New York’s Medicare Carriers have reported that they will be sending the 2005 Medicare Physician Fee Schedule (MPFS) on a CD-ROM this month to all those providers who usually receive the Fee Schedule in booklet format. Watch for additional information on your carrier’s website. This change comes as a result of a successful pilot project conducted a year earlier.

The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) released yesterday, four sites CMS will use for a chiropractic demonstration projected required under section 651 of the Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement, and Modernization Act. Making the announcement, CMS Administrator, Mark B. McClellan, M.D., Ph.D., announced that Medicare will conduct a demonstration project in Maine, New Mexico, Illinois and Virginia expanding coverage of chiropractic services for neuromusculoskeletal conditions. “We recognize that many Medicare beneficiaries seek the services of chiropractors for back pain and other conditions,” McClellan said. “This demonstration provides the opportunity to evaluate whether expanding coverage of chiropractic services reduces overall Medicare expenditures for neuromusculoskeletal conditions.” Beginning in April 2005, chiropractors that are located in the demonstration areas will be able to provide services to any beneficiary enrolled under Medicare Part B. The demonstration will expand coverage for the services that chiropractors provide for the care of neuromusculoskeletal conditions, including diagnostic and other services such as the provision of x-rays and therapy services. Current Medicare coverage for chiropractic care is limited to manual manipulation of the spine to correct a subluxation, which is defined as a malfunction of the spine. Treatment may only be provided for the active correction of a documented subluxation, and not for prevention or health maintenance. Treatment for the subluxation must be related in terms of a neuromusculoskeletal condition where there is a reasonable expectation of recovery or functional improvement. The goal of the demonstration is to evaluate the feasibility and desirability of covering additional chiropractic services under Medicare beyond the current coverage. CMS has scheduled an Open Door Forum on November 18 to solicit input from interested groups regarding benefits of this demonstration and implementation of its budget neutrality requirements. The demonstration will be conducted in the entire states of Maine and New Mexico, and in the Chicago Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA) and 17 central counties in Virginia. The statue specified that the demonstration must include four sites, two urban and two rural, and one site of each must be in a health professional shortage area (HPSA). The statute requires an evaluation of the demonstration to assess cost effectiveness, cost benefit, beneficiary satisfaction, and other issues as the Secretary of Health and Human Services determines to be appropriate. ▪ ACA Concerns After fighting hard to have the demonstration project language included in the language of the Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement, and Modernization Act, the ACA notes with some chagrin that is has some concerns with how the proposed demonstration project may be carried out. ACA staff met with CMS officials last Friday, November 6, to receive information on the status of planning for the demonstration. Subsequently, the ACA has identified several areas of concern with regard to the design, including possible infringements on full scope of practice under existing Medicare program benefits. ACA is preparing a formal and detailed response to CMS that will be available prior to CMS's November 18th, Open Door Forum on the chiropractic demonstration project. More on the project will be forthcoming in the not too distant future.

The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) released yesterday, four sites CMS will use for a chiropractic demonstration projected required under section 651 of the Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement, and Modernization Act. Making the announcement, CMS Administrator, Mark B. McClellan, M.D., Ph.D., announced that Medicare will conduct a demonstration project in Maine, New Mexico, Illinois and Virginia expanding coverage of chiropractic services for neuromusculoskeletal conditions. “We recognize that many Medicare beneficiaries seek the services of chiropractors for back pain and other conditions,” McClellan said. “This demonstration provides the opportunity to evaluate whether expanding coverage of chiropractic services reduces overall Medicare expenditures for neuromusculoskeletal conditions.” Beginning in April 2005, chiropractors that are located in the demonstration areas will be able to provide services to any beneficiary enrolled under Medicare Part B.

Arlington, Va. (Oct. 19, 2004) — The American Chiropractic Association (ACA) has vowed to appeal a recent decision by a U.S. District Court judge to dismiss its lawsuit against the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), a lawsuit that protects the very heart of the chiropractic profession’s services under Medicare – manual manipulation of the spine to correct a subluxation. ACA officials said they would continue the battle until doctors of chiropractic are the only providers who can offer the profession’s core service. “While we are understandably disappointed in the judge’s decision, we take pride in the fact that our lawsuit has already put an end to years of discrimination against doctors of chiropractic and their patients,” said ACA President Dr. Donald J. Krippendorf. “Before we filed our lawsuit, Medicare HMOs were given the green light to misappropriate taxpayer dollars to pay non-physician physical therapists to deliver the chiropractic physician service of 'manual manipulation of the spine to correct a subluxation’ under Medicare – or to deny the service to beneficiaries altogether. That unfair and illegal practice has ended as a direct result of our lawsuit. We strongly believe that we owe it to our patients – and have a strong legal basis – to continue our battle in an effort to prohibit medical doctors and osteopaths from correcting subluxations, a service that is uniquely chiropractic.” Dr. Krippendorf also noted the “monumental victories for Medicare patients” already achieved through the lawsuit, including: • Compelling the government to prepare and release a study showing the virtual elimination of chiropractic services to Medicare beneficiaries entering the Medicare Managed Care system; • Prohibiting federal payments to physical therapists providing manual manipulation of the spine to correct a subluxation to Medicare patients; • And, mandating that all Medicare Managed Care plans must make available and pay for manual manipulation of the spine to correct a subluxation. In his Oct. 14 decision, U.S. District Judge John Garrett Penn granted HHS a motion for summary judgment, stating that Congress did not intend for only chiropractors to provide “manual manipulation of the spine to correct a subluxation” when it established the Medicare program in 1972, and that the Medicare statute is “neither silent nor ambiguous” in this regard. According to ACA officials, the judge’s rationale is “perplexing,” given the fact that even the U.S. government itself admitted ambiguity in the 32-year-old language governing the Medicare program – and, according to the government’s own position with the court, that “Congress has not directly spoken to the precise issue of who may provide manual manipulation of the spine to correct a subluxation to Medicare beneficiaries.” “We have a responsibility to our Medicare patients to continue this fight. They deserve to have chiropractic services delivered by doctors of chiropractic,” added Dr. Krippendorf. “We believe the use of the term ‘subluxation’ at the time it was inserted in the Medicare statute was meant to assign the correction of the subluxation exclusively to doctors of chiropractic.” The ACA first filed its lawsuit in November 1998, claiming that HHS guidelines unlawfully allowed Medicare Managed Care plans to substitute the services of other health care providers for services that should legally be performed by doctors of chiropractic and that chiropractic services were not being provided under Medicare Managed Care programs. Specifically challenged in ACA's lawsuit was a 1994 “Operational Policy Letter” stating: “Managed care plans contracting with Medicare are not required, however, to offer services of chiropractors, but may use other physicians to perform this service. In addition, managed care plans may offer manual manipulation of the spine as performed by non-physician practitioners, such as physical therapists, if allowed under applicable state law.” In January 2002, as a direct result of the ACA lawsuit, HHS issued a new policy directive that, under Medicare, physical therapists could not be reimbursed for providing manual manipulation of the spine to correct a subluxation, and also added that manual manipulation to correct a subluxation must be provided by Medicare managed care plans. In a revision to the 1994 Operational Policy Letter, Medicare's Center for Beneficiary Choices wrote: “The (Medicare) statute specifically references manual manipulation of the spine to correct a subluxation as a physician service. Thus, Medicare+Choice organizations must use physicians, which include chiropractors, to perform this service. They may not use non-physician physical therapists for manual manipulation of the spine to correct a subluxation.” (emphasis added) In addition, the new policy provides: “As a standard of Medicare Part B benefit, manual manipulation of the spine to correct a subluxation must be made available to enrollees in Medicare+Choice plans.” (Updated OPL#23, Jan. 15, 2002 emphasis added.) The ACA has 30 days to file a notice of appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia – a court that has been coined “the second highest court in the land” because many of its judges are ultimately appointed to the U.S. Supreme Court. From there, the court will issue a briefing schedule. Typically, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia makes a decision on cases within 12 months. “We thank the thousands of supporters and contributors within the chiropractic profession who continue to stand with us through this monumental legal battle,” Dr. Krippendorf said. “Because of your commitment to the cause, we will continue to ensure that Medicare beneficiaries receive the safe and effective chiropractic care they need and deserve, and that they receive it only from health care providers appropriately trained and skilled to provide manual manipulation of the spine to correct a subluxation – doctors of chiropractic.” FOR MORE INFORMATION: Angela Kargus or Felicity Feather Clancy 800.986.4636 | [email protected] Copy of the opinion can be found at:

The New York State Chiropractic Association's Fall Conference at the Fort William Henry Resort in Lake George, New York was a resounding success! The conference convened Friday afternoon, October 1 through mid-day Sunday, October 3 and offered doctors a Practice Enhancement Program (PEP) and roughly 33 credits of continuing education from a list of outstanding speakers, including a class on the HIPAA Security Rule, the next evolution in the HIPAA compliance series (enforcement of the Security Rule begins April 20, 2005). Saturday evening ended with an awards dinner cruise and social sponsored by McCarthy, Chechanover & Rosado, LLP Law Firm, aboard the Adirondac, a new cruise ship on scenic Lake George. The NYSCA extends is sincere appreciation to McCarthy, Chechanover & Rosado, LLP and the many other vendors who helped make the conference such a success including: OUM Chiropractor Program, American Specialty Health Networks, Harvey Professional Supply, Tri-State Diagnostics, Meditek, Inc., PMR Products, New York Chiropractic College, Islandia MRI/East Manhattan Diagnostic, Dale Professional Supply, Jack S. Beige & Associates, LLP, Scheine, Furey & Associates, LLP, NCMIC Chiropractic Solutions, McCarthy, Chechanover & Rosado, PRI Physicians’ Reciprocal Insurers, Bee Sure Distributors, Open MRI of DeWitt, D’Youville College, HUM Division of MLMIC, Harlan Health Products, and Empire Medicare Services. The next NYSCA convocation is scheduled for January 28, 29 and 30, 2005 at the fabulous Mohegan Sun Casino and Resort in Uncasville, Connecticut. We look forward to seeing you there! As the April 20, 2005 enforcement deadline approaches, doctors should start taking the necessary steps now to come into compliance with the HIPAA Security Rule. Plan on attending the January Mohegan Sun Conference now!

Beginning October 11, interns at the Depew Health Center will be providing chiropractic services to students at the State University of New York at Buffalo (UB). This affiliation is the culmination of a two-year undertaking originally born as a result of a presentation on chiropractic made to the doctors and staff of the UB Student Health Center. Dr. Frank Carnevale, the Director of the Center, is excited about the new program and expects it will quickly become a success. The UB Student Health Center satellite clinic will expose NYCC student interns to an additional patient population that will enhance their clinical education. Hours of operation will be Mondays from 1:00 to 7:00 PM and Wednesdays from 1:00 to 5:00 PM, and appointments will be booked through the UB Student Health Center. Integrating chiropractic services with the UB Student Health Center’s medical and social services will be yet another example of NYCC’s multidisciplinary efforts aimed at benefiting patients. A byproduct of this affiliation will be the education of medical counterparts and U.B. students who come in for care. The University of Buffalo is the largest and most comprehensive university in the SUNY system. The large UB student body – more than 27,000! – will mean a busy schedule for student interns at the satellite clinic.

A Randomized, Controlled Trial Background: Dysfunction of the cervicothoracic spine and the adjacent ribs (also called the shoulder girdle) is considered to predict occurrence and poor outcome of shoulder symptoms. It can be treated with manipulative therapy, but scientific evidence for the effectiveness of such therapy is lacking. Objective: To study the effectiveness of manipulative therapy for the shoulder girdle in addition to usual medical care for relief of shoulder pain and dysfunction. Design: Randomized, controlled trial. Setting: General practices in Groningen, the Netherlands. Patients: 150 patients with shoulder symptoms and dysfunction of the shoulder girdle. Interventions: All patients received usual medical care from their general practitioners. Only the intervention group received additional manipulative therapy, up to 6 treatment sessions in a 12-week period. Measurements: Patient-perceived recovery, severity of the main complaint, shoulder pain, shoulder disability, and general health. Data were collected during and at the end of the treatment period (at 6 and 12 weeks) and during the follow-up period (at 26 and 52 weeks). Results: During treatment (6 weeks), no significant differences were found between study groups. After completion of treatment (12 weeks), 43% of the intervention group and 21% of the control group reported full recovery. After 52 weeks, approximately the same difference in recovery rate (17 percentage points) was seen between groups. During the intervention and follow-up periods, a consistent between-group difference in severity of the main complaint, shoulder pain and disability, and general health favored additional manipulative therapy. Limitations: The sample size was small, and assessment of end points was subjective. Conclusion: Manipulative therapy for the shoulder girdle in addition to usual medical care accelerates recovery of shoulder symptoms. SUMMARIES FOR PATIENTS September 2004 issue of Annals of Internal Medicine | Volume 141 Issue 6| Pages 432-439

ABSTRACT Folic acid supplementation has proved to be extremely effective in reducing the occurrence of neural tube defects (NTDs) and other congenital abnormalities in humans, suggesting that folic acid can modulate key mechanisms for growth and differentiation in the central nervous system (CNS). To prevent NTDs, however, supplemental folate must be provided early in gestation. This suggests that the ability of folic acid to activate growth and differentiation mechanisms may be confined to the early embryonic period. Here, we show that folic acid can enhance growth and repair mechanisms even in the adult CNS. Using lesion models of CNS injury, we found that intraperitoneal treatment of adult rats with folic acid significantly improves the regrowth of sensory spinal axons into a grafted segment of peripheral nerve in vivo. Regrowth of retinal ganglion cell (RGC) axons into a similar graft also was enhanced, although to a smaller extent than spinal axons. Furthermore, folic acid supplementation enhances neurological recovery from a spinal cord contusion injury, showing its potential clinical impact. The results show that the effects of folic acid supplementation on CNS growth processes are not restricted to the embryonic period, but can also be effective for enhancing growth, repair, and recovery in the injured adult CNS. Ann Neurol 2004;56:221-227

ABSTRACT Objectives We investigated the relationship between breastfeeding, asthma and atopy, and child body mass index (BMI). Methods From a prospective birth cohort (n = 2860) in Perth, Western Australia, 2195 children were followed up to age 6 years. Asthma was defined as doctor-diagnosed asthma and wheeze in the last year, and atopy was determined by skin prick test of 1596 children. Breastfeeding, BMI, asthma, and atopy were regressed allowing for confounders and the propensity score for overweight. Results Using fractional polynomials, we found no association between breastfeeding and overweight. Less exclusive breastfeeding was associated with increased asthma and atopy, and BMI increased with asthma. Conclusions Less exclusive breastfeeding leads to increases in child asthma and atopy and a higher BMI is a risk factor for asthma. Wendy H. Oddy and Jill L. Sherriff are with the Department of Nutrition, Dietetics and Food Science, Curtin University of Technology, Perth, Australia. Wendy H. Oddy, Nicholas H. de Klerk, Garth E. Kendall, Peter D. Sly, and Fiona J. Stanley are with the Centre for Child Health Research, University of Western Australia, Telethon Institute for Child Health Research, West Perth, Australia. Lawrence J. Beilin, Kevin B. Blake, and Louis I. Landau are with the Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, University of Western Australia, West Perth. Correspondence: Requests for reprints should be sent to Wendy H. Oddy, PhD, MPH, Telethon Institute for Child Health Research, PO Box 855, West Perth, Western Australia 6872, Australia (e-mail: [email protected]).

ABSTRACT Objective We examined the impact of relatively "green" or natural settings on attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) symptoms across diverse subpopulations of children. Methods Parents nationwide rated the aftereffects of 49 common after-school and weekend activities on children’s symptoms. Aftereffects were compared for activities conducted in green outdoor settings versus those conducted in both built outdoor and indoor settings. Results In this national, nonprobability sample, green outdoor activities reduced symptoms significantly more than did activities conducted in other settings, even when activities were matched across settings. Findings were consistent across age, gender, and income groups; community types; geographic regions; and diagnoses. Conclusions Green outdoor settings appear to reduce ADHD symptoms in children across a wide range of individual, residential, and case character Frances E. Kuo is with the Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Sciences and the Department of Psychology, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. Andrea Faber Taylor is with the Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Sciences, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. Correspondence: Requests for reprints should be sent to Frances E. Kuo, PhD, Human Environment Research Laboratory, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, 1103 S Dorner Dr, Urbana, IL 61801 (e-mail: [email protected]).

Wayne A. Ray, Ph.D., Katherine T. Murray, M.D., Sarah Meredith, M.B., B.S., Sukumar Suguna Narasimhulu, M.B., B.S., M.P.H., Kathi Hall, M.S., and C. Michael Stein, M.B., Ch.B. ABSTRACT Background Oral erythromycin prolongs cardiac repolarization and is associated with case reports of torsades de pointes. Because erythromycin is extensively metabolized by cytochrome P-450 3A (CYP3A) isozymes, commonly used medications that inhibit the effects of CYP3A may increase plasma erythromycin concentrations, thereby increasing the risk of ventricular arrhythmias and sudden death. We studied the association between the use of erythromycin and the risk of sudden death from cardiac causes and whether this risk was increased with the concurrent use of strong inhibitors of CYP3A. Methods We studied a previously identified Tennessee Medicaid cohort that included 1,249,943 person-years of follow-up and 1476 cases of confirmed sudden death from cardiac causes. The CYP3A inhibitors used in the study were nitroimidazole antifungal agents, diltiazem, verapamil, and troleandomycin; each doubles, at least, the area under the time–concentration curve for a CYP3A substrate. Amoxicillin, an antimicrobial agent with similar indications but which does not prolong cardiac repolarization, and former use of erythromycin also were studied, to assess possible confounding by indication Results The multivariate adjusted rate of sudden death from cardiac causes among patients currently using erythromycin was twice as high (incidence-rate ratio, 2.01; 95 percent confidence interval, 1.08 to 3.75; P=0.03) as that among those who had not used any of the study antibiotic medications. There was no significant increase in the risk of sudden death among former users of erythromycin (incidence-rate ratio, 0.89; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.72 to 1.09; P=0.26) or among those who were currently using amoxicillin (incidence-rate ratio, 1.18; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.59 to 2.36; P=0.65). The adjusted rate of sudden death from cardiac causes was five times as high (incidence-rate ratio, 5.35; 95 percent confidence interval, 1.72 to 16.64; P=0.004) among those who concurrently used CYP3A inhibitors and erythromycin as that among those who had used neither CYP3A inhibitors nor any of the study antibiotic medications. In contrast, there was no increase in the risk of sudden death among those who concurrently used amoxicillin and CYP3A inhibitors or those currently using any of the study antibiotic medications who had formerly used CYP3A inhibitors. Conclusions The concurrent use of erythromycin and strong inhibitors of CYP3A should be avoided. Source Information: From the Division of Pharmacoepidemiology, Department of Preventive Medicine (W.A.R., S.M., K.H.), and the Departments of Medicine and Pharmacology, Divisions of Cardiology (K.T.M.), Clinical Pharmacology (K.T.M., S.S.N., C.M.S.), and Rheumatology (C.M.S.), Vanderbilt University School of Medicine; and the Geriatric Research, Education, and Clinical Center, Nashville Veterans Affairs Medical Center (W.A.R.) — both in Nashville. Address reprint requests to Dr. Ray at [email protected].

Dr. Dan Quatro, New York State Chiropractic Association (NYSCA) president wins a decisive victory in Tuesdays Republican Primary for the Monroe County 15th Legislative District. Quatro’s opponent was Webster Town Councilman James Carlevatti garnished 258 to Quatro’s 578 votes. “I never expected to win the primary by such a large margin, but we had the right message,” said Quatro. Dr. Quatro was appointed to the 15th District seat in July after the death of County Legislator Ray Santirocco. There is no time to sit back for County Legislator Dan Quatro and enjoy his victory as the November Election is less then two months away. His Democratic opponent in the November Election is Dolly Kujawa. Quatro will also run on the Independent and Conservative lines on the November ballot.

According to CMS, “Chiropractors have been submitting a very high rate of incorrect claims to Medicare. Medicare only pays for chiropractic services for active/corrective treatment (those using HCPCS codes 98940, 98941, or 98942). Claims for medically necessary services rendered on or after October 1, 2004, must contain the Acute Treatment (AT) modifier to reflect such services provided or the claim will be denied. Read more in the Members' Only Section. Not a member? Click on the application on the left of your screen and stay informed.

Q. My mother is super-active for a woman past 80. She insists on cutting her lawn and regularly runs errands for neighbors, who largely are shut-ins. Still, she complains of “achy legs” and plans now on seeing some local chiropractor. Is this wise? A. The day has long past when chiropractors were regarded solely as “bone crackers” and shunned as pariahs, to be held outside the bounds of scientific medicine. There are many hospitals today with chiropractors on staff. Moreover, Medicare reimburses for “spinal manipulation” therapy. In effect, this places the federal government’s approval seal on both manipulator and his or her treatment. Now, having said this, I quickly add that a conservative, even deliberate, approach to most matters of health and medicine strikes me as appropriate. For example, let’s together examine the matter of chronic pain in the back, which could in fact also cause someone to suffer “achy legs.” First, accept that more than 70 percent of American adults, at some point in their lives experience what medicine labels “significant lower-back pain.” (Aside: the first rule for treatment of back pain: the pain almost always goes away, with or without treatment.) Next, know that the rush to treatment for back pain is good business. Indeed, the current estimate for this medical care is more than $26 billion annually. Disabling back pain commonly occurs between the ages of 45 and 64, when many people are anxious to return to work to prove they’re still fit. The result: a rush to surgery, in particular the lower-lumbar spinal fusion. There were more than 150,000 such operations performed last year, and while critics of medicine acknowledge this surgery is excellent for patients with fractured spines or spinal cancers, no one is absolutely sure how effective it is for lower back pain. Yet, these fusions continue-and no one steps up to suggest we call a temporary halt, at least until we have persuasive proof. Plainly, faith in medicine runs very deep in today’s America. Now, before someone yells “Doctor hater” or insinuates a bias exists in favor of chiropractors, let me state: 1) no relatives, or close friends, practice chiropractic medicine; 2) however, a beloved son, Paul R. Lindeman, is a board-certified internist. Further, I once worked inside the House of Medicine, referring to the headquarters building of the American Medical Association (AMA) in Chicago. During these years, there was an aggressive committee whose full-time mission was to uncover failings, mishaps and errors committed by chiropractors. In my role as editor-in-chief of Today’s Health, the AMA’s consumer magazine, I understood the subject represented trouble, editorially speaking. Chiropractors were considered imposters, or “fakes.” (Aside: this was just 30 years ago.) Thus, the lessons for today: Back pain is common, it’s expensive and there oftentimes is a rush to treat it “now!” Meanwhile, medical science knows not nearly enough about the origin and/or cause of this trauma. “We know more about the surface of the moon than we do how to treat the bad back,” continues as popular wisdom. For too long, chiropractors have worked under a shadow, in a dark place where bias holds currency. At a time when all science is moving faster and faster, why not invite these professionals to the main banquet: challenge the supposed newcomers (the discovery of chiropractic dates to September, 1895) to “show us what you got!” And please publish all findings in the accepted medical literature. Consider, our compelling need to do better: the United States spends more than $4,500 per person per year on health care. Costa Rica, with half as many doctors per capita, spends just $300 per person every year. Yet life expectancy at birth is all but identical in both countries? Here then are a number of reason why we’re “sick:” an estimated 127 million Americans, of all ages, are obese or overweight, while 47 million still smoke, risking any number of cancers. Additionally, 14 million abuse alcohol, and 16 million use addictive drugs. Plainly, we need a serious, continuing national campaign promoting good health habits, so how about this for a first proposal: a cut in Medicare premiums and taxes for those older adults who demonstrate they’re avoiding the leading risks to a healthful lifestyle? In summary, they’re living right. Finally, this free advice to chiropractors: join the good health practices campaign. Tell your senior patients to exercise (nearly everyone can walk), eat smart, be sociable, volunteer, read and learn. Too few medical doctors, pressured for time, follow this common sense regimen. Bard Lindeman welcomes questions from readers. Although he cannot respond to each one individually, he will answer those of general interest in his column. Write to Bard at 5428 Oxbow Rd., Stone Mountain, GA 30087-1228; fax to 404-815-5787; or send e-mail to [email protected]. Reprinted with permission of Bard Lindeman, article in the Gwinnett Daily Post. Bard Lindeman covers issues faced by seniors, including family, health, retirement, elder care and aging. He has received the American Society on Aging National Media Award.

Semont maneuver vs Epley procedure ABSTRACT The authors compared the efficacy of a self-applied modified Semont maneuver (MSM) with self-treatment with a modified Epley procedure (MEP) in 70 patients with posterior canal benign paroxysmal positional vertigo. The response rate after 1 week, defined as absence of positional vertigo and torsional/upbeating nystagmus on positional testing, was 95% in the MEP group (n = 37) vs 58% in the MSM group (n = 33; p < 0.001). Treatment failure was related to incorrect performance of the maneuver in the MSM group, whereas treatment-related side effects did not differ significantly between the groups. View the procedure on videos © 2004 American Academy of Neurology NEUROLOGY 2004;63:150-152 To read the FULL TEXT click on the link below:

Metz, R Douglas DC; Nelson, Craig F. DC, MS; LaBrot, Thomas DC; Pelletier, Kenneth R. PhD, MD(hc) Abstract: An analysis of claims data from a managed care health plan was performed to evaluate whether patients use chiropractic care as a substitution for medical care or in addition to medical care. Rates of neuromusculoskeletal complaints in 9e diagnostic categories were compared between groups with and without chiropractic coverage. For the 4-year study period, there were 3,129,752 insured member years in the groups with chiropractic coverage and 5,197,686 insured member years in the groups without chiropractic coverage. Expressed in terms of unique patients with neuromusculoskeletal complaints, the cohort with chiropractic coverage experienced a rate of 162.0 complaints per 1000 member years compared with 171.3 complaints in the cohort without chiropractic coverage. These results indicate that patients use chiropractic care as a direct substitution for medical care. (C)2004The American College of Occupational and Environmental Medicine Journal of Occupational & Environmental Medicine. 46(8):847-855, August 2004.

ABSTRACT Background: The adult lifetime incidence for low back pain is 75% to 85% in the United States. Investigating appropriate care has proven difficult, since, in general, acute pain subsides spontaneously and chronic pain is resistant to intervention. Subacute back pain has been rarely studied. Objective: To compare the relative efficacy of chiropractic adjustments with muscle relaxants and placebo/sham for subacute low back pain. Design: A randomized, double-blind clinical trial. Methods: Subjects (N = 192) experiencing low back pain of 2 to 6 weeks' duration were randomly allocated to 3 groups with interventions applied over 2 weeks. Interventions were either chiropractic adjustments with placebo medicine, muscle relaxants with sham adjustments, or placebo medicine with sham adjustments. Visual Analog Scale for Pain, Oswestry Disability Questionnaire, and Modified Zung Depression Scale were assessed at baseline, 2 weeks, and 4 weeks. Schober's flexibility test, acetaminophen usage, and Global Impression of Severity Scale (GIS), a physician's clinical impression used as a secondary outcome, were assessed at baseline and 2 weeks. Results: Baseline values, except GIS, were similar for all groups. When all subjects completing the protocol were combined (N = 146), the data revealed pain, disability, depression, and GIS decreased significantly (P < .0001); lumbar flexibility did not change. Statistical differences across groups were seen for pain, a primary outcome, (chiropractic group improved more than control group) and GIS (chiropractic group improved more than other groups). No significant differences were seen for disability, depression, flexibility, or acetaminophen usage across groups. Conclusion: Chiropractic was more beneficial than placebo in reducing pain and more beneficial than either placebo or muscle relaxants in reducing GIS. Hoiriis KT, et al. Journal of Manipulative and Physiological Therapeutics. July/August 2004; Vol. 27, No. 6. Read the complete study by clicking on the JMPT Online link in the "Members' Only" section. Not a member? Than join NYSCA today to access this and other regularly updated information.

ARLINGTON, Va. -- As students savor the last precious days of summer vacation, parents are out making the final run for school supplies. So, parents, take note -- when back to school shopping this year there is one essential item that requires very special attention: your child's backpack. Backpack weight is becoming an increasing problem, and studies show that heavy backpacks can lead to both back pain and poor posture, noted the American Chiropractic Association (ACA). In fact, in 2001 backpacks were the cause of 7,000 emergency room visits and countless complaints of muscle spasms, neck and shoulder pain. "In my own practice, I have noticed a marked increase in the number of young children who are complaining about back, neck and shoulder pain," said Dr. Scott Bautch, a chiropractor from Wausau, Wis., and noted ergonomics expert. "The first question I ask these patients is, 'Do you carry a backpack to school?' Almost always, the answer is 'yes.'" This painful trend among youngsters isn't surprising when you consider the disproportionate amounts of weight they carry in their backpacks -- often slung over just one shoulder. According to Dr. Bautch, "Many of these kids are carrying a quarter of their body weight over their shoulders for a large portion of the day. That's equivalent to a 180-pound man carrying around a 45- pound load." Thankfully, backpacks have undergone a radical evolution in recent years and now many are designed to be ergonomic while remaining fashionable. Not to mention, the backpack of today has adapted to keep up with our changing lives. Children not only pack heavy schoolbooks, band instruments and running shoes into their backpacks, many of them also tuck away popular electronics -- such as laptops, cellular phones, MP3 players, CD players and personal digital assistants (PDA) -- into specially designed compartments inside their backpacks. Bulging backpacks offer a significant risk to children, but parents can help limit the strain on young necks, backs and shoulders. The ACA offers the following tips to help prevent the pain caused by backpack misuse. --- Make sure your child's backpack weighs no more than 10 percent of his or her body weight. A heavier backpack will cause your child to stoop forward in an attempt to support the additional weight. --- The backpack should never hang more than 4 inches below the waistline. A backpack that hangs too low increases the weight on the shoulders, causing your child to lean forward when walking. --- A backpack with individualized compartments helps position the contents most effectively. Make sure that pointy or bulky objects are packed away from the area that will rest on your child's back, and try to place the heaviest items closet to the body. --- Bigger is not necessarily better. The more room there is in a backpack, the more your child will carry and the heavier the backpack will be. --- Urge your child to wear both shoulder straps. Lugging the backpack around by one strap can cause a disproportionate shift of weight to one side, leading to neck and muscle spasms, as well as low-back pain. --- Wide, padded straps are very important. Non-padded straps are uncomfortable, and can dig into your child's shoulders. --- The shoulder straps should be adjustable so the backpack can be fitted to your child's body. Straps that are too loose can cause the backpack to dangle uncomfortably and cause spinal misalignment and pain. --- If the backpack is still too heavy, talk to your child's teacher. Ask if your child could leave the heaviest books at school, and bring home only lighter handout materials or workbooks. Ask the teacher for a set oftext books to keep at home. Chiropractic has been practiced in the United States for more than 100 years, and each year, millions of Americans trust their health to one of the nation's 60,000 doctors of chiropractic. To read research studies about the effectiveness of chiropractic care, visit ACA's website at:

In response to comments the State Insurance Department (SID) received from the New York State Chiropractic Association (NYSCA) and other professional groups, individuals and organizations, on August 18, the Department published a “revised” regulatory proposal floated earlier this year that, among other things, would have pegged the fees for durable medical equipment (DME) at Medicaid levels, and, in one of the other more controversial amendments referred to as the "Concurrent Care Rule," would have required the “sharing of fees among licensed health providers or the payment of a fee only to the provider whose specialty was most relevant to the diagnosis, if more than one licensed health provider treated the patient at the same time, and the treatment involved overlapping or common services.” Read more in "Members' Only" section. Not a member? Consider joining NYSCA today to access this and other regularly updated information.