C J Phillips1, J J Meyer. 1. Postgraduate Faculty, Northwestern College of Chiropractic, Bloomington, MN, USA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine whether the addition of chiropractic care including craniosacral therapy to a regimen of standard obstetric pregnancy results in fewer obstetric interventions during labor and delivery. DESIGN: Retrospective, case-matched, static-group comparison. SETTING: The study group was obtained from a college faculty-based clinic and received chiropractic care in addition to their routine obstetrical care. The setting for the comparison group was unkown, but the care rendered was presumed to be primary medical obstetric care only. PATIENTS: A consecutive sample of 63 pregnant women who sought chiropractic care within the period under study. The reason for seeking care was not necessarily related to the pregnancy. The sample was primarily between 18 and 35 yr, non-Hispanic caucasian and primiparous. After selection and matching criteria, 35 patients remained in the study group. INTERVENTION: Chiropractic care and craniosacral therapy delivered during pregnancy vs. unknown care within the same county. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Obstetric interventions during labor and delivery as reported by the birth attendant on the certificate of live birth. RESULTS: No statistical differences were detected in the rates of obstetric interventions used during labor or delivery between the two samples. Approximate large-sample 95% confidence intervals are provided. CONCLUSION: Because of the limitations in the design of the project, this study provides no evidence that the addition of chiropractic care and craniosacral therapy during pregnancy results in any observable benefit or detriment with regard to obstetric interventions used during labor and delivery and that chiropractic care for pregnancy-related neuromusculoskeletal disorders should not complicate labor or delivery.
OBJECTIVE: To determine whether the addition of chiropractic care including craniosacral therapy to a regimen of standard obstetric pregnancy results in fewer obstetric interventions during labor and delivery. DESIGN: Retrospective, case-matched, static-group comparison. SETTING: The study group was obtained from a college faculty-based clinic and received chiropractic care in addition to their routine obstetrical care. The setting for the comparison group was unkown, but the care rendered was presumed to be primary medical obstetric care only. PATIENTS: A consecutive sample of 63 pregnant women who sought chiropractic care within the period under study. The reason for seeking care was not necessarily related to the pregnancy. The sample was primarily between 18 and 35 yr, non-Hispanic caucasian and primiparous. After selection and matching criteria, 35 patients remained in the study group. INTERVENTION: Chiropractic care and craniosacral therapy delivered during pregnancy vs. unknown care within the same county. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Obstetric interventions during labor and delivery as reported by the birth attendant on the certificate of live birth. RESULTS: No statistical differences were detected in the rates of obstetric interventions used during labor or delivery between the two samples. Approximate large-sample 95% confidence intervals are provided. CONCLUSION: Because of the limitations in the design of the project, this study provides no evidence that the addition of chiropractic care and craniosacral therapy during pregnancy results in any observable benefit or detriment with regard to obstetric interventions used during labor and delivery and that chiropractic care for pregnancy-related neuromusculoskeletal disorders should not complicate labor or delivery.