Articles and Research
My Special OffersWe are excited to announce the release of the first cds in our Mind Body Therapy line. These self-hypnosis cds facilitate the healing response and encourage positive outcomes. The first two in the series deal with Insomnia and Pain Control. The cds are approximately 25 min long and are hypnotic in nature. They are designed to be listened to daily for 21 days.
Pick up both programs for the cost of a greasy burger and fries!
My Articles and Opinions
By Dr. Brandon Neff
JAMA –The Journal of the American Medical Association
Did JAMA just recommend Chiropractic care as a form of alleviating back pain? I thought
it was a misprint at first then I read the full article. Not only do they suggest Chiropractic
care but also Physical Therapy and Acupuncture along with Exercise to alleviate lower back
pain. The article in SPINE is simply stating that with medical care adding chiropractic care
decreased the patients symptomatology dramatically!
“Adding Chiropractic Manipulative Therapy To Standard Medical Care Patients With Acute
Low Back Pain” SPINE Vol. 30, Number 8, pp. 627-634. 2013
The mere fact that JAMA speaks positively of chiropractic care in its writings is in fact a
ringing endorsement in my opinion and the opinion of hundreds of patients we see in our
South Jordan Chiropractic office. Can Medical Doctors and Chiropractic Doctors agree?
The Studies in SPINE tell the story best and both types of Doctors should evaluate the
Studies for the best results for their patients. Working as a Salt Lake City Chiropractor since
2006 I find that all Doctors are using surgical procedures as a last resort and they should
try to alleviate the pain in the patient using the JAMA recommendations.
More information about Dr. Neff
Neff Family Chiropratic specializes in: Chiropractic care, Decompression therapy, corrective
exercises, K-Laser or Cold Laser therapy, Roller bed, Electric Stimulation, Trigger point
therapy, Myofascial Release Therapy, spinal and extra spinal adjustment like Shoulders,
elbows, hips, knees, ankles, fingers and toes. He specializes in Migraines and with
Pregnancy related spinal adjustments.
He offers a Time of Service Discount on your first visit of just $65 and each follow-up
thereafter are $40. He posts on his facebook other discounts so please check out his
He uses these 3rd party products for patient wellness including EmergentC, BioFreeze and
Bromolain for a natural solution to inflammation and Arthritis.
He put himself through Chiropractic school teaching self-hypnosis for pain management.
His license is proudly displayed in his office and some other accomplishment he is proud
of as well, like his Family pictures, the Salt Lake Community College mascot Brutus the
Bear and his DOPL credentials.
Dr. Neff received a Bachelor of Science degree from the University of Utah in 2002 (1998-
2002) and in 2005 he Graduated Magna cum Laude from Western States Chiropractic
College. (2002- 2005)
He opened his practice at the Southwest Chiropractic Clinic on Redwood Road in January
2006 under the name “Neff Family Chiropractic”
Dr. Neff has proudly serves hundreds of patients from South Jordan, Riverton, Sandy,
West Jordan, West Valley, Lehi, Saratoga Springs and Salt Lake City and they come to him
from as far away as Bountiful to experience his healing techniques.
Dr. Neff provides some of the most advanced spinal correction and chiropractic
adjustments in his South Jordan office. He utilizes “state of the art” chiropractic
techniques. Many of the newest chiropractic techniques are actually safer, more
comfortable and more effective than the past techniques of just a few years ago. As a
chiropractor who cares about utilizing the most advanced techniques for his patient’s
wellness he will treat you with the utmost care to solve your neck spine or lower back
Address: 10358 Redwood Road, South Jordan, UT 84095
facebook page — https://www.facebook.com/pages/Neff-Family-Chiropractic/167459949963844
http://youtu.be/y5JRar5lf_Q in memory of Julie Neff
3rd Party Studies and Articles
The Rand Study
The RAND corporation, one of the most prestigious centers for research in public policy and health, released a study in 1991 which found that spinal manipulation is appropriate for specific kinds of low back pain.1
The Koes Clinical Trial
A 1992 Dutch project compared manipulative therapy (chiropractic) and physiotherapy for the treatment of persistent back and neck complaints. After 12 months, the manipulative therapy group showed greater improvement in the primary complaint as well as in physical function, with fewer visits.2
The AHCPR Guidline
In 1994, the Agency for Health Care Policy and Research (AHCPR), now the Agency on Health Research and Quality (AHRQ), an arm of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, released a clinical practice guideline for the treatment of acute low back problems. The guidelines recommend the use of spinal manipulation as an effective method of symptom control. The researchers developing the guideline found that “manipulation…is safe and effective for patients in the first month of acute low back symptoms without radiculopathy [disease of the spinal nerve roots].”3
The Manga Study
This study researched both the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the chiropractic management of low-back pain. Dr. Pran Manga, the study’s author, found “on the evidence, particularly the most scientifically valid clinical studies, spinal manipulation applied by chiropractors is shown to be more effective than alternative treatment for LBP [low-back pain]. Many medical therapies are of questionable validity or are clearly inadequate.”4
The Duke Study
Based on a literature review of several headache treatment options, a panel of 19 multidisciplinary experts concluded that spinal manipulation resulted in almost immediate improvement for cervicogenic headaches and had significantly fewer side effects and longer lasting relief of tension-type headache than a commonly prescribed medication. Researchers concluded the following: “Manipulation appeared to result in immediate improvement in headache severity when used to treat episodes of cervicogenic headache when compared with an attention-placebo control. Furthermore, when compared to soft-tissue therapies (massage), a course of manipulation treatments resulted in sustained improvement in headache frequency and severity.”5
The Boline Study
This randomized controlled trial compared six weeks of spinal manipulative treatment of tension-type headache by chiropractors to six weeks of medical treatment with amitriptyline, a medication often prescribed for the treatment of severe tension headache pain. Researchers found that chiropractic patients experienced fewer side effects (4.3%) than the amitriptyline group (82.1%) and while both were effective during the treatment phase of the study, only the chiropractic patients continued to report fewer headaches when the treatment ended.6
The Nelson Migraine Study
This study compared chiropractic spinal manipulation to amitriptyline (a medication often prescribed for the treatment of headache) for the treatment of migraine headaches. The researchers found that “spinal manipulation seemed to be as effective as a well-established and efficacious treatment (amitriptyline), and on the basis of a benign side effects profile, it should be considered a treatment option for patients with frequent migraine headaches.” The researchers also found that in the weeks immediately following treatment, patients who had received spinal manipulation had a 42% reduction in headache frequency compared to only 24% of those who took amitriptyline.7
The Colic Study
When researchers compared spinal manipulation for the treatment of infantile colic to dimethicone (a medication for colic), they came to a simple conclusion: “Spinal manipulation is effective in relieving infantile colic.”8
A Study of Education
This study examined the education provided in medical school to that provided in chiropractic school. The researchers found that “considerable commonality exists between chiropractic and medical programs.” Surprisingly, it was found that more time is spent in basic and clinical sciences in chiropractic education. Not surprisingly, chiropractic education spends more time in nutrition, while medical education spends more time in public health. In addition, little time in medical school is devoted to the study of the neuromusculoskeletal system and related problems; this is a major focus in chiropractic education.9
Chiropractors go through an immense amount of schooling to receive a “Doctor of Chiropractic” degree (also known as a D.C.). Their collegiate agenda is as follows:
– Graduate from a four year college.
– Completing at least two years undergraduate study, with a focus on the sciences.
– Four years of Chiropractic Education.
– Take mandatory internships.
– At least 900 hours of work in a Chiropractic Clinic.
– After graduating, pass a written and oral board exams, at national and state levels.
A Chiropractor may opt to choose to advance their degree in an area of specialty.
These areas include: Chiropractic neurology, radiology, sports medicine, as well as many other fields
The Abt Study
Abt Associates of Cambridge, MA, convened two expert panels (one panel primarily of medical doctors and the other entirely chiropractic) and asked the panels to investigate the role of the Doctor of Chiropractic as a primary health care provider. Both panels agreed that, with respect to a list of 53 primary care functions found to occur in daily medical offices, chiropractors are capable of making diagnoses in 92% of these activities. The researchers concluded that “the overriding sense of agreement between allopathic and chiropractic physicians in terms of the scope of primary care activities, suggesting that there is opportunity for chiropractors and medical doctors to work together on patient care and organizational strategy.”10
The IPA Study
A survey of patients of chiropractors in an independent physicans’ association found that, when asked if they would recommend their Doctor of Chiropractic to others, 95.5% of the patients said “yes.”
Other results were as high:
Length of time to get an appointment – 84.9% said Excellent
Access to the office by telephone – 95.5% Excellent or Very Good
Length of wait at the office – 92.4% Excellent of Very Good
Time spent with the doctor – 95.5% Excellent or Very Good
Explanation of what was done at the visit – 95.5% Excellent or Very Good
Technical skills of the provider – 98.5% Excellent or Very Good
Personal manner of the chiropractor – 100% Excellent or Very Good
Overall visit – 100% Excellent or Very Good
The Burton Study
Researchers interested in the value of manipulation for the treatment of lumbar disc herniation compared it to chemonucleolysis, a common medical treatment involving enzyme injection into the disc. It was concluded that “manipulation produced statistically significant greater improvement for back pain and disability in the first few weeks.” Researchers also found that manipulation provided “overall financial advantage.”11
1. Shekelle PG, Adams A, et al. The Appropriateness of Spinal Manipulation for Low-Back Pain: Indications and Ratings by a Multidisciplinary Expert Panel. RAND Corporation, Santa Monica, California 1991
2. Koes BW, Boulter LM, et al. British Medical Journal. March 7, 1992; Vol. 304, No. 6827, pp. 601-605.
3. Bigos S, Bowyer O, et al. Acute Low Back Problems in Adults. Clinical Practice Guideline, Number 14, Rockville, Maryland: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, Agency for Health Care Policy and Research, AHCPR Pub. No. 95-0642; December 1994.
4. Manga P, Angus D, et al. The Effectiveness and Cost-Effectiveness of Chiropractic Management of Low-Back Pain. The Ontario Ministry of Health, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada, August 1993.
5. McCrory DC, et al. Evidence Report: Behavioral and Physical Treatments for Tension-type and Cervicogenic Headache. Duke University Evidence-Based Practice Center, Durham, North Carolina, January 2001.
6. Boline PD, Kassak K, et al. Journal of Manipulative and Physiological Therapeutics. March/April 1995; Vol. 18, No. 3, pp. 148-154.
7. Nelson CF, et al. Journal of Manipulative and Physiological Therapeutics. October 1998; Vol. 21, No. 8, pp. 511-519.
8. Wiberg JMM, et al. Journal of Manipulative and Physiological Therapeutics. October 1999; Vol. 22, No. 8, pp. 517-522.
9. Coulter I, et al. Alternative Therapies. September 1998; Vol. 4, No. 5, pp. 64-75.
10. Gaumer GL, Walker A, Su S. Journal of Manipulative and Physiological Therapeutics. May 2001; Vol. 24, No. 4, pp. 239-259.
11. Burton AK, et al. European Spine Journal. June 2000; Vol. 9, No. 3, pp. 202-207