Spinal Manipulation Techniques Research Articles

Beliefs and practice patterns of spinal thrust manipulation for mechanical low back pain of physical therapists in the state of Minnesota

ABSTRACT Introduction The primary purpose of this study was to examine the perceptions and utilization of spinal thrust manipulation (STM) techniques of physical therapists who treat patients with low back pain (LBP) in the State of Minnesota. A secondary purpose was to investigate differences between physical therapists who perform STM and those who do not. Methods A cross-sectional design was utilized through the completion of an electronic survey. 74 respondents completed the survey. Descriptive measures were recorded as frequencies for categorical data or mean ± standard deviation for continuous data. For between-group comparisons, chi-square analyses were used for categorical items of nominal or ordinal data and t-tests were utilized for continuous data. The alpha level was set at p < 0.05. Result 60.2% of respondents reported using STM when treating patients with LBP. 69.9% of respondents utilize a classification system. 76.7% of individuals answered correctly regarding the Minnesota State practice act. Of those who use STM, 81.8% utilize a Clinical Prediction Rule. Respondents who use STM were more likely to have a specialist certification (chi-square = 6.471, p = 0.011) and to have completed continuing education courses on manual therapy (chi-square = 4.736, p = 0.030). Discussion/Conclusions Physical therapists who perform STM are more likely to have a better understanding of their state practice act, be board certified, and have completed continuing education in manual therapy.

Creating and testing a questionnaire to predict immediate and strong positive responders to spinal manipulative therapy for non-specific low back pain. A pilot study

BackgroundMany chiropractors use spinal manipulative techniques (SMT) to treat spinal pain. A recent Delphi study posited 18 items across five domains as predictors of patients experiencing non-specific low back pain most likely to experience a strong and immediate positive response to SMT. We sought to create a ‘pen and paper’ questionnaire that would measure these items and then pilot its use in a clinical setting to determine its ‘usability’ for a larger study. Knowing this information would inform a more efficacious use of SMT.MethodOf the 18 items identified in the Delphi study, 13 were deemed historical in nature and readily provided by the chiropractor and patient. A literature search revealed reliable and valid measures for two more items. The remaining three items were generated by creating descriptive questions matched to an appropriate Likert scale. A panel of six chiropractors who had used SMT for at least 7 years when treating non-specific low back pain was formed to evaluate the items for clarity and relevance. Ten Western Australian chiropractors were then recruited to pilot the questionnaire on ten consecutive patients with non-specific low back pain where SMT was used from March to June 2020. Ethics approval was obtained from Murdoch University.ResultsCOVID-19 restrictions impacted on practitioner recruitment and delayed the data collection. Of the intended 100 participants, only 63 could be recruited over a 3-month period from seven chiropractors. Time constraints forced the closure of the data collection. The measures of all predictor items demonstrated ceiling effects. Feedback from open-ended practitioner questions was minimal, suggesting an ease of use.ConclusionThe length of time and level of participation required to collect the calculated sample size was inadequate and suggested that incentivization may be required for a larger investigation. Significant ceiling effects were found and suggested that participants did so because of a positive bias toward chiropractic care and the use of SMT. The questionnaires in this pilot study require alternative measures and further validation before use in a larger study.

Are YouTube videos claiming to describe lumbar spinal manipulation techniques adequate?

ABSTRACT Background and objective YouTube has become a digital visual library in almost all fields of life, including medicine. Healthcare professionals and students frequently use YouTube to gain new skills and knowledge; however, the content of these videos has not been scientifically evaluated. Therefore, this study aimed to determine the descriptive adequacy and quality of YouTube videos on lumbar spine manipulation techniques (LSMTs) prepared by different healthcare professionals. Methods The first 50 most relevant videos retrieved on searching YouTube for the keyword ‘lumbar spinal manipulation techniques’ were included in the study. The video metrics (total duration, number of views, time since upload, number of comments, number of likes, and number of dislikes) that could be accessed from video descriptions were recorded. However the videos were scored according to manipulation definition criteria proposed by the American Academy of Orthopedic Manual Physical Therapists (AAOMPT manipulation description score – AAOMPT-MDS) and benchmark criteria for quality of digital content by the Journal of American Medical Association’s (JAMA). The video metrics, AAOMPT-MDS and JAMA scores of the videos prepared by medical doctors, chiropractors, osteopaths, and physiotherapists were compared. Results Video metrics of groups were similar. The mean AAOMPT-MDS of the videos was 2.40 ± 1.57 out of 6.00 (higher score was better), and the mean JAMA score was 2.14 ± 1.05 out of 4.00 (higher score was better). Videos created by all professional groups had statistically comparable AAOMPT-MDS and JAMA scores (p > 0.05). Conclusion Although YouTube videos on LSMTs offer valuable information for professionals and students, creators should follow the proposed recommendations when producing these videos to ensure quality content and systematic presentation.

Efficacy of spinal manipulations and Schroth exercises on psychological parameters in patients with functional scoliosis: a randomised controlled trial

Functional scoliosis is defined as the reversible and temporary lateral spinal curvature that mainly occurs due to abnormal postural habits that leads to non-structural and compensatory changes in spine. Functional scoliosis can lead to the development of mental health issues, such as stress, anxiety and depression. The purpose of the present study was to evaluate the effects of spinal manipulation techniques and Schroth exercises on psychological parameters in patients with functional scoliosis. The subjects were randomly allocated into experimental (n=31) and control group (n=31). Spinal manipulation techniques and Schroth exercises were given to the patients of experimental group, while only Schroth exercises were given to the patients of control group. Outcome measures were Depression, Anxiety &amp; Stress Score that was examined by using ‘DASS-21 questionnaire’. Treatment was given for four weeks, thrice weekly. After the completion of four weeks, DASS scores were obtained from the participants. Patients were followed up after 2 months and data was collected again. Repeated measures ANOVA were used to compare the mean changes within-group. Independent t-test was used to analyse the mean improvement between-group. Results suggested that there was a statistically significant difference between pre-/post and pre-/follow-up scores of the DASS, but there was statistical non-significant difference between post-/follow-up scores of the DASS. Results also suggested that experimental group showed better improvement compared to the control group. This study concluded that the combine use of spinal manipulation techniques and Schroth exercise protocol can significantly reduce the psychosomatic symptoms in functional scoliosis. Clinical Trial Registry of India: CTRI/2020/02/023221

Spinal manipulation and adverse event reporting in the pregnant patient limits estimation of relative risk: a narrative review

ABSTRACT Objective To describe variability in spinal manipulation technique details and adverse event (AE) documentation of spinal manipulation during pregnancy. Methods Five databases were searched for peer-reviewed investigations of spinal manipulation during pregnancy. Criteria for inclusion was as follows: high velocity, low amplitude thrust manipulation performed, subjects pregnant during manipulation, and English language. Studies were excluded when participants were not currently pregnant, and when the manipulation performed was not high-velocity, low-amplitude thrust. Data extraction included study design, number of participants, gestational age, spinal region, number of manipulations, manipulation technique details, profession of manipulator, AE reporting (Yes vs. No), type, and number of AE. Results Out of 18 studies included in the review, only three provide details of the spinal manipulation technique. The reported variables include patient position, practitioner position, and direction of thrust. Fourteen studies documented AE; however, only seven provide AE details. Discussion Reporting of spinal manipulation techniques and AE during pregnancy were inconsistent. Replication of methods in future investigations is limited without more detailed documentation of manipulation techniques performed. Furthermore, determining the relative risk and safety of spinal manipulation during pregnancy is not possible without more detailed reporting of AE. Due to these inconsistencies, a checklist is proposed for standardized reporting of spinal manipulation techniques and AE. With more consistent reporting of these parameters, results of future investigations may allow for more definitive and generalizable safety recommendations on spinal manipulation during pregnancy.

Immediate effects of spinal manipulation on painful sensitivity and postural stability in patients with chronic nonspecific low back pain: study protocol for a controlled randomised clinical trial

BackgroundLow back pain is one of the main public health concerns. Chronic low back pain (cLBP) reduces functional capacity and affects postural stability. Although health professionals widely use spinal manipulation, its immediate effect on painful sensitivity and postural stability is lacking. This study aims to verify the immediate effects of lumbar spinal manipulation on the pressure pain threshold and postural stability in individuals with cLBP.MethodsA two-arm, placebo-controlled clinical trial with parallel groups and examiner-blinded will be conducted with 80 participants with cLBP from an outpatient physical therapy department, randomly allocated at a 1:1 distribution. The experimental group will receive a lumbar spinal manipulation technique, and the placebo group will receive a simulated lumbar spinal manipulation. Both groups will receive one session of treatment and will be evaluated before and immediately after the intervention. The primary outcomes will be the pressure pain threshold and postural stability. Pain intensity and patient’s expectation will be assessed as a secondary outcome. The pressure pain threshold will be assessed using a pressure algometer in 6 different anatomical regions. The evaluation of postural stability will be performed in a baropodometry exam by displacing the centre of pressure. The pain intensity will be measured using the Numeric Pain Rating Scale. A Likert scale will be used for the patient’s expectation about the treatment. A two-way analysis of variance will compare the effect of the interventions between groups.DiscussionThis study will provide insights regarding the immediate effects of spinal manipulation in patients with cLBP against a simulated spinal manipulation using objective outcomes and considering patients’ expectations regarding the treatment.Trial registrationBrazilian Registry of Clinical Trials RBR-3ksq2c. Registered on 13 July 2020

Влияние метода профессора Козявкина на функцию руки у детей с церебральным параличом

Актуальность. Нарушение функции руки является одним из факторов, которые больше всего ограничивают самообслуживание и выполнение повседневных действий пациентами с церебральным параличом (ЦП). В исследованиях последних лет продемонстрирована эффективность интенсивных многокомпонентных методов реабилитации для улучшения функции руки у детей с ЦП. Одним из таких методов является система интенсивной нейрофизиологической реабилитации, известная также как метод профессора Козявкина, — многокомпонентная система, объединяющая разносторонние вмешательства в один интенсивный курс. Целью этого исследования было оценить изменения функции руки у детей с ЦП после двухнедельного курса реабилитации по методу Козявкина. Материалы и методы. В исследовании принимали участие 32 пациента в возрасте 6–15 лет со спастическими формами ЦП (двустороннее поражение, I–III уровень по Системе классификации функции руки). Все пациенты проходили двухнедельный курс реабилитации по методу Козявкина. Лечение продолжалось до 5 часов в день и состояло из физической терапии, эрготерапии, биомеханической коррекции позвоночника, рефлексотерапии, мобилизации суставов, компьютерной игротерапии и других лечебных воздействий. Основным инструментом оценки был тест функции руки Джебсена — Тэйлора, а дополнительными — опросник ABILHAND-kids, тест «Кубики в коробке» и динамометрия кисти. Результаты. Статистически достоверное улучшение на 14,9 ± 38,0 секунды было обнаружено при выполнении теста Джебсена — Тэйлора для доминантной руки. Изменения теста «Кубики в коробке» также были статистически достоверными и составляли 2,0 ± 3,7 пункта для доминантной руки и 1,8 ± 2,8 пункта — для недоминантной. Сила руки не изменилась; увеличение оценки по опроснику ABILHAND-kids не было статистически достоверным. Выводы. После двухнедельного курса лечения по методу Козявкина у детей с церебральным параличом улучшились функции руки, в частности ловкость обеих рук и функционирование доминантной руки.

The Changes of Motor Control Strategies in Non-specific Chronic Low Back Pain During Spinal Manipulation and Muscle Energy Techniques: A Beta-band Intermuscular Pair-Wise Coherence Analysis

Background: Until now, a variety of techniques have been introduced to address the adverse effects of NS-CLBP, including spinal manipulation technique (SMT) and muscle energy technique (MET). However, most of these techniques have focused on pain assessment and disability. In other words, the intermuscular synchronization between the co-contracting muscles was not considered, and hence, the effectiveness of these techniques on the corticospinal tract function was not studied. Objectives: This study aimed to compare the effects of SMT and MET on corticospinal tract function during four phases of standing, flexion, relaxation, and extension in flexion-extension task (F-ET) in NS-CLBP using pair-wise coherence of Beta-band intermuscular coherence (Bb-IMC). Methods: Twenty volunteer healthy male subjects and twenty-four male subjects with NS-CLBP (20 - 45 years of age) participated in this work. The patients had continuous or recurrent symptoms for three months or more without any referral pain to the lower extremities. The patients were randomly assigned to two equal intervention groups (SMT and MET), and the techniques were applied as described by Greenman. Surface electromyography (sEMGs) from lumbopelvic muscles was recorded for all participants (i.e., healthy group and the patient groups), while they performed three trials of F-ET, and the pair-wise coherence for all muscles was calculated using Bb-IMC analysis. Besides, in the patient's groups, sEMGs from the muscles were recorded before and after the interventional techniques (i.e., SMT and MET), while they performed three trials of F-ET, and the pair-wise coherence was calculated. Multivariate analysis of variance test was used to compare the healthy subjects and patient groups before the interventions in A and B muscle cross at different phases of F-ET task. Furthermore, in the NS-CLBP patients, comparisons were made before and after the interventions in each group (i.e., SMT and MET groups) as well as between the two groups in A and B muscle cross at different phases of the F-ET task. Results: In the standing phase of F-ET, there were no significant differences in the SMT and MET group before and after the intervention in PWC of A muscle cross and B muscle cross (P &lt; 0.05). Considering the flexion phase, there were significant differences in the SMT group in all pair muscles as PWC (M1-M4), PWE (M1-M6), PWC (M4-M6) (P &lt; 0.05), whereas there was one significantly in PWC (M4-M6) in the MET group (P &lt; 0.05). In the relaxation phase, the SMT had significantly in PWC (M2-M5), whereas there was one significantly in PWC (M4-M6) in MET group (P &lt; 0.05). In the extension phase, although the SMT was not significant (P &lt; 0.05) in the MET intervention group, there were significant differences in the PWC (M2-M3) and PWC muscles (M2-M5). Conclusions: This study provided some pieces of evidence about the effects of one of the common manual therapy techniques on the primary motor cortex and corticospinal drive in the NS-CLBP patients. The results showed that, by increasing the pair-wise coherence in all phases of FE-T, SMT intervention was more effective than MET intervention. Therefore, the pair-wise coherence of Bb-IMC can be considered an approach for clinicians when designing the rehabilitation protocol to ensure optimal treatment.

Comparison of the effects of spinal manipulation and muscle energy techniques on motor control in Non- Specific Chronic Low Back Pain by Beta-band intermuscular pool coherence

Background: Until now, a variety of techniques have been introduced to address the adverse effects of NS-CLBP, including SMT and MET. However, most of these techniques have focused on pain assessment and disability. In other words, the effectiveness of these techniques on the corticospinal tract function was not studied. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to compare the effects of SMT and MET on corticospinal tract function during flexion-extension task phases in NS-CLBP using PC of Bb-IMC. Methods: A cross-sectional study was designed that in which 20 healthy and twenty-four (20–45 years) NS-CLBP patients men voluntarily participated. The patients had continuous or recurrent symptoms for 3 months or more without any referral pain to the lower extremities. The patients were randomly assigned to two equal intervention groups (SMT and MET) and the techniques were applied as described by Greenman. sEMGs from lumbopelvic muscles was recorded for all participants before and after the intervention while they performed three trials of F-ET and the PC for all muscles was calculated using Bb-IMC analysis. Multivariate analysis of variance test was used to compare the differences between the healthy subjects and patient groups before the interventions. Furthermore, in NS-CLBP patients, comparisons were made before and after the interventions in each group (i.e. SMT and MET groups). Results: There were significant differences in A and B muscle cross in the SMT group before and after the intervention in four phases of F-ET (P < 0.05). However, no significant differences were found in the MET group. Conclusion: These results showed that the SMT intervention was more effective than the MET intervention by reducing the PC of Bb-IMC in all phases of FE-T. Therefore, the PC of Bb-IMC could be considered as an approach for clinicians when designing the rehabilitation protocol to ensure optimal treatment.

Upper body postures effect on neuromuscular activities of the lower limb during a squat: musculoskeletal modeling

Spinal manipulative techniques are commonly used in manual therapies but quantified descriptive and reliability data are lacking considering supine thoracic thrust manipulation.The purpose of this study is to explore and compare kinetic parameters during supine thoracic thrust manipulation performed at two different thoracic regions. Intra-rater task repeatability and influence of practitioners were estimated.Exploratory and agreement study.Kinetic parameters were assessed by examining reaction force magnitude and orientation (on the basis of the zenithal angle) using force platforms. Manipulative procedure (consisting in the application of 3 preloads followed by one thrust adjustment) at both intervertebral and costovertebral region was performed by different practitioners at three sessions. Application of thrust was allowed for experienced practitioners only. Preload force, peak force magnitude and vector force orientation were compared between anatomical sites, sessions and practitioners, and bias with limit of agreement were estimated.Repeatability analysis showed that practitioners achieved similar preload and peak force independent of the session, with comparable force orientation. Differences between practitioners were observed for preload and peak force but not regarding the zenithal angle during the thrust phase.The present study is the first that explores kinetic parameters for supine thoracic thrust manipulation applied on two different regions of the thorax. Results confirm consistency of performance among practitioners for supine manipulative techniques at intervertebral and costovertebral region. While task repeatability was confirmed, several differences were observed between practitioners. Further investigations would examine velocity, acceleration and potential neurophysiological effect of such manipulative technique.

Short-term effects of spinal thrust joint manipulation on postural sway in patients with chronic mechanical neck pain: a randomized controlled trial

Purpose Our aim was to compare the efficacy of spinal manipulation of the upper cervical spine (C1-C2) on postural sway in patients with chronic mechanical neck pain with the application of a combination of cervical (C3-C4), cervicothoracic (C7-T1) and thoracic spine (T5-T6) thrust joint manipulation. Methods One hundred eighty-six (n = 186) individuals with chronic mechanical neck pain were randomised to receive an upper cervical spine manipulation (n = 93) or three different spinal manipulation techniques applied to the cervical spine, cervicothoracic joint and thoracic spine (n = 93). Measures included the assessment of stabilometric parameters using the Medicapteurs S-Plate platform. Secondarily, neck pain was analysed using the Numeric Pain Rating Scale. Results We observe a decrease in the length of the centre of pressure path, average speed, medio-lateral and antero-posterior displacement with statistically significant results (p < 0.05) in the upper cervical manipulation group. Both interventions are equally effective in reducing neck pain after fifteen days (p < 0.001). Conclusion The application of upper cervical thrust joint manipulation is more effective in improving stabilometric parameters in patients with chronic mechanical neck pain. Trial registration: The study was registered in the Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trial Registry (no. ACTRN12619000546156). Implications for rehabilitation Patients who suffer from neck pain exhibit increased postural sway than asymptomatic subjects. Both spinal manipulation treatments applied in this study are equally effective in reducing neck pain. Spinal manipulation treatment on the upper cervical spine improves postural stability parameters.

Manual therapy and its role in occupational health: Reducing absenteeism and presenteeism by treating chronic pain with spinal manipulation and mobilization in the workplace

IntroductionWork-related musculoskeletal disorders are one of the greatest causes of work absenteeism and an enormous economic burden for employers globally. Employees report they still go to work despite being in pain, leading to decreased productivity, potentially representing an even greater economic cost than absenteeism. The evidence in favour of occupational health services such as manual therapy, does not only serve as an early intervention but as a strong preventive opportunity for work-related musculoskeletal pain. This article discusses the potential benefits for businesses if they employed manual therapists. MethodsEvidence was sought on the prevalence of work-related musculoskeletal disorders to identify the efficacy of spinal manipulation and mobilization and techniques commonly employed by manual therapists to manage common musculoskeletal disorders. ResultsThe body of evidence itself was not at all extensive so this opinion article provides information needed to build a stronger argument for the use of health professionals trained in manual therapy for work environments with the broader goal of creating opportunities for further research to be developed on reducing absenteeism from musculoskeletal disorders. ConclusionsThe benefits of having these professionals intervening on-site, for employees and workers alike, are evident and could be a potentially provide a competitive advantage. Worker satisfaction and productivity is increased with manual therapy interventions at the workplace, while reducing the economic burden of absenteeism. Further research should be developed to explore the cost effectiveness of manual therapy in the on reducing absenteeism from musculoskeletal disorders in the workplace.

Comparing the range of musculoskeletal therapies applied by physical therapists with postgraduate qualifications in manual therapy in patients with non-specific neck pain with international guidelines and recommendations: An observational study

The aim of this study is to compare Dutch usual care musculoskeletal therapy in patients with non-specific neck pain with recommendations from international clinical practice guidelines. Physical therapy is diverse, as it may consist of exercise, massage, advice, and other modalities. Physical therapists with post graduate qualifications in manual therapy (MT) may additionally apply spinal thrust manipulation or non-thrust mobilization techniques to treat neck pain. It is important that, in the absence of a Dutch clinical guideline for the treatment of patients with neck pain, musculoskeletal therapists use the available recommendations from international clinical practice guidelines when treating patients with neck pain. One updated clinical practice guideline was identified (Blanpied, 2017), a report from the Task Force on Neck Pain (Guzman et al., 2008) and the IFOMPT International Framework for Examination of the Cervical Region for potential of Cervical Arterial Dysfunction prior to Orthopaedic Manual Therapy Intervention (Rushton et al., 2014). At baseline 1193 patients are included and data with regard to pain, disability, fear avoidance, expectations and applied treatment modalities are gathered. Outcome is measured using the Global Perceived Effect questionnaire. Results show that patients with acute neck pain are treated significantly more often with manipulation compared to patients with sub-acute or chronic neck pain (p < .000) and younger patients are treated with manipulation more often than older patients (p < .000). In the presence of comorbidity, the preference of spinal manipulation seems to diminish, in favour of mobilization and exercise. Almost every patient receives multimodal therapy (94.3%) and spinal manipulation and mobilization are rarely used as a stand-alone treatment (4.5% and 0.8%). Dutch musculoskeletal therapists choose treatment strategies that correspond with recommendations from international guidelines.

Manual therapy treatment for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis

BackgroundAdolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) is a common orthopedic condition with a prevalence of 2%–3% in children aged 10–16 years. Conservative interventions remain controversial and are usually based on physical therapy exercises and treatments. Manual therapy techniques may also serve as adequate treatments for AIS due to their ability to improve range of motion and decrease muscle tone and pain. ObjectiveTo critically assess the current literature on the effectiveness of manual therapy methods used to treat AIS. MethodsPubMed, PEDro, BioMed Central, and Google Scholar databases were searched from inception until December 2016 using keywords associated with scoliosis and manual therapy. Criteria for inclusion were studies investigating the effect of manual therapy methods on AIS treatment. We analyzed all published material with an emphasis on randomized controlled trials (RCT). Trials of any methodological quality written in English were included in the review. Major findingsFourteen papers were reviewed, all presenting manual therapy treatments such as manipulation, mobilization, and soft tissue techniques used to treat AIS. All case studies showed a significant improvement, post-treatment, in most measured parameters. Observational studies showed mixed results. Only one RCT concluded manual therapy techniques were ineffective in improving trunk morphology and spine flexibility in AIS patients. ConclusionCase reports and small-scale clinical trials of poor methodological quality presented in this review did not allow us to draw a clear conclusion about the effectiveness of manual therapy in the treatment of AIS. On the other hand, they provide us a basis to assume that manual therapy techniques such as myofascial release and spinal manipulative techniques may potentially be effective in treating AIS in conjunction with other conservative treatments. Further high-quality studies are essential to determine the effectiveness of the different manual therapy techniques.

Effects of spinal manipulation and myofascial techniques on heart rate variability: A systematic review

BackgroundThe analysis of heart rate variability is important to the investigation of stimuli from the autonomic nervous system. Osteopathy is a form of treatment that can influence this system in healthy individuals as well as those with a disorder or disease. ObjectivesThe aim of the present study was to perform a systematic review of the literature regarding the effect of spinal manipulation and myofascial techniques on heart rate variability. MethodsSearches were performed of the Pubmed, Scielo, Lilacs, PEDro, Ibesco, Cochrane and Scopus databases for relevant studies. The PEDro scale was used to assess the methodological quality of each study selected. ResultsA total of 505 articles were retrieved during the initial search. After an analysis of the abstracts, nine studies were selected for the present review. ConclusionBased on the findings, osteopathy exerts an influence on the autonomic nervous system depending on the stimulation site and type. A greater parasympathetic response was found when stimulation was performed in the cervical and lumbar regions, whereas a greater sympathetic response was found when stimulation was performed in the thoracic region.

Patient-Induced Reaction Forces and Moments Are Influenced by Variations in Spinal Manipulative Technique.

An in vivo biomechanical study. The aim of the present study was to quantify and compare the reaction loads for two spinal manipulation therapy (SMT) procedures commonly used for low back pain using a biomechanical computer model. Contemporary computer-driven rigid linked-segment models (LSMs) have made it feasible to analyze low back kinetics and kinematics during various activities including SMT procedures. Currently, a comprehensive biomechanical model analyzing actual differences in loading effects between different SMT procedures is lacking. Twenty-four healthy/asymptomatic participants received a total of six SMT applications, representing all combinations of two similar SMT procedures within three patient hip flexion angles. All contact forces, patient torso kinematics, and inertial properties were entered into a dynamic three-dimensional LSM to calculate lumbar reaction forces and moments. Peak net applied force along with the maximums, minimums, and ranges for each component of the three-dimensional reaction force and moment vectors during each SMT procedure was analyzed. One specific SMT technique (lumbar spinous pull) produced greater maximum anterior-posterior reaction force and both lateral bending and axial twisting reaction moments compared to the other technique (lumbar push procedure [all P ≤ 0.034]). SMT trials without hip flexion had lower maximum medial-lateral reaction force and range compared to those with 45 and 90 degrees of hip flexion (all P ≤ 0.041). There were no interactions between procedure and hip angle for any of the dependent measurements. The technique used to apply SMT and the participant's initial hip orientation induced significantly different actions on the low back. These findings and future research can improve patient outcomes and safety by informing clinicians on how to best use SMT given specific types of low back pain. 2.

Peyton's four-step approach for teaching complex spinal manipulation techniques - a prospective randomized trial.

BackgroundThe objectives of this prospective randomized trial were to assess the impact of Peyton’s four-step approach on the acquisition of complex psychomotor skills and to examine the influence of gender on learning outcomes.MethodsWe randomly assigned 95 third to fifth year medical students to an intervention group which received instructions according to Peyton (PG) or a control group, which received conventional teaching (CG). Both groups attended four sessions on the principles of manual therapy and specific manipulative and diagnostic techniques for the spine. We assessed differences in theoretical knowledge (multiple choice (MC) exam) and practical skills (Objective Structured Practical Examination (OSPE)) with respect to type of intervention and gender. Participants took a second OSPE 6 months after completion of the course.ResultsThere were no differences between groups with respect to the MC exam. Students in the PG group scored significantly higher in the OSPE. Gender had no additional impact. Results of the second OSPE showed a significant decline in competency regardless of gender and type of intervention.ConclusionsPeyton’s approach is superior to standard instruction for teaching complex spinal manipulation skills regardless of gender. Skills retention was equally low for both techniques.

Short-term effectiveness of spinal manipulative therapy versus functional technique in patients with chronic nonspecific low back pain: a pragmatic randomized controlled trial

Background ContextChronic low back pain (LBP) is a prevalent condition associated with pain, disability, decreased quality of life, and fear of movement. To date, no studies have compared the effectiveness of spinal manipulation and functional technique for the management of this population. PurposeThis study aimed to compare the effectiveness of spinal manipulation and functional technique on pain, disability, kinesiophobia, and quality of life in patients with chronic LBP. Study Design/SettingA single-blind pragmatic randomized controlled trial conducted in a university research clinic was carried out. Patient SampleSixty-two patients (62% female, age: 45±7) with chronic LBP comprised the patient sample. Outcome MeasuresData on disability (Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire [RMQ], Oswestry Low Back Pain Disability Index [ODI]), pain intensity (Numerical Pain Rate Scale [NPRS]), fear of movement (Tampa Scale of Kinesiophobia [TSK]), quality of life (Short Form-36 [SF-36] quality of life questionnaire), isometric resistance of abdominal muscles (McQuade test), and spinal mobility in flexion (finger-to-floor distance) were collected at baseline immediately after the intervention phase and at 1 month postintervention by an assessor blinded to group allocation of the patients. MethodsPatients were randomly assigned to the spinal manipulative therapy group or the functional technique group and received three once-weekly sessions. ResultsIn comparison to patients receiving functional technique, those receiving spinal manipulation experienced statistically, although not clinically, significant greater reductions in terms of RMQ (standardized mean difference in score changes between groups at post-treatment: 0.1; at 1 month: 0.1) and ODI (post-treatment: 2.9; at 1 month: 1.4). Linear longitudinal analysis showed a significant improvement in both groups over time for RMQ (manipulative: F=68.51, p<.001; functional: F=28.58, p<.001) and ODI (manipulative: F=104.66, p<.001; functional: F=32.15, p=.001). However, significant treatment-by-time interactions were not detected for pain intensity (p=.488), TSK (p=.552), any domains of the SF-36 quality of life questionnaire (p≤.164), McQuade test (p=.512), and finger-to-floor distance (p=.194). Differences between and within groups were not clinically meaningful in any of the reported measures. ConclusionsIn comparison to functional technique, spinal manipulative therapy showed greater reduction in disability in patients with chronic LBP, but not in terms of pain, fear of movement, quality of life, isometric resistance of trunk flexors, or spinal mobility. However, differences in disability were not clinically meaningful; therefore, spinal manipulative therapy did not result in any clinically important short-term benefits over functional technique therapy. In addition, as neither group met the threshold for minimum clinically important difference following treatment, neither treatment resulted in a clinically meaningful benefit.

Chiropractic treatment approaches for spinal musculoskeletal conditions: a cross-sectional survey.

BackgroundThere are several chiropractic spinal manipulative technique systems. However, there is limited research differentiating the efficacy of these techniques. Additionally, chiropractors may also use ancillary procedures in the treatment of musculoskeletal pain, a variable that also needs to be considered when measuring the efficacy of chiropractic therapy. No data is currently available regarding the frequency of usage of chiropractic technique systems or ancillary procedures for the treatment of specific musculoskeletal conditions. Knowing which technique systems and ancillary procedures are used most frequently may help to direct future research. The aim of this research was to provide insight into which treatment approaches are used most frequently by Australian chiropractors to treat spinal musculoskeletal conditions.MethodsCross-sectional survey design. The survey was sent online to the members of the two main Australian chiropractic associations between 30th June 2013 and 7th August 2013. The participants were asked to provide information on treatment choices for specific spinal musculoskeletal conditions.Results280 respondents. Diversified manipulative technique was the first choice of treatment for most of the included conditions. Diversified was used significantly less in 4 conditions; cervical disc syndrome with radiculopathy and cervical central stenosis were more likely to be treated with Activator; flexion distraction technique was used almost as much as Diversified in the treatment of lumbar disc syndrome with radiculopathy and lumbar central stenosis. More experienced Australian chiropractors use more Activator and soft tissue therapy and less Diversified technique compared to their less experienced peers. The majority of responding chiropractors used ancillary procedures such as soft tissue techniques and exercise prescription in the treatment of spinal musculoskeletal conditions.ConclusionThis survey provides information on commonly used treatment choices to the chiropractic profession. Treatment choices changed based on the region of disorder and whether neurological symptoms were present rather than with specific diagnoses. Diversified technique was the most commonly used spinal manipulative therapy, however, ancillary procedures such as soft tissue techniques and exercise prescription were also commonly utilised. This information may help direct future studies into the efficacy of chiropractic treatment for spinal musculoskeletal disorders.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12998-014-0033-8) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Cost-Effectiveness of Manual Therapy for the Management of Musculoskeletal Conditions: A Systematic Review and Narrative Synthesis of Evidence From Randomized Controlled Trials

ObjectivesThe purpose of this study was to systematically review trial-based economic evaluations of manual therapy relative to other alternative interventions used for the management of musculoskeletal conditions. MethodsA comprehensive literature search was undertaken in major medical, health-related, science and health economic electronic databases. ResultsTwenty-five publications were included (11 trial-based economic evaluations). The studies compared cost-effectiveness and/or cost-utility of manual therapy interventions to other treatment alternatives in reducing pain (spinal, shoulder, ankle). Manual therapy techniques (eg, osteopathic spinal manipulation, physiotherapy manipulation and mobilization techniques, and chiropractic manipulation with or without other treatments) were more cost-effective than usual general practitioner (GP) care alone or with exercise, spinal stabilization, GP advice, advice to remain active, or brief pain management for improving low back and shoulder pain/disability. Chiropractic manipulation was found to be less costly and more effective than alternative treatment compared with either physiotherapy or GP care in improving neck pain. ConclusionsPreliminary evidence from this review shows some economic advantage of manual therapy relative to other interventions used for the management of musculoskeletal conditions, indicating that some manual therapy techniques may be more cost-effective than usual GP care, spinal stabilization, GP advice, advice to remain active, or brief pain management for improving low back and shoulder pain/disability. However, at present, there is a paucity of evidence on the cost-effectiveness and/or cost-utility evaluations for manual therapy interventions. Further improvements in the methodological conduct and reporting quality of economic evaluations of manual therapy are warranted in order to facilitate adequate evidence-based decisions among policy makers, health care practitioners, and patients.