Pressures Generated During Spinal Manipulation and Their Association With Hand Anatomy (original) (raw)
Related papers
Review of methods used by chiropractors to determine the site for applying manipulation
Chiropractic & Manual Therapies, 2013
Background: With the development of increasing evidence for the use of manipulation in the management of musculoskeletal conditions, there is growing interest in identifying the appropriate indications for care. Recently, attempts have been made to develop clinical prediction rules, however the validity of these clinical prediction rules remains unclear and their impact on care delivery has yet to be established. The current study was designed to evaluate the literature on the validity and reliability of the more common methods used by doctors of chiropractic to inform the choice of the site at which to apply spinal manipulation. Methods: Structured searches were conducted in Medline, PubMed, CINAHL and ICL, supported by hand searches of archives, to identify studies of the diagnostic reliability and validity of common methods used to identify the site of treatment application. To be included, studies were to present original data from studies of human subjects and be designed to address the region or location of care delivery. Only English language manuscripts from peer-reviewed journals were included. The quality of evidence was ranked using QUADAS for validity and QAREL for reliability, as appropriate. Data were extracted and synthesized, and were evaluated in terms of strength of evidence and the degree to which the evidence was favourable for clinical use of the method under investigation.
Effects of biomechanical parameters of spinal manipulation: A critical literature review
Journal of Integrative Medicine, 2022
Spinal manipulation is a manual treatment technique that delivers a thrust, using specific biomechanical parameters to exert its therapeutic effects. These parameters have been shown to have a unique dose-response relationship with the physiological responses of the therapy. So far, however, there has not been a unified approach to standardize these biomechanical characteristics. In fact, it is still undetermined how they affect the observed clinical outcomes of spinal manipulation. This study, therefore, reviewed the current body of literature to explore these dosage parameters and evaluate their significance, with respect to physiological and clinical outcomes. From the experimental studies reviewed herein, it is evident that the modulation of manipulation's biomechanical parameters elicits transient physiological responses, including changes in neuronal activity, electromyographic responses, spinal stiffness, muscle spindle responses, paraspinal muscle activity, vertebral displacement, and segmental and intersegmental acceleration responses. However, to date, there have been few clinical trials that tested the therapeutic relevance of these changes. In addition, there were some inherent limitations in both human and animal models due to the use of mechanical devices to apply the thrust. Future studies evaluating the effects of varying biomechanical parameters of spinal manipulation should include clinicians to deliver the therapy in order to explore the true clinical significance of the dose-response relationship.
Risks associated with spinal manipulation
The American Journal of Medicine, 2002
To summarise the evidence about the risks of spinal manipulation. Searching MEDLINE (via PubMed), EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library were searched in November 2001 (start dates not given) for articles in any language. The search terms used were 'adverse effects', 'adverse events', 'chiropractic', 'complications', 'manual therapy', 'osteopathy', 'risk', 'safety', 'spinal manipulation', 'stroke', and 'vascular accident'. Reference lists and the authors' own files were handsearched, and other experts (n=9) were consulted. Study selection Study designs of evaluations included in the review Any report containing data about the risks associated with spinal manipulation was included. Recent systematic reviews were used as the basis of the article. Specific interventions included in the review The specific intervention was spinal manipulation. Participants included in the review Patients of all ages who were receiving spinal manipulation were included. Outcomes assessed in the review The nature and incidence of adverse events was assessed. How were decisions on the relevance of primary studies made? The authors do not state how the papers were selected for the review, or how many of the reviewers performed the selection. How were differences between studies investigated? The authors do not report a method for investigating heterogeneity between the studies. Results of the review Systematic reviews (1), comprehensive reviews (2), case-control studies (1), case reports and case series (27), and
For centuries, techniques used to manipulate joints in the spine have been passed down from one generation of manipulators to the next. Today, spinal manipulation is in the curious position that positive clinical effects have now been demonstrated, yet the theoretical base underpinning every aspect of its use is still underdeveloped. An important question is posed in this masterclass: why do spinal manipulation techniques take the form they do? From the available literature, two factors appear to provide an answer: 1. Action of a force upon vertebrae. Any 'direct' spinal manipulation technique requires that the patient be orientated in such a way that force is applied perpendicular to the overlying skin surface so as to act upon the vertebrae beneath. If the vertebral motion produced by 'directly' applied force is insufficient to produce the desired effect (e.g. cavitation), then force must be applied 'indirectly', often through remote body segments such as the head, thorax, abdomen, pelvis, and extremities. 2. Spinal segment morphology. A new hypothesis is presented. Spinal manipulation techniques exploit the morphology of vertebrae by inducing rotation at a spinal segment, about an axis that is always parallel to the articular surfaces of the constituent zygapophysial joints. In doing so, the articular surfaces of one zygapophysial joint appose to the point of contact, resulting in migration of the axis of rotation towards these contacting surfaces, and in turn this facilitates gapping of the other (target) zygapophysial joint. Other variations in the form of spinal manipulation techniques are likely to depend upon the personal style and individual choices of the practitioner.
Chiropractic & Manual Therapies, 2014
Background: Patients with low back pain often seek chiropractic care and more than ninety percent of Chiropractors use lumbar side posture manipulation for the treatment of low back pain. During this procedure chiropractors deliver forces by means of hand contact on the patient in a side lying position. The objective of this pilot study was to report on the three-dimensional forces at the hand contact between the chiropractor and the simulated patient (asymptomatic volunteers) during side posture lumbar high velocity low amplitude adjustments. Methods: In 2005, two licensed chiropractors delivered spinal manipulations to the lumbar spines of the participants. A three-dimensional force transducer (Model # Mini-45, ATI-Industrial Automation, Apex, North Carolina) was used to measure the three-dimensional loads. The force-time histories were analyzed for preloads, peak loads, duration of thrusts to peak load, duration of thrust for completion, rate of loading, and magnitudes of the three forces and the resultant total force delivered by the chiropractor. Results: The two chiropractors delivered a total of 14 thrusts to the five asymptomatic volunteers. Normal force (Fz) is the dominating force, followed by inferior-superior force (Fx). The lateral force (Fy) occurred in both directions. Conclusions: This study reports on the three dimensional load (three forces and the total resultant force) characteristics of chiropractor-patient hand contact while delivering a chiropractic high velocity low amplitude (HVLA) manipulation in a side lying position.
Journal of Manipulative and Physiological Therapeutics, 2007
Purpose: High volumes of manual therapy work can lead to overuse hand and wrist injuries. This study evaluated hand and back comfort in asymptomatic volunteers during spinal mobilization carried out with an instrumented manual therapy tool. Methods: This crossover design study examined 36 asymptomatic physiotherapy students that were tested in pairs. One participant assumed the role of the simulated therapist and the other the simulated patient, before reversing roles. Posteroanterior mobilization conditions formed by using 2 spinal segments (thoracic/ lumbar), 2 force application methods (hands/device), and 3 grades of mobilization were applied in a random order. After each combination, both participants in each pair rated hand or back comfort, respectively, on a 100-mm visual analogue scale. Data were analyzed by analysis of variance. Results: Rated back comfort was greater for hands than for the device and decreased with greater applied force. When the original hard rubber device tip was changed to one of soft molded rubber, both back and hand comfort improved significantly. Although tool mobilization was still rated as significantly less comfortable than mobilization with hands only, this difference was approximately half the discomfort experienced as the grade of mobilization increased from grade I to grade III. For hand comfort when using the softer device tip, the method of force application was no longer a significant determinant of comfort. Conclusions: The mobilizing tool with a molded rubber tip was acceptably comfortable in use with asymptomatic backs and hands. Further research is indicated in manual therapy settings with therapists who have experienced hand pain.
A replication of the study 'Adverse effects of spinal manipulation: a systematic review
Chiropractic & manual therapies, 2012
To assess the significance of adverse events after spinal manipulation therapy (SMT) by replicating and critically reviewing a paper commonly cited when reviewing adverse events of SMT as reported by Ernst (J Roy Soc Med 100:330-338, 2007). Replication of a 2007 Ernst paper to compare the details recorded in this paper to the original source material. Specific items that were assessed included the time lapse between treatment and the adverse event, and the recording of other significant risk factors such as diabetes, hyperhomocysteinemia, use of oral contraceptive pill, any history of hypertension, atherosclerosis and migraine. The review of the 32 papers discussed by Ernst found numerous errors or inconsistencies from the original case reports and case series. These errors included alteration of the age or sex of the patient, and omission or misrepresentation of the long term response of the patient to the adverse event. Other errors included incorrectly assigning spinal manipulati...
Scientific reports, 2016
Spinal manipulative therapy (SMT) creates health benefits for some while for others, no benefit or even adverse events. Understanding these differential responses is important to optimize patient care and safety. Toward this, characterizing how loads created by SMT relate to those created by typical motions is fundamental. Using robotic testing, it is now possible to make these comparisons to determine if SMT generates unique loading scenarios. In 12 porcine cadavers, SMT and passive motions were applied to the L3/L4 segment and the resulting kinematics tracked. The L3/L4 segment was removed, mounted in a parallel robot and kinematics of SMT and passive movements replayed robotically. The resulting forces experienced by L3/L4 were collected. Overall, SMT created both significantly greater and smaller loads compared to passive motions, with SMT generating greater anterioposterior peak force (the direction of force application) compared to all passive motions. In some comparisons, SMT...
The basis for spinal manipulation: Chiropractic perspective of indications and theory
It is reasonable to think that patients responding to spinal manipulation (SM), a mechanically based therapy, would have mechanical derangement of the spine as a critical causal component in the mechanism of their condition. Consequently, SM practitioners routinely assess intervertebral motion, and treat patients on the basis of those assessments.