The chiropractic profession: a scoping review of utilization rates, reasons for seeking care, patient profiles, and care provided

Table 6 Chiropractic treatment provided and proportion of use (34 studies)

Chiropractic treatment provided
Chiropractic treatment	Percentage of treatment provided (median, IQR)	Number of reporting studies
Spinal manipulation^a	79.3% (55.4-91.3)	22
Soft-tissue therapy^b	35.1% (16.5-52.0)	18
Formal patient education	31.3% (22.6-65.6)	15
Nutritional supplements	30.9% (10.8-63.0)	11
Exercise instruction/prescription	26.0% (9.0-68.1)	14
Cold/ice	26.0% (9.0-74.0)	7
Heat	21.8% (12.0-49.0)	5
Mobilization/Manual traction^c	17.2% (12.4-32.0)	8
Orthopedic supports	13.0% (3.0-23.0)	2
Electrical stimulation	12.7% (7.9-31.0)	9
Ultrasound	12.5% (6.7-27.1)	7
Acupuncture	2.4% (6.0-1.8)	4
Chiropractic system used
Chiropractic system	Proportion of use (median, IQR)	Number of reporting studies
Diversified	65.5% (57.1-83.0)	13
Nimmo-Tonus	28.8% (15.6-40.0)	4
Activator	23.0% (14.0-38.0)	12
Gonstead	14.0% (8.0-21.0)	12
Cox	10.5% (4.0-27.0)	5
HIO	10.0% (1.9-16.6)	3
Applied kinesiology	10.0% (3.0-19.0)	6
Thompson	7.0% (2.8-14.0)	6
Cranial/SOT	6.6% (5.8-14.0)	8

IQR interquartile range, HIO hole in one technique, SOT sacro-occipital technique
^aSpinal manipulation included adjustment with mechanical assistance such as hand-held instruments (Activator), toggle boards, and drop pieces
^bSoft-tissue therapy included the use of massage techniques, trigger-point release, ischemic compression, and other manual therapies typically used with the intent to treat connective tissue, muscles, and other soft tissue structures
^cMobilization/Manual traction included any manual therapy typically directed at the joint complex with varying speeds and amplitudes with the intent to restore optimal motion, function, and to reduce pain

ISSN: 2045-709X