OBJECTIVE: To review the results of control groups in 6 clinical control trials with before-and-after radiographic measurements taken days, weeks, months, or years apart to accept or reject the hypothesis that radiographic analysis procedures are not repeatable, reliable, or reproducible.
DATA SOURCES: Six published control groups from original data. Other data were obtained from searches on MEDLINE, CHIROLARS, MANTIS, and CINAHL on radiographic reliability, posture, and positioning.
RESULTS: Comparison of initial and follow-up radiographic data for 6 control groups indicate that measured angles and distances between initial and follow-up radiograph measurements on lateral and anterior to posterior radiographs are not significantly different when utilizing Chiropractic Biophysics radiographic procedures. In 48 out of 50 measurements, the differences between initial and follow-up radiographs are less than 1.5 degrees and 2 mm. These measurements indicate that posture is repeatable, radiographic positioning is repeatable, and radiographic line drawing analysis for spinal displacement is highly reliable. The scientific literature on these topics also indicates the repeatability of posture, radiographic positioning, and radiographic line drawing.
CONCLUSIONS: Posture, radiographic positioning, and radiographic line drawing are all very reliable/repeatable. When Chiropractic Biophysics standardized procedures are used, any pre-to-post alignment changes in treatment groups are a result of the treatment procedures applied. These results contradict common claims made by several researchers and clinicians in the indexed literature. Chiropractic radiologic education and publications should reflect the recent literature, provide more support for posture analysis, radiographic positioning, radiographic line drawing analyses, and applications of posture and radiographic procedures for measuring spinal displacement on plain radiographs.
Click on the above link for the PubMed record for this letter; full text by subscription.