Cervical Spine Manipulation Research Articles

Associations of Treatment Outcome Expectations and Pain Sensitivity after Cervical Spine Manipulation in Patients with Chronic Non-Specific Neck Pain: A Cohort Study.

(1) Background: This cohort study aimed to evaluate the effect of patients' treatment expectations on pain perception changes following manual therapy cervical manipulations in individuals with chronic mechanical neck pain. (2) Methods: Demographic data were collected by 56 subjects who were asked to fill out the Neck Disability Index (NDI) and the Expectations for Treatment Scale (ETS). All patients received one single cervical manipulation, and pressure pain thresholds (PPTs) were measured before and immediately after the manipulation with a digital algometer. (3) Results: A total of 56 patients participated. Most subjects (62.5%) had high treatment expectations according to the ETS scale. Statistically significant increases in PPTs were noted both locally and in remote areas (p < 0.05), with 37.5-48.2% of participants showing clinically significant changes in pain perception. However, no statistically significant correlation was found between high treatment expectations and increased PPTs (p > 0.05). (4) Conclusions: Although a significant reduction in pain perception was observed, it did not correlate with patients' treatment expectations. Future research for further investigation of this hypothesis by comparing real versus sham treatment and exploring additional mechanisms affecting changes in PPTs after cervical manipulations in this population will contribute to a better understanding of the research question.

Cervical Spine Manipulation and Causation of Cervical Artery Dissection: A Review of 10 Case Reports.

Recent media coverage of high-profile cases of cervical artery dissection (CAD) has ignited the discussion about the role of cervical spine manipulation (CSM) in causing cervical artery dissection. However, research does not support a causal association between cervical spine manipulation and cervical artery dissection in a healthy cervical spine. The objective of this study was to review the 10 most recent case reports of cervical spine manipulation and cervical artery dissection for convincing evidence of the causation of cervical artery dissection by cervical spine manipulation. Nine of 10 case reports showed no convincing evidence of a causal relationship between cervical spine manipulation and cervical artery dissection. The 10th case report was exceptional as the CSM was contraindicated by pre-existing cervical spine pathology. We conclude that these 10 case reports provide no convincing evidence of the causation of cervical artery dissection by cervical spine manipulation in a healthy cervical spine. One case report demonstrated that cervical spine manipulation can cause cervical artery dissection when performed in the presence of pre-existing cervical spine pathology. Therefore, we conclude that practitioners should exclude cervical spine pathology before performing cervical spine manipulation.

Strain of the vertebral artery during passive neck movements and spinal manipulation of the cervical spine: An observational study

BackgroundNeck pain is a common condition, and a frequent treatment is chiropractic cervical spinal manipulation therapy (cSMT). However, cervical spinal manipulations have been associated with excessive cervical artery elongations, allegedly causing arterial dissection leading to stroke. PurposeThe primary purpose of this study was to quantify the total vertebral artery elongations during cSMT, and secondarily, quantify the vertebral artery elongations during the pre-manipulative orientation of the head and neck and the subsequent elongations during the actual thrust. MethodsVertebral artery strains were measured at the cervical levels C0–C1, C1–C2, and C2–C3 using piezoelectric crystals that were sutured to the wall of the left and right vertebral artery in three cadavers. Vertebral artery strains were measured continuously for a full set of passive range of motion testing and for the chiropractic spinal manipulation. FindingsFor the range of motion testing, the greatest average vertebral artery strains at the C0–C1 level were 6.9% for ipsilateral flexion-rotation, at the C1–C2 level 4.3% for contralateral rotation, and at the C2–C3 level 3.7% for contralateral flexion-rotation. For the chiropractic spinal manipulation, the average maximal strains at the C0–C1, C1–C2 and C2–C3 levels were 1.3%, 0.1%, and 1.0%, respectively. The maximal average vertebral artery strains in the pre-manipulative phase were 0.5% and the corresponding maximal vertebral artery strains during the manipulative thrust was 1.1%. InterpretationPassive range of motion testing produced strains in the vertebral artery were 5.3 times (C0–C1), 7.2 times (C1–C2), and 3.7 times (C2–C3) greater than the corresponding strains during chiropractic spinal manipulation, suggesting that strains in the vertebral artery during chiropractic spinal manipulation were much smaller than the strains that can occur during normal everyday movements of the head and neck. Furthermore, vertebral artery strains in the pre-manipulative phase did not contribute to the peak strains on the contralateral vertebral artery and helped reduce strains on the ipsilateral side.

Percutaneous tendon dry needling and thrust manipulation as an adjunct to multimodal physical therapy in patients with lateral elbow tendinopathy: A multicenter randomized clinical trial

Objective The purpose of this study was to assess the effects of adding electrical dry needling and thrust manipulation into a multimodal program of exercise, mobilization, and ultrasound in patients with lateral elbow tendinopathy. Design Randomized, single-blinded, multicenter, parallel-group trial. Setting Thirteen outpatient physical therapy clinics in nine different US states. Participants One hundred and forty-three participants (n = 143) with lateral elbow tendinopathy were randomized. Intervention Cervical spine manipulation, extremity manipulation, and percutaneous tendon electrical dry needling plus multimodal physical therapy (n = 73) or multimodal physical therapy (n = 70) alone. Main measures The primary outcome was elbow pain intensity and disability as measured by the Patient-Rated Tennis Elbow Evaluation at baseline, 1 week, 4 weeks, and 3 months. Secondary outcomes included the Numeric Pain Rating Scale, Tennis Elbow Functional Scale, Global Rating of Change, and medication intake. Results The 2 × 4 analysis of covariance demonstrated that individuals with lateral elbow tendinopathy receiving electrical dry needling and thrust manipulation plus multimodal physical therapy experienced significantly greater improvements in disability (Patient-Rated Tennis Elbow Evaluation: F = 19.675; P < 0.001), elbow pain intensity (Numeric Pain Rating Scale: F = 22.769; P < 0.001), and function (Tennis Elbow Function Scale: F = 13.269; P < 0.001) than those receiving multimodal physical therapy alone at 3 months. The between-group effect size was large for pain and disability (Patient-Rated Tennis Elbow Evaluation: standardized mean difference = 1.13; 95% confidence interval: 0.78, 1.48) in favor of the electrical dry needling and thrust manipulation group. Conclusions The inclusion of percutaneous tendon electrical dry needling and thrust manipulation into a multimodal program of exercise, mobilization and ultrasound was more effective than multimodal physical therapy alone in individuals with lateral elbow tendinopathy. Trial Registration: www.clinicaltrials.gov NCT03167710 May 30, 2017.

Plausible Mechanisms of Causation of Immediate Stroke by Cervical Spine Manipulation: A Narrative Review.

It has been proposed that cervical spine manipulation (CSM) can cause dissection in healthy cervical arteries, with resultant immediate stroke. However, research does not support a causal association between CSM and cervical artery dissection (CAD) in healthy cervical arteries. The objective of this study was to review the literature to identify plausible mechanisms of causation of immediate stroke by CSM. Immediate stroke is defined as a stroke occurring within seconds or minutes of CSM. Our review found plausible thromboembolic and thrombotic mechanisms of causation of immediate stroke by CSM in the literature. The common premise of these mechanisms is CAD being present before CSM, not occurring as a result of CSM. These mechanisms of causation have clinical and medicolegal implications for physicians performing CSM.

Fatal Vertebral Artery Dissection Following Self-Manipulation of the Cervical Spine.

Cervical spine manipulation is a known risk factor for vertebral artery dissection. In this report, we present a case of fatal vertebral artery dissection that occurred as the result of self-manipulation of the cervical spine. The decedent was a 40-year-old man with no significant past medical history. He was observed to "crack his neck" while at work. Soon after, he began experiencing neck pain, then developed strokelike symptoms and became unresponsive. He was transported to a local medical center, where imaging showed bilateral vertebral artery dissection. His neurological status continued to decline, and brain death was pronounced several days later. An autopsy examination showed evidence of cerebellar and brainstem infarcts, herniation, and diffuse hypoxic-ischemic injury. A posterior neck dissection was performed to expose the vertebral arteries, which showed grossly visible hemorrhage and dilation. There was no evidence of traumatic injury to the bone or soft tissue of the head or neck. Bilateral dissection tracts were readily appreciated on microscopic examination. Death was attributed to self-manipulation of the neck, which in turn led to bilateral vertebral artery dissection, cerebellar and brainstem infarcts, herniation, hypoxic-ischemic injury, and ultimately brain death.

The association between cervical artery dissection and spinal manipulation among US adults.

Cervical artery dissection (CeAD), which includes both vertebral artery dissection (VAD) and carotid artery dissection (CAD), is the most serious safety concern associated with cervical spinal manipulation (CSM). We evaluated the association between CSM and CeAD among US adults. Through analysis of health claims data, we employed a case-control study with matched controls, a case-control design in which controls were diagnosed with ischemic stroke, and a case-crossover design in which recent exposures were compared to exposures in the same case that occurred 6-7months earlier. We evaluated the association between CeAD and the 3-level exposure, CSM versus office visit for medical evaluation and management (E&M) versus neither, with E&M set as the referent group. We identified 2337 VAD cases and 2916 CAD cases. Compared to population controls, VAD cases were 0.17 (95% CI 0.09 to 0.32) times as likely to have received CSM in the previous week as compared to E&M. In other words, E&M was about 5 times more likely than CSM in the previous week in cases, relative to controls. CSM was 2.53 (95% CI 1.71 to 3.68) times as likely as E&M in the previous week among individuals with VAD than among individuals experiencing a stroke without CeAD. In the case-crossover study, CSM was 0.38 (95% CI 0.15 to 0.91) times as likely as E&M in the week before a VAD, relative to 6months earlier. In other words, E&M was approximately 3 times more likely than CSM in the previous week in cases, relative to controls. Results for the 14-day and 30-day timeframes were similar to those at one week. Among privately insured US adults, the overall risk of CeAD is very low. Prior receipt of CSM was more likely than E&M among VAD patients as compared to stroke patients. However, for CAD patients as compared to stroke patients, as well as for both VAD and CAD patients in comparison with population controls and in case-crossover analysis, prior receipt of E&M was more likely than CSM.

P.061 Stroke from cerebral artery dissection after cervical spine manipulation therapy in younger patient case report

Background: Cervical and lumber spine manipulation therapy is widely used treatment of spinal degenerative disc disease. Serous side affects can be associated with this treatment especially in cervical spine. Stroke represents an infrequent adverse reaction associated with cervical spine manipulation therapy. Methods: 34 year old lady presented to Emergency Department (ED) referring Hospital 20 minutes after having neck manipulation by a chiropractor, she complained of neck pain after the manipulation with syncope, half hour later developed visual field loss, with few episodes of emesis, and increasing headache. Results: The patient was started on Aspirin and admitted locally for observation. Computers tomography (CT) head , CT-Angiography showed left Vertebral artery (V3 segment) , MRI showed acute infarction within the both cerebellar hemisphere, after 3 days patient transferred to our unit, patient had posterior fossa decompressive craniotomy with external ventricular drainage (EVD), discharged to rehabilitation 2 weeks, 2 months follow-up patient improving. Conclusions: There is inceased evidence that shows increased association between spinal manipulation and adverse effects and dissection of vertebral arteries in younger population. Younger patients (&lt; 45 years) are particulary high risk, they should be informed of the risk of stroke or vascular injury from this procedure. No aggresive manipulation in younger population.

The cervical spine in tension type headache

IntroductionThe concept that headaches may originate in the cervical spine has been discussed over decades and is still a matter of debate. The cervical spine has been traditionally linked to cervicogenic headache; however, current evidence supports the presence of cervical musculoskeletal dysfunctions also in tension-type headache. PurposeThis position paper discusses the most updated clinical and evidence-based data about the cervical spine in tension-type headache. ImplicationsSubjects with tension-type headache exhibit concomitant neck pain, cervical spine sensitivity, forward head posture, limited cervical range of motion, positive flexion-rotation test and also cervical motor control disturbances. In addition, the referred pain elicited by manual examination of the upper cervical joints and muscle trigger points reproduces the pain pattern in tension-type headache. Current data supports that the cervical spine can be also involved in tension-type headache, and not just in cervicogenic headache. Several physical therapies including upper cervical spine mobilization or manipulation, soft tissue interventions (including dry needling) and exercises targeting the cervical spine are proposed for managing tension-type headache; however, the effectiveness of these interventions depends on a proper clinical reasoning since not all will be equally effective for all individuals with tension-type headache. Based on current evidence, we propose to use the terms cervical “component” and cervical “source” when discussing about headache. In such a scenario, in cervicogenic headache the neck can be the cause (source) of the headache whereas in tension-type headache the neck will have a component on the pain pattern, but it will be not the cause since it is a primary headache.

Effect of Seated Cervical Spinal Manipulation on Autonomic Nervous System Activity as Measured by Heart Rate Variability and Plasma Norepinephrine Levels: A randomized Pre- and Poststudy

ObjectiveThe objective of this study was to determine whether seated cervical manipulation produced changes in autonomic nervous system activity, as measured by heart rate variability and plasma norepinephrine levels. MethodsNinety-five healthy young adults (ages 20-48 years) were recruited into a single-blinded physiological study, with 47 randomized to a seated cervical manipulation and 44 randomized to a sham procedure. Heart rate variability in the frequency domain, and plasma norepinephrine levels were measured prior to, immediately following, and 5 minutes following the intervention. ResultsElectrocardiograms were obtained from 39 subjects in the sham group and 43 subjects in the manipulation group. No statistically significant changes were found in measures of heart rate variability in the frequency domain in either the manipulation or sham groups. Blood samples were obtained from 22 subjects in the sham group and 27 subjects in the manipulation group. Plasma norepinephrine levels, as measured by spectrophotometry, declined in both groups from pre- to immediately postintervention, and they remained at decreased levels 5 minutes after the interventions. There were no statistically significant differences between groups in pre- or postintervention norepinephrine levels. ConclusionsMeasures of heart rate variability and plasma norepinephrine levels did not show that seated cervical manipulation produced short-term changes in autonomic nervous system activity compared to a sham procedure in healthy young adults.

Immediate Effects of a Single Session of Cervical Spine Manipulation on Cervical Movement Patterns in People With Nonspecific Neck Pain: A Randomized Controlled Trial

ObjectiveThe aim of the present study was to assess the immediate effects of a single session of cervical spine manipulation on cervical movement patterns, disability, and the patient's perceived improvement in people with nonspecific neck pain. MethodsA single-blinded, randomized, sham-controlled trial was carried out at a biomechanics institute. Fifty participants diagnosed with acute and chronic nonspecific neck pain (minimum duration of the symptoms being 1 month) were randomized to an experimental group (EG, n = 25) or a sham-control group (CG, n = 25, 23 of whom completed the study). EG received a single cervical spine manipulation session; CG received a single placebo intervention. Both groups received manipulation or sham from the same physiotherapist. Main outcome measures were neck kinematics (ie, range of motion and movement harmony) during cyclic movements, self-reported neck disability, and impression of change assessed before and 5 minutes after treatment. ResultsThe EG showed no significant improvements (P > .05) in any of the studied biomechanical variables, except for right-side bending and left rotation, in which we found a range of motion significant mean difference of 1.97° and 1.95°, respectively (P < .05). The CG showed enhanced harmonic motion during flexion (P < .05). Both groups showed a significant decrease in self-reported neck disability after treatment (P < .05), and EG participants perceived a significantly larger improvement after manipulation compared with the CG (P < .05). ConclusionsA single session of cervical manipulation provided by a physiotherapist had no impact on cervical motion during cyclic movements, but rather induced self-reported perceived improvement in neck disability and impression of change after treatment in people with nonspecific neck pain.

Association between cervical artery dissection and spinal manipulative therapy –a medicare claims analysis

BackgroundCervical artery dissection and subsequent ischemic stroke is the most serious safety concern associated with cervical spinal manipulation.MethodsWe evaluated the association between cervical spinal manipulation and cervical artery dissection among older Medicare beneficiaries in the United States. We employed case-control and case-crossover designs in the analysis of claims data for individuals aged 65+, continuously enrolled in Medicare Part A (covering hospitalizations) and Part B (covering outpatient encounters) for at least two consecutive years during 2007–2015. The primary exposure was cervical spinal manipulation; the secondary exposure was a clinical encounter for evaluation and management for neck pain or headache. We created a 3-level categorical variable, (1) any cervical spinal manipulation, 2) evaluation and management but no cervical spinal manipulation and (3) neither cervical spinal manipulation nor evaluation and management. The primary outcomes were occurrence of cervical artery dissection, either (1) vertebral artery dissection or (2) carotid artery dissection. The cases had a new primary diagnosis on at least one inpatient hospital claim or primary/secondary diagnosis for outpatient claims on at least two separate days. Cases were compared to 3 different control groups: (1) matched population controls having at least one claim in the same year as the case; (2) ischemic stroke controls without cervical artery dissection; and (3) case-crossover analysis comparing cases to themselves in the time period 6–7 months prior to their cervical artery dissection. We made each comparison across three different time frames: up to (1) 7 days; (2) 14 days; and (3) 30 days prior to index event.ResultsThe odds of cervical spinal manipulation versus evaluation and management did not significantly differ between vertebral artery dissection cases and any of the control groups at any of the timepoints (ORs 0.84 to 1.88; p > 0.05). Results for carotid artery dissection cases were similar.ConclusionAmong Medicare beneficiaries aged 65 and older who received cervical spinal manipulation, the risk of cervical artery dissection is no greater than that among control groups.

Vertebral arteries do not experience tensile force during manual cervical spine manipulation applied to human cadavers

ABSTRACT Background The vertebral artery (VA) may be stretched and subsequently damaged during manual cervical spine manipulation. The objective of this study was to measure VA length changes that occur during cervical spine manipulation and to compare these to the VA failure length. Methods Piezoelectric ultrasound crystals were implanted along the length of the VA (C1 to C7) and were used to measure length changes during cervical spine manipulation of seven un-embalmed, post-rigor human cadavers. Arteries were then excised, and elongation from arbitrary in-situ head/neck positions to first force (0.1 N) was measured. Following this, VA were stretched (8.33 mm/s) to mechanical failure. Failure was defined as the instance when VA elongation resulted in a decrease in force. Results From arbitrary in-situ head/neck positions, the greatest average VA length change during spinal manipulation was [mean (range)] 5.1% (1.1 to 15.1%). From arbitrary in-situ head/neck positions, arteries were elongated on average 33.5% (4.6 to 84.6%) prior to first force occurrence and 51.3% (16.3 to 105.1%) to failure. Average failure forces were 3.4 N (1.4 to 9.7 N). Conclusions Measured in arbitrary in-situ head/neck positions, VA were slack. It appears that this slack must be taken up prior to VA experiencing tensile force. During cervical spine manipulations (using cervical spine extension and rotation), arterial length changes remained below that slack length, suggesting that VA elongated but were not stretched during the manipulation. However, in order to answer the question if cervical spine manipulation is safe from a mechanical perspective, the testing performed here needs to be repeated using a defined in-situ head/neck position and take into consideration other structures (e.g. carotid arteries).

Knowledge, beliefs, and attitudes of spinal manipulation: a cross-sectional survey of Italian physiotherapists

Background and ObjectiveHigh-velocity low-amplitude thrust spinal manipulation (SM) is a recommended and commonly used manual therapy intervention in physiotherapy. Beliefs surrounding the safety and effectiveness of SM have challenged its use, and even advocated for its abandonment. Our study aimed to investigate the knowledge and beliefs surrounding SM by Italian physiotherapists compared with similar practitioners in other countries.MethodsAn online survey with 41 questions was adapted from previous surveys and was distributed via a mailing list of the Italian Physiotherapists Association (March 22–26, 2020). The questionnaire was divided into 4 sections to capture information on participant demographics, utilization, potential barriers, and knowledge about SM. Questions were differentiated between spinal regions. Attitudes towards different spinal regions, attributes associated with beliefs, and the influence of previous educational background were each evaluated.ResultsOf the 7398 registered physiotherapists, 575 (7.8%) completed the survey and were included for analysis. The majority of respondents perceived SM as safe and effective when applied to the thoracic (74.1%) and lumbar (72.2%) spines; whereas, a smaller proportion viewed SM to the upper cervical spine (56.8%) as safe and effective. Respondents reported they were less likely to provide and feel comfortable with upper cervical SM (respectively, 27.5% and 48.5%) compared to the thoracic (respectively, 52.2% and 74.8%) and lumbar spines (respectively, 46.3% and 74.3%). Most physiotherapists (70.4%) agreed they would perform additional screening prior to upper cervical SM compared to other spinal regions. Respondents who were aware of clinical prediction rules were more likely to report being comfortable with SM (OR 2.38–3.69) and to perceive it as safe (OR 1.75–3.12). Finally, physiotherapists without musculoskeletal specialization, especially those with a traditional manual therapy background, were more likely to perform additional screening prior to SM, use SM less frequently, report being less comfortable performing SM, and report upper cervical SM as less safe (p < 0.001).DiscussionThe beliefs and attitudes of physiotherapists surrounding the use of SM are significantly different when comparing the upper cervical spine to other spinal regions. An educational background in traditional manual therapy significantly influences beliefs and attitudes. We propose an updated framework on evidence-based SM.

Angular Kinematics of Chiropractic Supine Cervical Spine Manipulation: Rotational Measures and Comparisons to Doctor and Recipient Perceptions

ObjectivesThe primary purposes of this study were to measure axial rotation during supine cervical spinal manipulative therapy (cSMT) and to record recipients’ and doctors’ perceptions of rotational magnitudes. MethodsExperienced doctors of chiropractic (DCs) provided supine cSMT and acted as recipients of cSMT. Participants who received SMT wore inertial measurement units attached to the forehead and sternum for motion capture. Afterward, recipients and DCs completed questionnaires asking about their perceptions of motion. Data were analyzed for magnitudes of axial rotation at peak thrust and correlations with patient and doctor perceptions. Secondary analyses included angular velocity, angular acceleration, and other kinematic variables. ResultsWe recorded 23 SMT events with 14 DCs. Rotation at thrust peaks averaged 32.4° (17.4°). Doctors’ and recipients’ perceptions of rotation were higher than measured values 45% and 50% of the time, respectively. Maximum angular velocity and acceleration averaged 221.9°/s (124.9) and 4786.5°/s2 (2456.6), respectively. We found no correlation between perceptions and velocity or acceleration; doctors’ perceptions had an inverse correlation with measurements. ConclusionOn average, we found rotation during supine cSMT to be 32°. Both DCs and SMT recipients overestimated rotation compared with actual measurements. These factors should be considered in discussions of rotation and SMT.

Concurrent Bell’s Palsy and Facial Pain Improving with Multimodal Chiropractic Therapy: A Case Report and Literature Review

Patient: Female, 52-year-old Final Diagnosis: Bell’s palsy • trigeminal neuropathy Symptoms: Facial pain • facial paresis • neck pain Medication: — Clinical Procedure: Cervical traction • exercises • soft tissue manipulation • spinal manipulation Specialty: Neurology • Rehabilitation • Traditional Medicine Objective: Rare coexistence of disease or pathology Background:Bell’s palsy, also called facial nerve palsy, occasionally co-occurs with trigeminal neuropathy, which presents as additional facial sensory symptoms and/or neck pain. Bell’s palsy has a proposed viral etiology, in particular when occurring after dental manipulation.Case Report:A 52-year-old Asian woman presented to a chiropractor with a 3-year history of constant neck pain and left-sided maxillary, eyebrow, and temporomandibular facial pain, paresis, and paresthesia, which began after using a toothpick, causing possible gum trauma. She had previously been treated with antiviral medication and prednisone, Chinese herbal medicine, and acupuncture, but her recovery plateaued at 60% after 1 year. The chiropractor ordered cervical spine magnetic resonance imaging, which demonstrated cervical spondylosis, with no evidence of myelopathy or major pathology. Treatment involved cervical and thoracic spinal manipulation, cervical traction, soft-tissue therapy, and neck exercises. The patient responded positively. At 1-month follow-up, face and neck pain and facial paresis were resolved aside from residual eyelid synkinesis. A literature review identified 12 additional cases in which chiropractic spinal manipulation with multimodal therapies was reported to improve Bell’s palsy. Including the current case, 85% of these patients also had pain in the face or neck.Conclusions:This case illustrates improvement of Bell’s palsy and concurrent trigeminal neuropathy with multimodal chiropractic care including spinal manipulation. Limited evidence from other similar cases suggests a role of the trigeminal pathway in these positive treatment responses of Bell’s palsy with concurrent face/neck pain. These findings should be explored with research designs accounting for the natural history of Bell’s palsy.

Immediate Effects of Cervical Spine Manipulation Compared With Muscle Energy Technique on Neck Muscle Activity and Range of Motion in Asymptomatic Participants: A Randomized Study

ObjectiveThe purpose of this study was to investigate the immediate effects of cervical spine manipulation (SM) compared with muscle energy technique (MET) on neck muscle activity and range of motion in asymptomatic people. MethodsA randomized parallel-group study was conducted at a chiropractic teaching clinic in Durban, South Africa. Fifty asymptomatic participants between 18 and 35 years of age were randomly assigned into group 1 or group 2. Group 1 received cervical SM, and group 2 received MET. Participants were blinded to group allocation only. Baseline and post-test measurements consisted of resting upper trapezius and posterior cervical muscle activity and cervical spine range of motion (ROM) in lateral flexion and extension. ResultsA significant difference was found in cervical ROM within groups (P < .001), with no significant difference observed between the 2 groups. The right posterior cervical muscles showed a significant difference in group 1 only (P = .012). No significant muscle activity changes occurred in group 2. Resting muscle activity measures showed no statistically significant changes between groups. ConclusionA single application of SM and MET to the cervical spine immediately increased cervical ROM. Neither cervical SM nor MET changed resting posterior cervical and upper trapezius muscle activity.

CAROTID ARTERY DISSECTION FOLLOWING CERVICAL SPINE MANIPULATION: AN ASSOCIATION OR CAUSATIVE RELATIONSHIP

TYPE: Late Breaking Case Report TOPIC: Cardiovascular Disease INTRODUCTION: Spinal manipulation is a hallmark practice of chiropractic providers and sometimes by physiotherapists, and osteopaths. It is a controversial and potentially dangerous procedure.1 Associations have been observed between chiropractic maneuvers and cervical artery dissection, although it remains difficult to prove causal relationship.2-4 We report a case of carotid artery dissection following chiropractic manipulation in a young male with no risk factors for carotid artery dissection. CASE PRESENTATION: This is a 40-year-old male with medical history of migraine headaches and cervicalgia, evaluated for a sudden onset of headache, associated with nausea, vomiting, blurred vision, and dizziness, two months after a chiropractic manipulation. He also reported rigorous exercise and sexual intercourse prior to the headache onset. Vital sign is significant for a 10/10, non-radiating right-sided headache. Neurological examination revealed right ptosis and miosis. Labs were unremarkable. CTA of neck showed tapering of the right ICA with near occlusion at the skull base. He was started on acetylsalicylic acid and clopidogrel, and subsequently discharged home to follow-up with Neurologist. Six-month follow-up revealed resolution of his symptoms and resolved right ICA dissection thrombosis. DISCUSSION: Spinal manipulation is commonly practiced by chiropractic and other providers. Even though it remains difficult to prove causal relationship between spinal manipulation and carotid artery dissection, several cases have been reported in the literature. Potential consequence of cervical artery dissection is stroke, which have increased morbidity and mortality.5 CONCLUSIONS: Our case highlights the dangers of chiropractic manipulation and provides a thorough review of the literature relating to chiropractic manipulation and carotid artery dissection. DISCLOSURE: Nothing to declare. KEYWORD: Cervical spine manipulation

Kinematics of the head and associated vertebral artery length changes during high-velocity, low-amplitude cervical spine manipulation

BackgroundCervical spine manipulation (CSM) is a frequently used treatment for neck pain. Despite its demonstrated efficacy, concerns regarding the potential of stretch damage to vertebral arteries (VA) during CSM remain. The purpose of this study was to quantify the angular displacements of the head relative to the sternum and the associated VA length changes during the thrust phase of CSM.MethodsRotation and lateral flexion CSM procedures were delivered bilaterally from C1 to C7 to three male cadaveric donors (Jan 2016–Dec 2019). For each CSM the force–time profile was recorded using a thin, flexible pressure pad (100–200 Hz), to determine the timing of the thrust. Three dimensional displacements of the head relative to the sternum were recorded using an eight-camera motion analysis system (120–240 Hz) and angular displacements of the head relative to the sternum were computed in Matlab. Positive kinematic values indicate flexion, left lateral flexion, and left rotation. Ipsilateral refers to the same side as the clinician's contact and contralateral, the opposite. Length changes of the VA were recorded using eight piezoelectric ultrasound crystals (260–557 Hz), inserted along the entire vessel. VA length changes were calculated as D = (L1 − L0)/L0, where L0 = length of the whole VA (sum of segmental lengths) or the V3 segment at CSM thrust onset; L1 = whole VA or V3 length at peak force during the CSM thrust.ResultsIrrespective of the type of CSM, the side or level of CSM application, angular displacements of the head and associated VA length changes during the thrust phase of CSM were small. VA length changes during the thrust phase were largest with ipsilateral rotation CSM (producing contralateral head rotation): [mean ± SD (range)] whole artery [1.3 ± 1.0 (− 0.4 to 3.3%)]; and V3 segment [2.6 ± 3.6 (− 0.4 to 11.6%)].ConclusionsMean head angular displacements and VA length changes were small during CSM thrusts. Of the four different CSM measured, mean VA length changes were largest during rotation procedures. This suggests that if clinicians wish to limit VA length changes during the thrust phase of CSM, consideration should be given to the type of CSM used.

The effectiveness of mobilization and manipulation on patients suffering from cervical spine injuries

Patients with neck pain undergoing cervical mobilization and manipulation were monitored for changes in ROM and pain. The cervical spine was manipulated and mobilized. An inclinometer was used to measure cervical range of motion. VAS was used to gauge the severity of the pain in the cervical region (VAS). A total of 35 patients agreed to participate. The participants' ages ranged from 15 to 70, with an average of 46.5 years. Neck pain and limited cervical range of motion were common symptoms among the participants in this study. We saw a decrease in pain intensity and an increase in cervical range of motion in our patients. All metrics had significant pre-treatment variations (p0.01 at the first, fourth, and tenth visits). Patients with neck pain may benefit from the use of cervical spine Mobilization and Manipulation procedures, according to the findings of this study.