75 percent of the subjects noted significant pain relief.31 A two-stage survey of 116 chartered physiotherapists in Northern Ireland, who utilize LLLT as part of their clinical practice, ranked LLLT effective for the treatment of myofascial and postoperative pain syndromes; rheumatoid arthritis; muscle tears; hematomas; tendinitis; shingles; herpes simplex; scarring; burn and would healing.32 In this same survey, LLLT was ranked first, on the basis of relative effectiveness, when compared with four other modalities (interferential therapy, shortwave diathermy, ultrasound, and pulsed electromagnetic therapy), for use in pain relief and wound healing.32

Suggested Mercy Conference Review Low Level Laser Therapy: Low level laser therapy (LLLT) is a conservative procedure that utilized visible red and/or infrared regions of the electromagnetic spectrum. It is used as a physiotherapy modality for a variety of articular, neural and soft tissue conditions. Rating: Investigational to promising, awaiting FDA approval.

Evidence: Class I, II, III. Conclusions Laser therapy is gaining laboratory and clinical data to prove its effectiveness. LLLT has gained acceptance for treating a variety of osseous, neural and soft tissue conditions in many parts of the world. The acceptance in the U.S. has been limited because of the rigors of the FDA approval process. Many of the earlier studies involving laser use lacked proper scientific controls. Today there are many controlled studies that are well-designed and multicentered. These studies include the use of modern electrodiagnostic and magnetic resonance imaging to monitor the subjects response in an effort to objectively study the role of LLLT in treating neuromusculoskeletal pain. There is a current need for clinical investigators to research these new laser medical devices. Additional research is required to obtain data concerning success rates in treating specific conditions, length of exposure, frequency of treatments, and related therapeutic protocols. James J. White, DC Kendra Kaesberg-White, DC Belleville, Illinois 

Chiropractor in:
Temple Hills, Clinton, Oxen Hill, Forestvile

Friday, December 9, 2011

Watch Dr. Rosa on Sports Talk show with Glenn Harris

Dr. Rosa Will be on the Sports Talk tonight at 9:00 with Glenn Harris check it out!


WJLA/NewsChannel 8

Tuesday, December 6, 2011

Neck Pain

Neck Pain


Neck pain can occur as a result of a car accident—such as from whiplash, for example. Or, it can happen as a result of holding the head in the same position for too long, day after day. For instance, many computer users experience neck pain. Some people have neck pain from sports injuries as well. Regardless, whatever the reason, chiropractors can help people with neck pain.

How Can Popping My Neck Help?

Chiropractors don’t really "pop" a person’s neck. What a chiropractor will do is examine your neck and back, doing a thorough analysis of your entire spine. Then, he will figure out which of your vertebrae is out of line. Spinal misalignment is the true underlying cause of your neck pain, and your chiropractor will determine a method for putting your spine back into alignment. This will provide neck pain relief.

It Sounds Painful…

It isn’t painful. Chiropractic treatments are designed to relieve pain, not cause pain. The chiropractic doctor will not twist your neck, bend it back, or "pop" it. In fact, the treatment he does may not even seem as if it involves your neck—it may center on your back. However, it will still provide the neck pain relief that you need.

Back Treatment for Neck Pain Relief?

Think about it like this—your neck is connected to your back. Your spine runs from your tailbone all the way up to your neck. Since it is all connected, it makes sense that treating one part of it may affect another part, doesn’t it?

What your chiropractor will likely do is to have you lay on the examination table, face down. You will need to relax so that the treatment can work. Your muscles cannot be tense or clenched. Once you are relaxed, the chiropractor will thrust a force of energy at a specific point in your spine very quickly. This quick thrust is done in order to put your spine back into alignment.

You may hear some popping noises when the thrust is done—this is just oxygen and other gases being released by the joint. You will not feel any pain, other than the push from the thrust. This isn’t forceful enough to be like a punch—it is more like a shove.

Afterwards, you may experience immediate neck pain relief. Or, it may take a day or so to have relief from your neck pain. You may need to return for more treatments, too. This will depend upon your specific condition.

Wednesday, November 30, 2011

Functional Knee Brace after Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction not recommended

Functional Knee Brace after Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction not recommended.


I have often expressed my personal dislike of the over use of bracing in general and feel that in most cases it is over utilized. This study supports my previous statements that functional knee brace's are not helpful and we should focus on Rehabilitation not bracing.
A Randomized Controlled Trial Comparing the Effectiveness of Functional Knee Brace and Neoprene Sleeve Use After Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction

Trevor B. Birmingham, PhD,,*,
Dianne M. Bryant, PhD,,
J. Robert Giffin, MD, FRCS(C),,
Robert B. Litchfield, MD, FRCS(C),,
John F. Kramer, PhD,
Allan Donner, PhD, and
Peter J. Fowler, MD, FRCS(C),

+
Author Affiliations

From the †Fowler Kennedy Sport Medicine Clinic, and the ‡University of Western Ontario, London Ontario, Canada
Address correspondence to Trevor B. Birmingham, PhD, School of Physical Therapy, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Western Ontario, London, Ontario, Canada N6G 1H1 (e-mail: tbirming@uwo.ca).

Abstract
Background: Despite a lack of evidence for their effectiveness, functional knee braces are commonly prescribed to patients after anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction.
Purpose: This trial was conducted to compare postoperative outcomes in patients using an ACL functional knee brace and patients using a neoprene knee sleeve.
Hypothesis: Patients using a brace will have superior outcomes than those using a sleeve.
Study Design: Randomized controlled clinical trial; Level of evidence, 1.
Methods: One hundred fifty patients were randomized to receive a brace (n = 76) or neoprene sleeve (n = 74) at their 6-week postoperative visit after primary ACL reconstruction with hamstring autograft. Patients were assessed preoperatively, then 6 weeks and 6, 12, and 24 months postoperatively. Outcome measures included disease-specific quality of life (Anterior Cruciate Ligament–Quality of Life [ACL-QOL] Questionnaire), anterior tibial translation (KT-1000 arthrometer side-to-side difference), the single-limb forward hop test (limb symmetry index), and Tegner Activity Scale. Outcomes at 1 and 2 years were compared after adjusting for baseline scores. Subjective ratings of how patients felt while using the brace/sleeve were also collected for descriptive purposes using a questionnaire. Four a priori directional subgroup hypotheses were evaluated using tests for interactions.


Results: There were no significant differences between brace (n = 62) and sleeve (n = 65) groups for any of the outcomes at 1- and 2-year follow-ups. Adjusted mean differences at 2 years were as follows: −0.94 (95% confidence interval [CI], −7.52 to 5.64) for the ACL-QOL Questionnaire, −0.10 mm (95% CI, −0.99 to 0.81) for KT-1000 arthrometer side-to-side difference, −0.87% (95% CI, −8.89 to 7.12) for hop limb symmetry index, and −0.05 (95% CI, −0.72 to 0.62) for the Tegner Activity Scale. Subjective ratings of confidence in the knee provided by the brace/sleeve were higher for the brace group than the sleeve group. Subgroup findings were minimal. Adverse events were few and similar between groups.

Conclusions: A functional knee brace does not result in superior outcomes compared with a neoprene sleeve after ACL reconstruction. Current evidence does not support the recommendation of using an ACL functional knee brace after ACL reconstruction.
Keywords:
anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction
functional knee brace
neoprene sleeve, randomized clinical trial (RCT)
Footnotes

Friday, November 18, 2011

Dangers of backpacks just around the corner!

Back to school time, physician visits, school supplies and floods of backpacks
Elementary, High School and College students alike will all be heading off again to school with those famous backpacks strapped to their backs.
Parents start gearing up for the school year wondering how severe flu season will be or if there will be another chicken pox outbreak. Among all those health concerns drifting in and out of the minds of parents everywhere, backpacks should be the top of the list.
Overweight backpack strapped around the shoulders worn on the back can not only cause pain, fatigue and lead to bad posture other serious conditions can occur like early wear and tear syndrome and spine compression.Health practitioners agree that should not carry a backpack that is more than 15% of their body weight. Other recommended guidelines include; backpack straps should be padded and contoured to fit them. Both straps need to be worn to distribute the weight evenly. The Orthopedic Connection has Backpack Safety page filled with valuable information for parents concerning backpack safety for their children.
Most worries concerning these backpacks are the unnecessary weight of the packs. As the child grows older not only does the grade level go up but so do the amount of text books the child needs for school. Schools today now choose not to use lockers and if they do a child does not have enough time in between classes to go to the locker, unload books and reload. More and more low back pain in children is being seen. Adding to the list of that heavy back children tend to add in their personal items. These heavy backpacks at times have the child arching the back which can lead the spine to compress in an unnatural manner. Then there is that “cool look” of wearing that backpack over one shoulder. Little do they realize this action can cause them lower and upper back pain not to mention a strain in their neck or shoulders. Walking with this heavy pack increases their risk of falling especially on stairs or other areas where it is uneven.
A survey conducted by Backpack Safety International™ was to determine the volume of injuries due to heavy backpacks on patients aged five to eighteen years old. The survey was answered by North American Chiropractors and some of the results are as follows;
181 chiropractors saw patients aged 5 to 18 who reported back, neck or shoulder pain due to heavy backpacks. The most common diagnoses were subluxations.
Chiropractors can offer more for that beginning school year for children by providing preventive wellness care and maintain the body’s structure. Plus chiropractors deal with a variety of conditions for children including asthma, colic, sports injuries and more.
When your child goes off to school and you begin to notice any of the following:
They are having difficulty putting on or removing the backpack.
Complaints of tingling or numbness in the arm.
Complain their back hurts.
You notice their posture has changed with or without the backpack.
You notice a red mark on back, neck or shoulders.
They have discomfort in shoulder, arm, legs, back or neck.
It is time to your call your chiropractor before any more problems arise or the current ones worsen. Chiropractors are licensed and trained. When it comes to children they receive that extra special care. Many states now consider chiropractors as a general practitioner.
Among all the health checks and shopping runs it may not be a bad idea to stop at your chiropractor and make sure your child’s spine is in top condition for the upcoming school year.

- examiner.com

Wednesday, November 16, 2011

Cold Laser Therapy, Shingles Post Herpatic Neuralgia


Cold Laser Therapy, Shingles Post Herpatic Neuralgia

Laser Therapy and Pain Relief
Laser Therapy and Pain Relief
By James White, DC and Kendra Kaesberg-White, DC

Light amplification of stimulated emission of radiation (laser) is a light beam from the electromagnetic spectrum. Unlike conventional light sources a laser beam travels in only one direction and is monochromatic with its photons (little packets of energy) which are all identical in size, traveling equidistant in time and space.
Low-level laser therapy (LLLT) has been investigated and used clinically for over 30 years, mostly in Eastern Europe and Asia. The ability of lasers to cut, cauterize and destroy tissue is well known. These same or similar lasers at lower powers can nonthermally and nondestructively alter cellular function. This phenomenon, known as laser biostimulation, is the basis for the current use of lasers to treat a variety of articular, neural and soft tissue conditions.1
A variety of names have been used to describe the same type of low-level laser: biostimulation, low energy, low reactive, low intensity, soft and or cold laser. In current practice, LLLT uses low output levels (15100 mW), short treatment times (10-240 seconds), and low energy levels (1-4 J/cm2).1

The mechanism and effectiveness of LLLT has been compared with ultrasound therapy,2 and should be considered as an extension to the accepted physiotherapy modalities that currently utilize parts of the electromagnetic spectrum, such as shortwaves, microwaves, infrared, and ultraviolet therapy.1

Lasers produce nonionizing, electromagnetic radiation that is extremely monochromatic, polarized and coherent.3 Laser light has been reported to penetrate human tissue in the ranges of .8-15mm,4,5 but the majority of the light will be absorbed within the first 4mm.6,7 Although this may seem superficial, it should be noted that chemical processes may be initiated and mediate physiological effects at a deeper level.8

The initial studies utilizing LLLT on nerve tissue produced mixed results regarding nerve conduction velocity and distal latency. These earlier studies utilized low powered HeNe lasers (<=1mW) and resultant low energy densities (<=.012 J/cm2).1 More recent studies utilizing higher energy densities and deeper penetrating lasers have found alterations in distal nerve latency and conduction velocity by a few to many percent, and which can last for periods of 30 minutes or greater.1,9-11

It appears that nerve tissue has a photosensitive component, which results in a biostimulation blockade response following laser exposure.12 It is felt that LLLT reduces the excitability of the nerve cells by an interruption of the fast pain fibers with a resultant reduction in pain.12-15 LLLT has also been shown to accelerate the repair process of crush damaged nerves and improve function in both the CNS and peripheral nerves after injury.1,16-18 Laser Safety LLLT is a relatively safe procedure. Due to the low level, nonthermal nature of the laser, there is no tissue destruction or other hazards that you would find associated with the higher powered lasers. The FDA has classified the most commonly used low level lasers as a class III, nonsignificant risk, medical device for investigations use only.19 Because of the coherent nature of the laser beam, ocular damage is the main concern for the LLLT user. The operator should not attempt to stare directly into the beam. Suitable goggles to attenuate the wavelengths would be used by both the operator and patient.20 Other suggested contraindications would be to avoid exposure to sensitive tissue such as fetus, gonads and malignancy.20 Clinical Studies A number of papers have shown a reduction of pain with laser treatments directed over acupuncture points.21-24 Altered skin resistance with a reduction of pain were also noted in subjects who receive LLLT over muscular trigger points.25-26 A group of subjects with chronic tendinopathies, that had been previously treated unsuccessfully with physical therapy, NSAIDS, local injections, and or surgery, had an 87 percent success rate in pain reduction following the application of LLLT.27 In a study involving over 4,000 subjects who had suffered from conditions such as degenerative arthritis; muscle pain; tendinitis and tension myalgia. More than 80 percent of the subjects found a marked lessening of their symptoms following irradiation with an IR laser.28-30 In a study involving a total of 69 subjects and 302 total laser treatment sessions, more that 80 percent of the subjects with chronic radiculopathies and over 90 percent of the subjects with chronic neuropathies experienced a greater than 50 percent total relief of pain following LLLT.14

In a similar study involving 60 total patients and 111 total laser treatments, it was shown that LLLT produced an immediate reduction of pain in 79 percent of the subjects.15 In a study involving over 100 subjects and over 500 laser treatments, it was observed that acute soft tissue pain syndromes showed a dramatic response following the initial laser treatment with a marked reduction in tissue swelling, bruising and good pain relief.31 Subsequent treatments (2-3) produced further improvement.31 It was also noted that chronic pain syndromes were slower to respond to LLLT (average of eight treatments), although 75 percent of the subjects noted significant pain relief.31 A two-stage survey of 116 chartered physiotherapists in Northern Ireland, who utilize LLLT as part of their clinical practice, ranked LLLT effective for the treatment of myofascial and postoperative pain syndromes; rheumatoid arthritis; muscle tears; hematomas; tendinitis; shingles; herpes simplex; scarring; burn and would healing.32 In this same survey, LLLT was ranked first, on the basis of relative effectiveness, when compared with four other modalities (interferential therapy, shortwave diathermy, ultrasound, and pulsed electromagnetic therapy), for use in pain relief and wound healing.32

Suggested Mercy Conference Review Low Level Laser Therapy: Low level laser therapy (LLLT) is a conservative procedure that utilized visible red and/or infrared regions of the electromagnetic spectrum. It is used as a physiotherapy modality for a variety of articular, neural and soft tissue conditions. Rating: Investigational to promising, awaiting FDA approval.

Evidence: Class I, II, III. Conclusions Laser therapy is gaining laboratory and clinical data to prove its effectiveness. LLLT has gained acceptance for treating a variety of osseous, neural and soft tissue conditions in many parts of the world. The acceptance in the U.S. has been limited because of the rigors of the FDA approval process. Many of the earlier studies involving laser use lacked proper scientific controls. Today there are many controlled studies that are well-designed and multicentered. These studies include the use of modern electrodiagnostic and magnetic resonance imaging to monitor the subjects response in an effort to objectively study the role of LLLT in treating neuromusculoskeletal pain. There is a current need for clinical investigators to research these new laser medical devices. Additional research is required to obtain data concerning success rates in treating specific conditions, length of exposure, frequency of treatments, and related therapeutic protocols. James J. White, DC Kendra Kaesberg-White, DC Belleville, Illinois http://www.rosachiropractictemplehills.com/

Tuesday, November 1, 2011

Stretching and Jump performance whats the best method? New Study takes a look.


The Acute Effects of Different Stretching Exercises on Jump Performance

by Pacheco, Laura; Balius, Ramon; Aliste, Luisa; Pujol, Montse; Pedret, Carles

Pacheco, L, Balius, R, Aliste, L, Pujol, M, and Pedret, C. The acute effects of different stretching exercises on jump performance. J Strength Cond Res 25(11): 2991–2998, 2011—





The purpose of this study was to demonstrate the short-term effects of different stretching exercises during the warm-up period on the lower limbs.


A controlled, crossover clinical study involving 49 volunteers (14 women and 35 men; mean age: 20.4 years) enrolled in a "physical and sporting activities monitor" program. The explosive force was assessed using the Bosco test. The protocol was as follows:


The test involved a (pre) jump test, general warm-up, intervention and (post) jump test. Each volunteer was subjected to each of the 5 interventions (no stretching [NS] and stretching: static passive stretching [P]; proprioceptive neuromuscular facilitation [PNF] techniques; static active stretching in passive tension [PT]; static active stretching in active tension [AT]) in a random order. The jump test was used to assess the squat jump, countermovement jump (CMJ), elasticity index (EI), and drop jump.


An intragroup statistical analysis was performed before and after each intervention to compare the differences between the different stretching exercises. An intergroup analysis was also performed. Significant differences (p < 0.05) were found between all variables for the interventions "P," "PNF," and "TA" in the intragroup analysis, with each value being higher in the postjump test. Only the "P" intervention showed a significant difference (p = 0.046) for "EI," with the postvalue being lower. Likewise, significant differences (p < 0.05) were observed for the "CMJ" measurements during the intergroup analysis, especially between "NS" and the interventions "P," "PNF," "AT," and "PT," with each value, particularly that for "AT," being higher after stretching.


The results of this study suggest that static active stretching in AT can be recommended during the warm-up for explosive force disciplines.

Monday, October 17, 2011

Kinesiology taping

Kinesiology taping is an ideal modality for use in chiropractic settings. Chiropractors possess an in-depth understanding of the interplay between the body’s neurological system, muscular system and its structural and fascial frameworks. Effective kinesiology taping involves all of these systems, allowing chiropractors to quickly grasp the principles and techniques for applying kinesiology tape.


Kinesiology tape works best as one component of a patient’s treatment plan, which makes it an ideal fit with other clinical modalities. It can be applied at the end of a visit, after an adjustment and any other treatments have been completed. Because a kinesio taping application can remain comfortably in place for several days, it can reinforce and extend the benefits of the in-office procedures.


As word about the benefits of kinesiology taping spreads, more and more patients are actively seeking practitioners who offer kinesiology taping as part of their clinical programs. Offering kinesiology taping can enhance retention of current patients as well as attract new patients who may not have previously considered chiropractic as a treatment for their injuries or health conditions.

Kinesiology taping

Tuesday, October 4, 2011

Having Hip Pain?

Having Hip Pain?



Do you experience pain in one or both hips whenever you twist them or when you cross your legs? Does the pain wake you up in the night and make it hard to get a good night’s rest? When you arise in the morning, or when you get out of your car, are you stiff and do you find it an effort, initially, to move your legs? If you answered "yes" to any or all of these questions it is likely that you have imbalances and alignment problems in your lower extremities that, in addition to creating hip pain, can over time lead to degenerative joint disease in your hips if not addressed.



Though hip pain and related problems regularly point to age-related degenerative conditions, particularly osteoarthritis of the hip joint, osteoarthritis isn’t always the perpetrator. In fact, rather than being the original source of the problem, osteoarthritis of the hip joint can be the ultimate result of damage to your hips at a previous time.



Gait changes as the result of biomechanical problems such as an ankle sprain or knee strain, can cause hip pain. Also, if you change jobs, alter the way you sit, take on a new sport or activity, or start driving for long periods of a regular basis, your gait may shift to compensate for these new changes.



In addition, gait imbalances can occur from leg length dissimilarities, foot pronation conditions, even carrying a baby or small child on your hip. Strictly speaking, anything that generates an asymmetry or imbalance when you are in motion can cause painful hip problems.



As part of the chiropractic management of your hip problem, along with adjustments, your chiropractor may suggest that you wear orthotics. Your chiropractor will also offer suitable progressive rehabilitative exercises that include muscle stretching and strengthening.



Hip pain won’t disappear on its own. Hip pain indicates that something needs to be remedied. Your chiropractor can help to get you out of pain, get back into balance, and get your life back!



Here at Rosa Rehab, we use various techniques to treat hip pain, no matter the condition. Treating muscles, tendons, ligaments, and the joint itself will get you back on your feet and allow you to live a much more comfortable life.



Wednesday, August 31, 2011

The 3 Veggies with the Least Nutritional Value on Shine





The 3 Veggies with the Least Nutritional Value on Shine

The 3 Veggies with the Least Nutritional Value on Shine

Amy Paturel, SELF magazine

We're not here to demonize any form of produce. After all, every veggie has at least some nutritional value -- and we all need to include more vegetables in our diets, not less!

But if you're wondering whether to use iceberg or romaine in your signature summer salad, you may want to check out our list of the veggies with the least nutritional value:

1. Celery: Sure, you can nosh on 8 inches of celery for only 6 calories, but are you really getting any nutrients in return? The answer: Yes, but you'd have to go beyond an 8-inch stalk, which provides a mere 1.6 percent of our daily requirement for calcium and 2 percent of our daily requirement for vitamin C. It does, however, boast a decent amount of fiber and vitamin K. A better alternative: Carrots, which are loaded with eye-protecting beta carotene. Toss them into salads for a low-calorie crunch; braise them as a sweet summer side dish or slice them thin and add them to your favorite stir-fry.

Related: Yoga Moves for Flat Abs

2. Cucumbers: The cucumber is another low-calorie veggie. One cup of sliced cucumber weighs in at only 16 calories. But it's slim on nutrients, too. In fact, cucumbers contain 5 percent or less of our daily requirement for potassium, manganese, magnesium and vitamin C. On the plus side, cucumber extracts (not the whole cucumber) do have a number of disease-fighting antioxidant compounds, like tannins and flavonoids, says Registered Dietitian and Chef Consultant Michelle Dudash. A better alternative: Purslane, a peppery herb that's high in heart-healthy alpha linolenic acid (a type of omega-3). It's also higher in beta carotene than spinach. Toss it in salads, fold it into omelets or use it as a crunchy green on sandwiches.

See Also: Gwyneth Paltrow's Arm and Abs Workout

3. Iceberg Lettuce: Iceberg lettuce is one of the most commonly consumed vegetables in the U.S., along with potatoes (as French fries) and tomatoes, but that doesn't mean it's the healthiest option. While iceberg is low in calories and offers some vitamins and fiber, other dark leafy greens contain much more vitamin A and C. A better alternative: Romaine lettuce, which offers much more beta carotene than iceberg. Use romaine in a traditional wedge salad with blue cheese crumbles, diced tomatoes and balsamic vinaigrette, or layer it on turkey sandwiches.


Dr. Jessica Barnhart
Temple Hills, Oxon Hills, District Heights

Thursday, July 14, 2011

Chiropractic for Carpal Tunnel Syndrome

Chiropractic for Carpal Tunnel Syndrome


When people think “chiropractic,” they often think of back and neck problems. But chiropractic has many applications beyond these typical uses, and it can improve quality of life for a broad range of health conditions. One such condition iscarpal tunnel syndrome, a repetitive stress injury (RSI). Chiropractic can be a beneficial treatment for patients seeking noninvasive relief from this ailment that has become all too common in the modern world.

How Does a Chiropractor Treat Carpal Tunnel Syndrome (CTS)?
Carpal tunnel syndrome is a repetitive stress injury (RSI). This category of injuries is caused by repetitive motion, such as typing or assembly line work, which causes pain and injury over time. The earlier that an RSI is diagnosed and treated, the better the outcome can be. Diagnosis includes physical examination and possibly x-rays. Typically, the chiropractic treatment for RSI includes manipulation of the affected wrist and elbow, as well as manipulation of the upper spine. A spinal manipulation involves applying controlled pressure to a joint. The chiropractor may also advise the patient to rest the affected arm, apply cold to reduce inflammation, perform appropriate exercises, or wear a splint or brace to immobilize the area.Some common treatments chiropractors use for carpal tunnel syndrome include:
  • Manipulation of the wrist, arm, and upper spine: Misalignment in the spine could contribute to symptoms of carpal tunnel syndrome. Doctors of Chiropractic (DCs) perform adjustments (also called spinal manipulations) that aim to correct improper alignment in the spine. The chiropractor typically performs an adjustment using his or her hands, but sometimes devices are employed. Chiropractors may also adjust and treat other areas of the body as needed, including the wrist and arm.
  • Ultrasound therapy: This therapy uses either very high-energy or low-energy sound, both of which are outside the range of normal human hearing. The chiropractor uses a device that emits focused sound waves that penetrate deep into body tissue. Sound waves can relax muscles, alleviate pain, and reduce inflammation.
  • Wrist supports: Wrist supports seek to keep the wrist in the proper alignment and can be used to treat or prevent carpal tunnel syndrome.

What Can Be Expected During the Healing Process?

Chiropractic is generally a relatively safe practice and is a noninvasive treatment for carpal tunnel syndrome, especially compared to treatment involving medications and surgery. Studies have shown improvement in symptoms of repetitive stress injuries (RSIs), including carpal tunnel syndrome, as a result of chiropractic treatment. Some research has concluded that chiropractic can be just as effective as allopathic care for RSIs.


What Is Chiropractic?

As with any medical treatment, prognosis for resolution of a Repetitive Stress Injury (RSI) can vary from patient to patient, based on such factors as the nature and severity of the RSI, the age and overall health of the patient, and simultaneous use of other therapies. But in many cases, chiropractic treatment has helped patients struggling with carpal tunnel syndrome. So although carpal tunnel and other RSI patients must face the realities of modern-day society with its risks of conditions like RSI, chiropractic can provide hope for managing this condition.

Chiropractic subscribes to the belief that the body’s structure is related to its function. More specifically, the profession focuses on the structure of the spine and how that affects the state of health and the functioning of not only the neck and back but other areas of the body as well.

It holds to the philosophy that misalignments of the spine affect the body’s ability to function and can contribute to health problems. These misalignments need to be, and can be, corrected through chiropractic therapy. The nervous system, including the spine’s nerves, affects the flow of energy throughout the entire body. Another foundational belief of chiropractic is that the body has a powerful ability to heal itself. Chiropractic aims to stimulate that ability.

What Is Carpal Tunnel Syndrome (RSI)?

Carpal tunnel syndrome, a repetitive stress injury (RSI), was named as such because the anatomical structure of this form of injury. The bones in the wrist (called carpals) form a tunnel, and the median nerve travels from the forearm to the hand through this carpal tunnel. Carpal tunnel syndrome is, therefore, an injury to this area of the body. Often, the dominant wrist is the injured one, but in some patients, both left and right wrists are involved. Symptoms include pain and numbness in the index, middle fingers, and thumb, tingling in the hand(s), weakness, and pain shooting up the arm.

Carpal tunnel syndrome can be caused and worsened by repetitive motion and tasks, whereby the tendons in the carpal tunnel become swollen, which contributes to a pinched nerve in the carpal tunnel. Examples of repetitive motion include using a computer for long periods of time, performing a job on an assembly line, and using hand tools. Patients suffering with this condition are more often female than male. Middle age is the most common time in life for carpal tunnel syndrome to occur.

Many of the patients who seek chiropractic treatment for repetitive stress injuries (RSIs) do so because it is not nearly as invasive as other, more allopathic, treatments, which often rely on treatments such as medications.

Wednesday, May 18, 2011

Immune Response to Spinal Manipulation

Immune Responses to Spinal Manipulation

Chiropractic and Immune Function

By Malik Slosberg, DC, MS
For many years, chiropractors have observed in their own practices that their patients sometimes demonstrate improvements of complaints related to immune problems: the disappearance or lessening of allergy symptoms, quicker recovery from or less frequent and severe colds and other respiratory infections, and so on.
In the scientific literature, there have been occasional case reports that corroborate such findings, but no sound evidence to really document their veracity. These clinical observations remain suspended in that grey area unsubstantiated by scientific data to confirm their validity. Significant limitations of changes attributed to spinal manipulation in individual patients include
1) there is never a control group;
2) there is no blinding;
3) the improvement may simply be due to time;
4) they may be a nonspecific effect of care and attention;
5) it may be a regression to the mean; or
6) the result may be due to something other than spinal manipulation.
In some large studies, it has been found that chiropractic care for nonmusculoskeletal conditions is only weakly to moderately successful, but rarely harmful. [1-2] The most recent and thorough systematic literature review found that the evidence for effectiveness of spinal manipulation was inconclusive for nonmusculoskeletal conditions. [3]
Despite the lack of evidence of clinical effectiveness for nonmusculoskeletal conditions, a series of recent studies from several international research groups is systematically building the case that spinal manipulation appears to reduce the production of pro-inflammatory cytokines and increase the blood levels of immunoregulatory cytokines. Cytokines are small cell-signaling protein molecules that are secreted by numerous cells of the immune system and are a category of signaling molecules used extensively in intercellular communication.The accumulation of data from these studies suggests that a possible benefit of spinal manipulation is related to neuroimmunological effects. Of course, this is an exciting proposition for clinicians who have seen such changes in their own patients. Let’s review some of the research exploring the connections between spinal manipulation and functional changes in the immune system.
Early Research on Manipulation and the Immune System
Research in the 1990s laid the groundwork for the more recent papers published in the past five years. Brennan, et al., [4] published a paper demonstrating that upper thoracic spinal manipulation resulted in markers indicating significant increased phagocytic activity of neutrophils and monocytes compared to a sham manipulation or soft-tissue treatment. The findings suggest that a certain force threshold was needed to elicit the response.
In a second study, Brennan, et al., [5] concluded that their data suggests spinal manipulation, which generates a force over a certain threshold, elicits viscerosomatic responses that affect both neutrophils and mononuclear cells phagocytic activity, at least over the short term. And in a very small 1994 study, [6] the study authors concluded that upper cervical adjustments increased CD4 “helper” T-cell counts, which initiate the body’s response to viruses in HIV-positive subjects, by 48 percent over the six-month duration of the study.
Neural immunoregulation: Communication Between the Immune and Nervous Systems
These earlier papers have now been followed-up by a series of recent studies within the past five years. Teodorczyk-Injeyan, et al., [7] described the interplay between the nervous system and immune system as neural immunoregulation. The authors note that immune homeostasis is based on the reciprocal communication between the immune and the nervous systems executed by the actions of cytokines and neurotransmitters. In addition, the paper explains the close association of autonomic nerve terminals with macrophages and lymphocytes, which facilitates a chemically mediated transmission between nerves and immune cells.
This research group has published a series of papers that explores the relationship of spinal manipulation, spinoautonomic reflexes and their influence on activity of cells involved in immune and/or inflammatory responses. These interconnections may have great clinical relevance because studies [8] on the pathophysiology of discogenic low back pain, sciatica, and ligamentous tissue damage-related pain [9] reveal that the production of pro-inflammatory mediators, such as tumor necrosis factor alpha (TNF-a) and interleukin-1 beta (IL-1ß), are major factors in the genesis of pain and functional changes in neural activity. Furthermore, studies of the hypoalgesic effects of spinal manipulation have already been reported in the literature, suggesting that an anti-inflammatory mechanism might be activated by spinal manipulation. [10-11] Recent clinical studies have shown that chemical blockage of TNF-a is highly effective in reducing sciatic pain. [12]
Reduced Pro-Inflammatory Cytokines After Spinal Manipulation
In the first of their studies, the authors report that a single bilateral hypothenar upper-thoracic HVLA thrust resulted in the reduction of in vitro inflammatory cytokines, TNF-a and IL-1ß in blood samples activated with lipopolysaccharide taken before, 20 minutes and two hours after spinal manipulation. TNF-a and IL-1ß significantly declined in asymptomatic subjects assigned to manipulation with cavitation/audible, whereas in the sham and control groups, TNF-a and IL-1ß levels increased significantly after exposure to lipopolysaccharide.
The paper’s conclusion states that manipulation-related down-regulation of inflammatory-type responses occurred via an unknown central mechanism. These findings suggest that a single thoracic manipulation effectively ameliorates the physiological responses of blood cells to an inflammatory stimulus and that spinovisceral reflex effects may alter the functional activity of cells in the immune and/or inflammatory systems. Based on these findings, the paper notes that spinal manipulation is likely to present a noninvasive and efficacious alternative to drug therapies for reducing inflammation and resultant pain.
A 2009 paper from the Hungarian National Institute for Rheumatology and Physiotherapy [13] reported a dramatic and significant reduction in both debilitating cervicogenic headaches (before treatment 3-6 times a week lasting a total of 31-36 hours a week), neck stiffness and TNF-a after manual therapy in two women who suffered post-whiplash, MRI-documented C4-5 disc herniation.
Previous trials of conservative care (analgesic infusions, physical therapy) had failed. Both patients, after a neurological consult, were recommended to have a discectomy, but both opted for a trial of manual therapy (two times a week for 4-8 weeks) first. After manual therapy, surgery was unnecessary because both women became headache-free with a normal range of cervical motion. In addition, both patients experienced a dramatic reduction in TNF-a (reduced by more than half). [13]
The medical researchers conclude that pro-inflammatory substances secreted by the nucleus pulposus are likely involved in symp-tomatic disc herniation. In addition, TNF-a, interleukin-1ß and interleukin-10 may be involved in the pathogenesis of migraine at-tacks. After restoring spinal segmental motion and reducing pathologic mechanical irritation/compression, TNF-a levels were mark-edly reduced and symptoms were eliminated. In 2010, Roy, [14] et al., followed up these two studies by evaluating pre- and post-intervention measures from blood samples detecting pro-inflammatory cytokines interleukin 6 (IL-6) and C-reactive protein (CRP) after a series of nine chiropractic manipulations from T12-L5 using the an adjusting instrument and related protocol in 10 chronic low back pain patients and 10 healthy subjects. Once again, the introduction notes that low back pain is often associated with an inflammatory process and increased production of several pro-inflammatory cytokines including IL-6 and CRP. IL-6 is the main mediator of the acute phase of pro-inflammatory cytokines and results in a marked increase in liver cell synthesis of CRP.
This trial found that a series of nine thoracic manipulations resulted in a reduction of both IL-6 and CRP; that is, a normalization response. Both IL-6 and CRP levels were reduced toward the values in the healthy subjects. IL-6 and CRP were elevated in chronic LBP patients pre-intervention, but post-intervention differences were smaller, suggesting that nine manipulations are capable of attenuating the inflammatory response. The authors opine that it is plausible the inflammatory process was being reversed in those who received the adjustments.
Immunoregulation, Interleukin 2 and Spinal Manipulation
Another related avenue of research on neural immunoregulation evaluates the effects of spinal manipulation on the production of interleukin 2 (IL-2) – an immunoregulatory (not pro-inflammatory) cytokine and signaling molecule, instrumental in the body’s response to microbial infection and for the body’s ability to discriminate between foreign (non-self) and self. IL-2 is a pivotal cytokine in T-cell-dependent immune responses and plays a major role in the development, maintenance and survival of regulatory T cells. Thus, it is of critical importance in induction and sustenance of immune tolerance.
Seventy-six asymptomatic subjects [15] were randomized to receive an upper thoracic manipulation with cavitation or without cavitation, or were included in a control group. All subjects had their blood drawn before, 20 minutes and two hours after the intervention. Production of IL-2 in mononuclear cell cultures was activated with staphylococcal protein A (SPA). Induced secretion of IL-2 increased significantly in manipulation with and without cavitation. The paper concludes that in vitro T lymphocyte response to a SPA stimulus became enhanced after spinal manipulation. Therefore, this effect may be independent of joint cavitation/audible. This finding suggests manipulation may influence IL-2 immune-regulated biological responses.
In 2010, Teodorczyk-Injeyan, et al., [16] continued with this research on induction and regulation of immune responses related to interactions between the immune and nervous systems mediated by actions of neurotransmitters and immunoregulatory cytokines. To this end, the researchers followed the subjects from the previous study to determine if the increased production of interleukin-2 as a result of a single thoracic manipulation is associated with increased antibody synthesis from monocytes.
The paper reports that there were indeed significantly increased synthesis of immunoglobulin G (IgG) and immunoglobulin M (IgM) antibodies induced in cultures of peripheral blood mononuclear cells in subjects who received thoracic manipulation, particularly in those who had an associated cavitation. The paper concludes that antibody synthesis (IgG and IgM) induced by interleukin-2 can be, at least temporarily, increased after manipulation. This is additional direct evidence that thoracic manipulation may influence interleukin-2 immune-regulated biological responses.
The Take-Home Message
The studies described above demonstrate an accumulation of evidence that indicates spinal manipulation may influence the immune system’s response to various stimuli. Three of the studies suggest that manipulation consistently reduced the production of pro-inflammatory mediators associated with tissue damage and pain from articular structures. Two studies provide evidence that manipulation consistently reduced the production of pro-inflammatory mediators associated with tissue damage and pain from articular structures. Two studies provide evidence that manipulation may induce and enhance production of the immunoregulatory cytokine IL-2 and the production of immunoglobulins as well.
We must acknowledge that these results are preliminary because most are performed on asymptomatic subjects and the duration of the effects so far have only been demonstrated to be short-lived. Nevertheless, this research opens the door to further exploration of the possible neuroimmunoregulatory effects of spinal manipulation and confirms what many of us have observed in practice: Adjustments reduce pain and inflammation, and may improve immunoregulatory function.
References
1. Leboeuf-Yde C, et al. Self-reported nonmusculoskeletal responses to chiropractic intervention: a multination survey.
JMPT, 2005;28(5):294-302.
2. Leboeuf-Yde C, et al. The types and frequencies of improved nonmusculoskeletal symptoms reported after chiropractic SMT.
JMPT, 1999;22(9):559-64.
3. Bronfort G, Haas M, Evans R, Leiniger B, Triano J. Effectiveness of manual therapies: the UK evidence report.
Chiropr Osteopat, 2010;18:3.
4. Brennan PC, et al. Enhanced Phagocytic Cell Respiratory Burst Induced by Spinal Manipulation: Potential Role of Substance P
J Manipulative Physiol Ther 1991 (Sep); 14 (7): 399–408.
5. Brennan PC, et al. Enhanced Neutrophil Respiratory Burst as a Biological Marker for Manipulation Forces: Duration of the Effect and Association with Substance P and Tumor Necrosis Factor
J Manipulative Physiol Ther 1992 (Feb); 15 (2): 83–89
6. Selano JL. The Effects of Specific Upper Cervical Adjustments on the CD4 Counts of HIV Positive Patients
Chiro Res J 1994; 3 (1): 32–39
7. Teodorczyk-Injeyan JA, et al. Spinal Manipulative Therapy Reduces Inflammatory Cytokines but Not Substance P Production in Normal Subjects
J Manipulative Physiol Ther 2006 (Jan); 29 (1): 14–21
8. Fiorentino PM, Tallents RH, Miller J-nH. Spinal interleukin-1B in a mouse model of arthritis and joint pain.
Arthritis Rheum, 2008;58:3100-9.
9. King K, Davidson B, Zhou BE, Lu Y, Solomonow M. High magnitude cyclic load triggers inflammatory response in lumbar ligaments.
Clin Biomech, 2009;25:792-98.
10. Terrett Ac VH. Manipulation and pain tolerance.
Am J Phy Med, 1984;63:217-25.
11. Giles LG, Muller R. Chronic Spinal Pain: A Randomized Clinical Trial Comparing Medication, Acupuncture, and Spinal Manipulation
Spine 2003 (Jul 15); 28 (14): 1490–1502
12. Mohammadian P, Gonsalves A, Tsai C, Hummel T, Carpenter T. Areas of capsaicin-induced secondary hyperalgesia and allodynia are reduced by a single chiropractic adjustment: a preliminary study.
J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 2004 (Jul); 27 (6): 381-7
13. Omos G, MD, et al. Reduction in high blood TNF-a levels after manipulative therapy in 2 cervicogenic headache patients.
J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 2009 (Sep); 32 (7): 586-91
14. Roy RA, Boucher JP, Comtois AS. Inflammatory response following a short-term course of chiropractic treatment in subjects with and without chronic low back pain.
Journal of Chiropractic Medicine, 2010 (Sep);9 (3): 107-114.
15. Teodorczyk-Injeyan JA, Injeyan HS, McGregor M, et al. Enhancement of in vitro interleukin-2 production in normal subjects following a single spinal manipulative treatment. Chiropr Osteopat, 2008;16:5.
16. Teodorczyk-Injeyan JA, et al. Interleukin-2 regulated in vitro antibody production following a single spinal manipulative treatment in normal subjects.
Chiropr Osteopat, 2010;18:26.
Dr. Malik Slosberg, a 1981 valedictorian of Life Chiropractic College, has been in private practice for 25 years. He also holds a master’s of science degree (clinical counseling) from California State University, Hayward and a physician’s assistant degree from Dartmouth College. Dr. Slosberg has served on the postgraduate faculty of 10 chiropractic colleges and is currently a professor at Life Chiropractic College West.
Dr. Slosberg lectures throughout the United States and internationally. He has also written numerous articles that have been published in chiropractic journals, and produced educational materials including videos, wall charts and patient handouts used by many chiropractic colleges and thousands of chiropractors throughout the world.
Dr. Slosberg is a founding board member of the National Institute of Chiropractic Research, a funding agency for chiropractic research.



Aekta Erry D.C.

Temple Hill, MD

Tuesday, April 19, 2011

Dr. Oz and Chiropractic




The Dr. Oz Show aired a segment featuring the spine and the causes of back pain. Dr. Oz explained that 80% of people experiencing back pain could benefit from visiting a chiropractor and receiving a chiropractic adjustment to the spine.

On a large piece of equipment designed to represent the spine, Dr. Oz demonstrated how the spine getting out of alignment causes pressure on the discs and nerves, which in turn, causes pain. Dr. Oz said that even simple things such as sleeping wrong or getting groceries out of the car can force the spine out of alignment.

Dr. Oz explained that pain medications only mask the symptoms, but do not treat the underlying cause of back pain. He also said that a misaligned spine can result in a herniated disc which causes a lot of pain and takes quite a while to heal.

Dr. Oz had a chiropractor on today’s show who proceeded to give an audience member a chiropractic adjustment. Chiropractors restore health by the manual realigning of joints, particularly the spine. After the adjustment was given, he explained to Dr. Oz that realignment of the spine reduces interference to the nervous system and lets the body heal itself.

Dr. Oz has praised the benefits of chiropractic treatment before on previous shows. The majority of chiropractic clinics offer spinal and joint adjustments, massage, electrical stimulation, acupuncture, heat, cold, and exercise prescription to reduce their client’s pain.



Aekta Erry D.C.


Thursday, April 14, 2011

CHIROPRACTIC MANIPULATIVE THERAPY AND LOW-LEVEL LASER THERAPY IN THE MANAGEMENT OF CERVICAL FACET DYSFUNCTION: A RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED STUDY




Chiropractic Manipulative Therapy and Low-Level Laser Therapy in the Management of Cervical Facet Dysfunction: A Randomized Controlled Study

Lindie Saayman, MT (Chiro)a, Caroline Hay, MT (Chiro)b, Heidi Abrahamse, PhDcCorresponding Author Informationemail address

Received 7 May 2010; received in revised form 31 January 2011; accepted 10 February 2011.

Abstract

Purpose

The aim of this study was to determine the short-term effect of chiropractic joint manipulation therapy (CMT)and low-level laser therapy (LLLT) on pain and range of motion in the management of cervical facet dysfunction.

Methods

Sixty ambulatory women between the ages of 18 and 40 years with cervical facet joint pain of more than 30-day duration and normal neurologic examination were randomized to receive 1 of 3 treatment options: (1) CMT of the cervical spine, (2) LLLT applied to the cervical facet joints, or (3) a combination of CMT and LLLT. Each participant received 6 treatments in 3 weeks. The main outcome measures were as follows: the Numerical Pain Rating Scale, Neck Disability Index, Cervical Range of Motion Instrument, and Baseline Digital Inclinometer. Measurements were taken during weeks 1 (baseline), 2, 3, and 4.

Results

No differences existed between the 3 groups at baseline. A significant difference was seen between groups 1 (CMT) and 2 (LLLT) for cervical flexion, between groups 1 (CMT) and 3 (CMT + LLLT) for cervical flexion and rotation, and between groups 2 (LLLT) and 3 (CMT + LLLT) for pain disability in everyday life, lateral flexion, and rotation.

Conclusion

All 3 groups showed improvement in the primary and secondary outcomes. A combination of CMT and LLLTwas more effective than either of the 2 on their own. Both therapies are indicated as potentially beneficial treatments for cervical facet dysfunction. Further studies are needed to explore optimal treatment procedures for CMT and LLLT and the possible mechanism of interaction between therapies.