With respect to upper cervical specific techniques, there is little to no quality research to support such techniques. The method relies mostly on the placebo effect with most patients improving over time with or without treatment. I think it has gained popularity because people are often wary about manual joint manipulation in the neck. I can see the appeal of a technique where the treatment has little to no side effects and is very gentle. However, it's hard to compete with the well established short term and long term outcomes with manual joint manipulation, not to mention other treatments like cervical traction, soft-tissue work, and physical therapy which boast consistently favorable outcomes.

 

In the 100+ year history of Chiropractic, nobody has been able to show a relationship between "misalignments" and any actual disease process. Surprising right? We have, however, found that joints in the neck are prone to arthritis (disc degeneration, bone spurs, and cartilage degradation) due to all sorts of factors, including past trauma, genetics, and even chronic postural imbalances or overuse. These joints have huge physiological implications, partly due to their proximity to sensitive neurology and myofascial structures. 

 

As a chiropractor, new "techniques" and "protocols" are frequently marketed me. The sales pitch always sounds amazing and when you ask for the evidence you get the runaround. Some chiropractors buy in without much thought. I am much more critical of techniques with great theoretical promise and poor real life performance.

​

See ya soon,

​

~Dr Malone​