Woodstock Chiropractic - Woodstock, Georgia

09/25/2025

In analysis of umbilical cord blood, researchers discover that elevated levels of acetaminophen is associated with up to three times the risk of autism, ADHD diagnosis

09/22/2025

Great Weekend!

09/22/2025

How cute are these two?

09/20/2025

09/08/2025

08/28/2025

The 3 T's that affect our nervous system:
Thoughts=emotional/mental/F.E.A.R. False Evidence Appearing Real
Toxins=chemicals, drugs/medication, fake phoods, nutrient deficient foods
Trauma=micro-trauma(daily repetitive habits), macro-trauma(injuries, falls, slips...)

08/28/2025

Chiropractic care helps with mental health!!

Psychological response in spinal manipulation (PRISM): a systematic review of psychological outcomes in randomized controlled trials
Nefyn H Williams 1, Maggie Hendry, Ruth Lewis, Ian Russell, Alex Westmoreland, Clare Wilkinson
Affiliations Expand
PMID: 18054729 DOI: 10.1016/j.ctim.2007.01.008
Abstract
Background: The most important risk factors for back and neck pain are psychosocial. Nevertheless, systematic reviews of spinal manipulation have concentrated on pain and spine related disability, and ignored psychological outcomes.

Objective: To assess whether spinal manipulation was effective in improving psychological outcome.

Design: Systematic review of randomised controlled trials (RCTs).

Methods: RCTs were identified by searching Medline, CINAHL, Embase, CENTRAL, AMED, PsycINFO until November 2005. Trials reporting psychological outcomes including the mental health components of generic outcomes were extracted, and combined where appropriate in meta-analyses.

Results: One hundred and twenty nine RCTs of spinal manipulation were identified; 12 had adequately reported psychological outcomes. Six trials with a verbal intervention comparator were combined in a meta-analysis, and found a mean benefit from spinal manipulation equivalent to 0.34 of the population standard deviation (S.D.) [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.23-0.45] at 1-5 months; 0.27 of the S.D. [95% CI 0.14-0.40] at 6-12 months. Eight trials with a physical treatment comparator were combined in a meta-analysis and found a mean benefit of 0.13 of the S.D. [95% CI 0.01-0.24] in favour of manipulation at 1-5 months; 0.11 of the S.D. [95% CI -0.02 to 0.25] at 6-12 months.

Conclusions: There was some evidence that spinal manipulation improved psychological outcomes compared with verbal interventions.

Call now to connect with business.