Assessing forces during spinal manipulation and mobilization: factors influencing the difference between forces at the patient-table and clinician-patient interfaces.

BACKGROUND: Spinal manipulative therapy (SMT) and mobilization (MOB) effects are believed to be related to their force characteristics. Most previous studies have either measured the force at the patient-table interface or at the clinician-patient interface. The objectives of this study were to determine 1) the difference between the force measured at the patient-table interface and the force applied at the clinician-patient interface during thoracic SMT and MOB, and 2) the influence of the SMT/MOB characteristics, participants' anthropometry and muscle activity (sEMG) on this difference. METHODS: An apparatus using a servo-linear motor executed 8 SMT/MOB at the T7 vertebrae in 34 healthy adults between May and June 2019. SMT and MOB were characterized by a 20 N preload, total peak forces of 100 N or 200 N, and thrust durations of 100 ms, 250 ms, 1 s or 2 s. During each trial, thoracic sEMG, apparatus displacement as well as forces at the patient-table interface and the clinician-patient interface were recorded. The difference between the force at both interfaces was calculated. The effect of SMT/MOB characteristics on the difference between forces at both interfaces and correlations between this difference and potential influencing factors were evaluated. RESULTS: Force magnitudes at the patient-table interface were, in most trials, greater than the force at the clinician-patient interface (up to 135 N). SMT/MOB characteristics (total peak force, thrust duration and rate of force application) affected the difference between forces at both interfaces (all p-values< 0.05). No factor showed significant correlations with the difference between forces at both interfaces for the 8 SMT/MOB. CONCLUSIONS: The results revealed that the force measured at the patient-table interface is greater than the applied force at the clinician-patient interface during thoracic SMT and MOB. By which mechanism the force is amplified is not yet fully understood.

The bench-top accuracy of the VerteTrack spinal stiffness assessment device.

BACKGROUND: The assessment of spinal stiffness by manual palpation in clinical settings has demonstrated both poor accuracy and reliability. More recently, mechanical methods for assessment of spinal stiffness have demonstrated superior accuracy and reliability. However, mechanical methods of spinal stiffness assessment can be expensive, time consuming and/or unsuited to clinical practice. While a new device has been designed to address these issues (VerteTrack), its benchtop performance remains unknown. AIM: To measure the bench-top performance of VerteTrack. METHODS: A series of laboratory-based experiments were conducted in February 2018 to investigate the accuracy (precision and bias) of load and displacement measurements obtained by VerteTrack and then were compared against an appropriate reference standard. Measurements of both multiple-level continuous assessment (multiple spinal levels measured), and single-level assessment (single spinal level measured) were performed on a viscoelastic foam medium (AIREX® balance beam, Switzerland) and the resulting stiffness calculated. RESULTS: VerteTrack demonstrated high precision at all loads and displacements. There was minimal systematic measurement bias identified for applied versus reference load (mean bias = - 0.123 N; 95%CI - 0.182 to 0.428 N, p < .001), and no systematic measurement bias for measured versus reference displacement (mean difference = 0.02 mm; 95%CI - 0.09 to 0.14 mm, p < .001). The magnitude of stiffness obtained during multiple-level continuous assessment was on average 0.25 N/mm (2.79%) less than that for single-level assessment (95%CI - 0.67 to 0.17 N/mm, p < .001). CONCLUSIONS: VerteTrack demonstrated high accuracy (high precision, low bias) under bench-top conditions. The difference in stiffness found between multiple versus single spinal levels should be considered in the research context, but is unlikely to be clinically relevant. The results of this study demonstrate that VerteTrack may be suitable for both single and multi-level spinal stiffness measurements in-vivo.

Serial Casting in Neuromuscular and Syndromic Early-onset Scoliosis (EOS) Can Delay Surgery Over 2 Years.

BACKGROUND: The primary goal in managing early-onset scoliosis (EOS) is delaying/preventing surgical intervention while allowing improved spinal growth and chest wall and lung development to improve life expectancy. The effectiveness of serial casting for patients with neuromuscular and syndromic EOS is unclear. METHODS: Patients from 2 multicenter registries who underwent serial casting for nonidiopathic scoliosis (NIS) were reviewed retrospectively. Comparisons were made between precasting and postcasting major and compensatory curves and spine height. The need for surgical intervention and any treatment complications were documented. Risk factors for major curve progression from baseline to casting cessation were evaluated via univariate analysis. RESULTS: Forty-four patients (23 females; 21 males) with NIS (26 syndromic, 18 neuromuscular) and a mean age of 3.2 years at baseline were included. Mean follow-up and casting duration was 3.9 and 2.0 years, respectively. There were no statistically significant differences between mean precasting and postcasting major curve (55 vs. 60 degrees; P=0.348), minor curve (31 vs. 33 degrees; P=0.510), or rib-vertebra angle difference (18 vs. 29 degrees; P=0.840). However, thoracic height (15.5 vs. 16.8 cm; P=0.031) and lumbar height (8.9 vs. 9.8 cm; P=0.013) were significantly greater upon casting cessation. Currently, 13 patients (30%) have had successful casting (improvement of major curve ≥10 degrees) while 24 patients (55%) experienced major curve progression (worsening), and 19 patients (43%) required surgical intervention. Mean time from first casting to surgery was 34.5±15.1 months. There were no statistically significant predictors for major curve progression on univariate analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Spinal deformity progression despite casting and the subsequent need for surgical intervention for NIS were significantly higher compared with those reported for idiopathic EOS. However, serial casting did afford a substantial delay in surgical intervention. Ultimately, serial casting for neuromuscular or syndromic EOS is an effective strategy for delaying surgical intervention, despite suboptimal radiographic outcomes. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III.

Clinicians' Ability to Detect a Palpable Difference in Spinal Stiffness Compared With a Mechanical Device.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to quantify the threshold at which clinicians can detect a difference in spinal stiffness of the thoracic and lumbar spine via palpation and then determine if this detection threshold would affect a clinician's ability to identify changes in spinal stiffness as measured by an objective instrument. METHODS: In this study, the threshold at which a change in spinal stiffness was detected was quantified in 12 experienced clinicians (physical therapists and doctors of chiropractic) by changing the differential stiffness in 2 inflatable targets until the clinician could no longer identify which was stiffer. In the second part of the study, clinicians then were asked to palpate pre-identified pairs of vertebrae in an asymptomatic volunteer and to identify the stiffer of the pair (T7 and L3, T7 and L4, L3 and L4), and the biomechanical stiffness of each vertebral pair was quantified objectively by a validated instrument. RESULTS: The mean stiffness detection threshold for the clinicians was 8%. Objective measurement of the stiffness differential between vertebral pairs was 30% for T7* and L3, 20% for T7* and L4, and 10% for L3* and L4 (*denotes the stiffer of the pair). Ten of 12 clinicians correctly identified T7 as stiffer when compared with L3 and T7 as stiffer than L4. Alternatively, when the differential vertebral pair stiffness was similar to the stiffness detection threshold (~8%), clinicians were less successful in identifying the stiffer vertebra of the pair; 4 of 12 clinicians correctly identified L3 as being stiffer compared with L4. CONCLUSION: These results suggest that the physiological limits of human palpation may limit the ability of clinicians to identify small alterations in spine stiffness.

Effects of spinal manipulative therapy biomechanical parameters on clinical and biomechanical outcomes of participants with chronic thoracic pain: a randomized controlled experimental trial.

BACKGROUND: Spinal manipulative therapy (SMT) includes biomechanical parameters that vary between clinicians, but for which the influence on the therapy clinical effects is unknown. This parallel-randomized controlled trial aimed to investigate the effect of SMT biomechanical parameters on the outcomes of participants with chronic thoracic pain (CTP) following three treatment sessions (follow-up at one week). METHODS: Adults reporting CTP (pain within the evaluated region [T6 to T8] for ≥3 months) were asked to participate in a four-session trial. At the first session, participants were randomly assigned to one of three experimental groups (different SMT doses) or the control group (no SMT). During the first three sessions, one SMT was executed at T7 for the experimental groups, while a 5-min rest was provided to the control group. SMT were delivered through an apparatus using a servo-controlled linear actuator motor and doses consisted of peak forces, impulse durations, and rates of force application set at 135 N, 125 ms and 920 N/s (group 1), at 250 N, 125 ms and 1840 N/s (group 2), and at 250 N, 250 ms, 920 N/s (group 3). Disability and pain intensity were evaluated at each session (primary outcomes). Spinal stiffness was assessed before-and-after each SMT/rest and at follow-up. Tenderness and muscle activity were evaluated during each spinal stiffness trial. Improvement was evaluated at follow-up. Differences in outcomes between groups and sessions were evaluated as well as factors associated with clinical improvement. RESULTS: Eighty-one participants were recruited and 17, 20, 20 participants of the three experimental groups and 18 of the control group completed the protocol. In exception of higher pain intensity at baseline in the control group, no between-group differences were found for any of the outcomes. A decrease in pain intensity, disability, spinal stiffness, and tenderness during spinal stiffness were observed (p-values< 0.05). At follow-up, 24% of participants were classified as 'improved'. Predictors of improvement were a greater decrease in pain intensity and in tenderness (p-values< 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: In an experimental setting, the delivery of a SMT does not lead to significantly different outcomes in participants with CTP than a control condition (spinal stiffness assessment). Studies are still required to explore the mechanisms underlying SMT effects. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03063177 , registered 24 February 2017).

Chiropractic treatment including instrument-assisted manipulation for non-specific dizziness and neck pain in community-dwelling older people: a feasibility randomised sham-controlled trial.

Background: Dizziness in older people is a risk factor for falls. Neck pain is associated with dizziness and responds favourably to neck manipulation. However, it is unknown if chiropractic intervention including instrument-assisted manipulation of the neck in older people with neck pain can also improve dizziness. Methods: This parallel two-arm pilot trial was conducted in Melbourne, Australia over nine months (October 2015 to June 2016). Participants aged 65-85 years, with self-reported chronic neck pain and dizziness, were recruited from the general public through advertisements in local community newspapers and via Facebook. Participants were randomised using a permuted block method to one of two groups: 1) Activator II™-instrument-assisted cervical and thoracic spine manipulation plus a combination of: light massage; mobilisation; range of motion exercises; and home advice about the application of heat, or 2) Sham-Activator II™-instrument-assisted manipulation (set to zero impulse) plus gentle touch of cervical and thoracic spinal regions. Participants were blinded to group allocation. The interventions were delivered weekly for four weeks. Assessments were conducted one week pre- and post-intervention. Clinical outcomes were assessed blindly and included: dizziness (dizziness handicap inventory [DHI]); neck pain (neck disability index [NDI]); self-reported concerns of falling; mood; physical function; and treatment satisfaction. Feasibility outcomes included recruitment rates, compliance with intervention and outcome assessment, study location, success of blinding, costs and harms. Results: Out of 162 enquiries, 24 participants were screened as eligible and randomised to either the chiropractic (n = 13) or sham (n = 11) intervention group. Compliance was satisfactory with only two participants lost to follow up; thus, post-intervention data for 12 chiropractic intervention and 10 sham intervention participants were analysed. Blinding was similar between groups. Mild harms of increased spinal pain or headaches were reported by 6 participants. Costs amounted to AUD$2635 per participant. The data showed a trend favouring the chiropractic group in terms of clinically-significant improvements in both NDI and DHI scores. Sample sizes of n = 150 or n = 222 for dizziness or neck pain disability as the primary outcome measure, respectively, would be needed for a fully powered trial. Conclusions: Recruitment of participants in this setting was difficult and expensive. However, a larger trial may be feasible at a specialised dizziness clinic within a rehabilitation setting. Compliance was acceptable and the outcome measures used were well accepted and responsive. Trial registration: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR) ACTRN12613000653763. Registered 13 June 2013.Trial funding: Foundation for Chiropractic Research and Postgraduate Education (Denmark).

The development and evaluation of a novel repurposing of a peripheral gaming device for the acquisition of forces applied to a hydraulic treatment plinth.

This technical note details the stages taken to create an instrumented hydraulic treatment plinth for the measurement of applied forces in the vertical axis. The modification used a widely available low-cost peripheral gaming device and required only basic construction and computer skills. The instrumented treatment plinth was validated against a laboratory grade force platform across a range of applied masses from 0.5-15 kg, mock Gr I-IV vertebral mobilisations and a dynamic response test. Intraclass correlation coefficients demonstrated poor reliability (0.46) for low masses of 0.5 kg improving to excellent for larger masses up to15 kg respectively; excellent to good reliability (0.97-0.86) for the mock mobilisations and moderate reliability (0.51) for the dynamic response test. The study demonstrates how a cheap peripheral gaming device can be repurposed so that forces applied to a hydraulic treatment plinth can be collected reliably when applied in a clinically reasoned manner.

Characteristics of Paraspinal Muscle Spindle Response to Mechanically Assisted Spinal Manipulation: A Preliminary Report.

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this preliminary study is to determine muscle spindle response characteristics related to the use of 2 solenoid powered clinical mechanically assisted manipulation (MAM) devices. METHODS: L6 muscle spindle afferents with receptive fields in paraspinal muscles were isolated in 6 cats. Neural recordings were made during L7 MAM thrusts using the Activator V (Activator Methods Int. Ltd., Phoenix, AZ) and/or Pulstar (Sense Technology Inc., Pittsburgh, PA) devices at their 3 lowest force settings. Mechanically assisted manipulation response measures included (a) the time required post-thrust until the first action potential, (b) differences in mean frequency (MF) and mean instantaneous frequency (MIF) 2 seconds before and after MAM, and (c) the time required for muscle spindle discharge (MF and MIF) to return to 95% of baseline after MAM. RESULTS: Depending on device setting, between 44% to 80% (Pulstar) and 11% to 63% (Activator V) of spindle afferents required >6 seconds to return to within 95% of baseline MF values; whereas 66% to 89% (Pulstar) and 75% to 100% (Activator V) of spindle responses returned to within 95% of baseline MIF in <6 seconds after MAM. Nonparametric comparisons between the 22 N and 44 N settings of the Pulstar yielded significant differences for the time required to return to baseline MF and MIF. CONCLUSION: Short duration (<10 ms) MAM thrusts decrease muscle spindle discharge with a majority of afferents requiring prolonged periods (>6 seconds) to return to baseline MF activity. Physiological consequences and clinical relevance of described MAM mechanoreceptor responses will require additional investigation.

Fiabilidad y validez de la medida de la movilidad cervical en pacientes con espondiloartritis axial utilizando un sensor inercial / Reliability and validity of cervical mobility analysis measurement using an inertial sensor in patients with axial spondyloarthritis

Introducción. La espondiloartritis axial (EA) produce una reducción de la movilidad debido a la inflamación y el daño estructural a nivel vertebral. El análisis de la movilidad cervical es un componente fundamental en la evaluación de pacientes con EA. Diversos índices y herramientas se han propuesto para analizar la movilidad cervical en estos pacientes, si bien, algunos de ellos carecen de precisión y sensibilidad y otros necesitan amplios recursos para ser usados. Los sensores de movimiento inerciales (IMU) podrían ser útiles para este cometido, pero se necesitan procesos de validación. Material y método. Se evaluó el movimiento cervical en tres planos (flexión frontal, lateral y rotación cervical) utilizando un IMU y un sistema de captura de movimiento de forma sincronizada. Se hizo una prueba test/retest del sensor. Se tomaron otras medidas habitualmente usadas para monitorizar a los pacientes con EA. Resultados. El análisis de fiabilidad según el índice de correlación intraclase fue muy bueno (0,99) para el test/retest del sensor IMU y para la comparación con el sistema de captura de movimiento. Las diferencias en grados fueron pequeñas (2-9°). Discusión. La tecnología IMU proporciona una forma flexible y económica de medir la movilidad en este tipo de patologías. Según nuestros resultados, la comparativa con respecto a la captura de movimiento como «gold standard», ha sido satisfactoria. Es por esto que esta tecnología puede ser útil para analizar la movilidad cervical en la EA (AU)

Introduction. Axial spondyloarthritis (AS) reduces mobility due to inflammation and structural damage in the vertebra. Analysis of cervical mobility is a key component of the assessment of patients with AS. Several indices and tools have been proposed to analyse cervical mobility in these patients, but some of them lack accuracy and sensitivity and others require extensive resources for their use. Inertial motion sensors (IMU) might be useful for this purpose, but require validation. Material and method. Cervical movement was assessed synchronously in three planes (frontal flexion, lateral flexion and cervical rotation) by using an inertial sensor (IMU) and a motion capture system. A test/retest with the sensor was also performed. Other measurements commonly used to monitor AS patients were taken. Results. The reliability analysis using the intraclass correlation index was very good (0.99) for the test/retest with the IMU sensor and for the comparison with the motion capture system. Differences in degrees were small (2-9°). Discussion. IMU technology provides a flexible and economic way to measure mobility in this type of disease. In this study, the results of IMU versus motion capture as the gold standard were satisfactory. This technology can be useful for analysing cervical mobility in AS (AU)

Disección de arteria vertebral e infarto cerebeloso como complicación tardía de manipulación cervical: a propósito de un caso / Vertebral artery dissection and cerebellar infarction as a late complication of cervical spine manipulation: a case report

La manipulación cervical es una técnica ampliamente empleada en el tratamiento de dolores cervicales y algunos tipos de cefalea. Es fácil de realizar y generalmente inocua, pero en ocasiones puede producir complicaciones vasculares. Son múltiples los profesionales que la emplean. Presentamos el caso de un paciente que sufre una disección de arteria vertebral e infarto cerebeloso como complicación tardía de una manipulación cervical. Proponemos que en los pacientes con clínica de dolor cervical, cefalea o afectación del territorio vascular posterior a una manipulación cervical estos síntomas sean tenidos en cuenta como posible complicación de la misma (AU)

Cervical manipulation is a widely used technique in the treatment of cervical pain and some types of headache. It is easy to perform and is usually harmless but can occasionally cause vascular complications. The technique is used by multiple professionals. We report the case of a patient with a vertebral artery dissection and cerebellar infarction as a late complication of cervical manipulation. We suggest that symptoms of neck pain, headache or disturbances of the posterior circulation after cervical manipulation should be considered possible complications of the technique (AU)

Vertebral Derotation by Vertebral Column Manipulator Improves Postoperative Radiographs Outcomes of Lenke 5C Patients for Follow-up of Minimum 2 Years.

STUDY DESIGN: This was a retrospective study. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to compare radiographic outcomes of Lenke 5C adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) patients treated by vertebral column manipulator (VCM) or simple rod derotation (SRD) maneuver. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: The direct vertebral rotation (DVR) technique has demonstrated better rotational and coronal correction than SRD, but clinical radiographic outcomes for Lenke 5C AIS following DVR using a VCM derotational device have not been described. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective study was carried out in 39 Lenke 5C AIS patients treated by VCM (n=20) or SRD (n=19) techniques between April 2008 and June 2011. All patients had complete clinical record and radiographic data. Nine radiographic variables were collected and compared at 3 time points (preoperative, immediate postoperative, and minimum 2-year follow-up) between both groups. RESULTS: Scoliosis was successfully corrected in both groups. All patients obtained good coronal and sagittal balance, and no severe complications occurred. The postoperative apical rotation corrective rate of the VCM and SRD groups were 55.1% and 25.5%, respectively (P < 0.05). Lowest instrumented vertebra and stable vertebra (LIV-SV) was statistically significant between the VCM and SRD groups, the mean values were 1.2 ± 0.4 level and 0.7 ± 0.5 level (P < 0.05). The main curve corrective rates and LIV-tilt angle correction rates were not significantly different between groups, but it showed a spontaneous correction for the coronal LIV-tilt angle for both groups at the last follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: VCM improved postoperative apical axial rotational correction and lessened the lumbar fusion segment compared with the SRD technique, which might have a potential trend to reserve lumbar mobility.

Posterior-anterior(PA) pressure Puffin for measuring and treating spinal stiffness: Mechanism and repeatability.

BACKGROUND: Posterior-anterior (PA) pressure technique is widely used for assessing and treating spinal segments. PA pressure is manually applied and stiffness is subjectively assessed. The method has been deemed unreliable and is associated with occupational strain. OBJECTIVES: To introduce a new ergonomically designed hand-held device measuring spinal stiffness, and to assess its repeatability. DESIGN: Quasi experimental study. METHOD: A convenience sample of 30 university students, 20-30 years old was used. The participants were tested two consecutive days by two physical therapy students using the new device; the PA pressure Puffin. The spinal segments under study were L1, Th12, Th7 and Th6 which all were tested three times with 9 kg force by both testers, both days. Intra-class correlation coefficients (ICC3,k) were used to assess intra- and inter-tester repeatability and analysis of variance with alpha-level at 0.05 was used to assess differences in joint mobility at the four segments measured. Linear regression analyses were used to assess repeatability. RESULTS: Inter-tester and intra-tester coefficients (ICCs) ranged from 0.88 to 0.97 and from 0.83 to 0.97, respectively. There was no significant difference in displacement between Th6 and Th7 but all other joints were significantly different from each other. Displacement was always significantly greater the second day compared with day one (p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: This close to final prototype of the PA pressure Puffin measures segmental spinal stiffness and its ergonomically designed handle provides a promising tool for physical therapists applying PA pressure. Further research is needed for validation and reliability assessments.

Development of an attention-touch control for manual cervical distraction: a pilot randomized clinical trial for patients with neck pain.

BACKGROUND: Manual cervical distraction (MCD) is a traction-based therapy performed with a manual contact over the cervical region producing repeating cycles while patients lie prone. This study evaluated a traction force-based minimal intervention for use as an attention-touch control in clinical trials of MCD for patients with chronic neck pain. METHODS: We conducted a mixed-methods, pilot randomized clinical trial in adults with chronic neck pain. Participants were allocated to three traction force ranges of MCD: low force/minimal intervention (0-20 N), medium force (21-50 N), or high force (51-100 N). Clinicians delivered five treatments over two weeks consisting of three sets of five cycles of MCD at the C5 vertebra and occiput. Traction forces were measured at each treatment. Patient-reported outcomes included a pain visual analogue scale (VAS), Neck Disability Index (NDI), Credibility and Expectancy Questionnaire (CEQ), and adverse effects. A qualitative interview evaluated treatment group allocation perceptions. RESULTS: We randomized 48 participants, allocating an average of five each month. Forty-five participants completed the trial with three participants lost to follow-up. Most participants were women (65%) and white (92%) with a mean (SD) age of 46.8 (12.5) years. Mean traction force values were within the prescribed force ranges for each group at the C5 and occiput levels. Neck pain VAS demonstrated a benefit for high traction force MCD compared to the low force group [adjusted mean difference 15.6; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.6 to 29.7]. Participants in the medium traction force group demonstrated improvements in NDI compared to the low force group (adjusted mean difference 3.0; 95% CI 0.1 to 5.9), as did participants in the high traction force group (adjusted mean difference 2.7; 95% CI -0.1 to 5.6). CEQ favored the high force group. Most low force participants correctly identified their treatment allocation in the qualitative interview. No serious adverse events were documented. CONCLUSIONS: This pilot study demonstrated the feasibility of a clinical trial protocol and the utility of a traction-based, minimal intervention as an attention-touch control for future efficacy trials of MCD for patients with neck pain. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01765751 (Registration Date 30 May 2012).

Effect of manual versus mechanically assisted manipulations of the thoracic spine in neck pain patients: study protocol of a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Neck pain is a common musculoskeletal condition with a point prevalence of around 15% in males and 23% in females that often presents in physiotherapy practice. Physical therapy and/or manipulation therapy is generally the first management option for patients with mechanical neck pain. Physical therapists treat mechanical neck pain with a number of interventions including joint mobilization and/or manipulation, therapeutic exercises or education. However, manipulation of the cervical spine carries some risks. Treating the thoracic spine for neck pain is an alternative approach. Emerging evidence suggests that it may be effective for treating neck pain without the risks associated with cervical spine manipulation. A new electromechanical device has recently been developed and tested for delivering multiple high velocity, low amplitude thrust manipulations to the spine. This device incorporates both auditory and visual systems that provide real time feedback on the applied treatment. The objective of this study is to compare the short- and long-term effects of manual versus mechanically assisted manipulations of the thoracic spine for neck pain patients. METHODS/DESIGN: A 6-month, randomized controlled trial consisting of 54 patients with acute or chronic neck pain patients will be conducted. Patients with no signs of major pathology and with little or no interference with daily activities will be recruited. Three treatment sessions with 4-day intervals will be carried out. The patients will be randomly assigned to receive either manually performed manipulations or electromechanical manipulations at the thoracic spine. The primary outcome is pain intensity as measured by the Visual Analogue Pain Rating Scale. The secondary outcome measures are neck physical disability using the Neck Disability Index, quality of life measured by the European Quality of Life 5 Dimensions 5 Levels and patients' improvement using the Patient's Global Impression of Change Scale. DISCUSSION: It is expected that both interventions will improve neck pain. This would be a significant finding, as thoracic spine manipulation for neck pain does not carry the same risk of injury as cervical spine manipulation. In addition, the results may provide useful information about therapeutic options for health care providers and patients for the problem of neck pain. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN88585962, registered January 2013.

Influencia de la manipulación osteopática cervical sobre el flujo arterial / No disponible

Introducción: La medicina osteopática es uno de los medios de tratamiento más empleados en las dolencias de la columna cervical. Debemos conocer con precisión la relación entre manipulación cervical y valores hemodinámicos arteriales carotideos y vertebrales. Objetivos: Revisar el cuerpo de conocimientos que la literatura científica recoge sobre la relación entre la manipulación cervical osteopática y los posibles cambios en el flujo arterial carotideo. Material y Métodos: Realizamos una revisión bibliográfica en las bases de datos Pubmed, Web of Science y la plataforma EBSCOhost con los términos «spinal», «vertebral», «cervical manipulation», «carotid», «vertebral», «blood flow», «carotid», «vertebral», «blood velocity». Resultados: Obtenemos inicialmente una muestra de 232 estudios (n=232). Tras excluir los estudios que no cumplen los criterios establecidos, obtenemos una muestra de 12 estudios de lectura completa, de los que 5 (n=5) se incluyen en la revisión. Conclusiones: Hay escasa evidencia científica de los efectos postmanipualtivos sobre la circulación arterial cervical (AU)

No disponible

Técnica de dog en extensión bilateral aplicada en una dorsalgia aguda: a propósito de un caso / No disponible

Objetivo: Describir las principales características de aplicación de la técnica de dog en extensión bilateral (TDEB), la cual puede ser utilizada para la reducción de lesiones grupales de flexión bilateral, utilizada para el tratamiento de un paciente con dorsalgia aguda. Material y Métodos: Aplicamos un protocolo de evaluación osteopático en una paciente de 35 años, por un cuadro de dorsalgia aguda, valorada mediante pruebas ortopédicas, de inspección, palpación, movilización global y analítica. Aplicamos como tratamiento la TDEB sobre el segmento en lesión. Resultados: Los resultados obtenidos han sido favorables, dado que se ha restablecido la movilidad, tanto a nivel global como segmentario, y se ha atenuado el dolor percibido por la paciente tras la aplicación de la TDEB. Conclusiones: Una correcta restructuración de la movilidad de los segmentos hipomóviles devuelve la función a los mismos, y produce efectos clínicos favorables, mejorando el estado de salud del paciente (AU)

No disponible

In vitro biomechanical evaluation of single impulse and repetitive mechanical shockwave devices utilized for spinal manipulative therapy.

Mechanical shockwave therapy devices have been in clinical use for almost 40 years. While most often used to treat back pain, our understanding of their biomechanical performance is very limited. From biomechanical studies we know that biological tissue is viscoelastic and preferably excited around its resonance frequency. Targeting these frequencies has been the focus in extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy, but these concepts are relatively new in orthopedic and rehabilitation therapies. The exact mechanism by which shockwave therapy acts is not known. Knowledge of the performance characteristics of these devices, correlated with clinical outcome studies, may lead to better patient selection, improvement of device functionality, and knowledge of the underlying working principals of therapy. The objectives of this study were to determine the ability of several commercial shockwave devices to achieve a desired thrust profile in a benchtop setting, determine the thrust profile in a clinical analog, and determine the influence of operator experience level on device performance. We conducted two different types of testing: (1) bench testing to evaluate the devices themselves, and (2) clinical equivalent testing to determine the influence of the operator. The results indicated a significant dependence of thrust output on the compliance of the test media. The Activator V-E device matched the ideal half-sine thrust profile to 94%, followed by the Impulse device (84%), the Activator IV/FS (74%), and the Activator II (48%). While most devices deviated from the ideal profile on the return path, the Impulse device exhibited a secondary peak. Moreover, the Activator V-E device provided evidence that the device performs consistently despite operator experience level. This has been a major concern in manual spinal manipulation. Based on our results, a hyper-flexible spine would receive a lower peak thrust force than a hypo-flexible spine at the same power setting. Furthermore, a hand-held operation further reduced the peak thrust force as it increased the system compliance. However, that influence was dissimilar for the different devices. Although controlled clinical trials are needed to determine the correlation between thrust profile and clinical outcome, already ongoing clinical studies indicate an improved patient satisfaction due to reduced treatment pain when devices are used with a thrust characteristic closer to an ideal sine wave.

Análisis de la frecuencia cardiaca en hipertensos tras la manipulación con impulso en C7 / Analysis of heart frequency in hypertension after handling with a C7 impulse

Introducción: La hipertensión arterial es la principal causa de morbilidad de la mayoría de los países, afectando al 20% de la población adulta, causando elevados costes a la sociedad. En los últimos años el interés y la sensibilización social en este tema, particularmente en el campo de la osteopatía, han derivado en estudios sobre las variables de frecuencia cardiaca que permitan analizar sus causas y fomentar nuevas técnicas para su tratamiento. Objetivos: Determinar si la manipulación a alta velocidad en el séptimo nivel cervical (C7) en pacientes hipertensos es segura y no modifica la frecuencia cardiaca, tras la intervención. Material y métodos: Estudio aleatorio, experimental, cegado y controlado. Sesenta y uno (n=61) pacientes con hipertensión se distribuyeron aleatoriamente en dos grupos, experimental (n=32) y control (n=29). Se realizó una valoración inicial (Pre-intervención) y una final (Post-intervención) analizando los cambios de la frecuencia cardiaca. Se realizaron evaluaciones previas, mediante los Test de Mitchell, Jackson y Klein. La técnica de intervención aplicada fue la maniobra de impulso (thrust) C7-D1 en decúbito prono, para disfunción en ERS o FRS. Resultados: En los pacientes del grupo experimental, no observamos una reducción significativa tras la manipulación experimental, en la frecuencia cardiaca medida en el brazo izquierdo, en la frecuencia cardiaca pico, en la frecuencia cardiaca de pie, ni en la frecuencia cardiaca en descanso. Conclusiones: La técnica de thrust sobre el segmento cervical C7-D1 aplicada en pacientes hipertensos no reduce significativamente los valores de la frecuencia cardiaca y por tanto es una técnica segura, que podría aplicarse sobre estos pacientes (AU)

Introduction: High blood pressure is the main cause of morbidity in most countries, affecting 20% of the adult population and causing high costs to society. In recent years interest and social awareness in this area, particularly in the field of osteopathy, has led to studies on the variables of heart rate that allow them to analyze their causes and to promote new techniques for treatment. Objective: To determine if high speed manipulation at the seventh cervical level (C7) in hypertensive patients is safe and does not modify the heart rate after intervention. Material and methods: A randomized, experimental, blinded and controlled study. Sixty-one (n = 61) patients with hypertension were randomized into two groups; experimental (n = 32) and control (n = 29). An initial assessment (pre-intervention) and an end assessment (post-intervention) were performed, analyzing changes in heart rate. Previous evaluations were performed using the Mitchell, Jackson and Klein Test. The applied intervention technique was the C7-D1 thrust maneuver in the prone position for dysfunction in ERS or FSR. Results: In patients in the experimental group, we did not observe a significant reduction after experimental manipulation in the heart rate measured in the left arm, the peak heart rate, the standing heart rate, or the resting heart rate. Conclusions: The thrust technique on the cervical segment C7-D1 applied in hypertensive patients does not significantly reduce heart rate values and, therefore, is a safe technique that could be applied to these patients (AU)

Inertial sensor real-time feedback enhances the learning of cervical spine manipulation: a prospective study.

BACKGROUND: Cervical Spinal Manipulation (CSM) is considered a high-level skill of the central nervous system because it requires bimanual coordinated rhythmical movements therefore necessitating training to achieve proficiency. The objective of the present study was to investigate the effect of real-time feedback on the performance of CSM. METHODS: Six postgraduate physiotherapy students attending a training workshop on Cervical Spine Manipulation Technique (CSMT) using inertial sensor derived real-time feedback participated in this study. The key variables were pre-manipulative position, angular displacement of the thrust and angular velocity of the thrust. Differences between variables before and after training were investigated using t-tests. RESULTS: There were no significant differences after training for the pre-manipulative position (rotation p = 0.549; side bending p = 0.312) or for thrust displacement (rotation p = 0.247; side bending p = 0.314). Thrust angular velocity demonstrated a significant difference following training for rotation (pre-training mean (sd) 48.9°/s (35.1); post-training mean (sd) 96.9°/s (53.9); p = 0.027) but not for side bending (p = 0.521). CONCLUSION: Real-time feedback using an inertial sensor may be valuable in the development of specific manipulative skill. Future studies investigating manipulation could consider a randomized controlled trial using inertial sensor real time feedback compared to traditional training.

Three-dimensional computerized mobilization of the cervical spine for the treatment of chronic neck pain: a pilot study.

BACKGROUND: Manual therapies for chronic neck pain are imprecise, inconsistent, and brief due to therapist fatigue. A previous study showed that computerized mobilization of the cervical spine in the sagittal plane is a safe and potentially effective treatment of chronic neck pain. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the safety and efficacy of computerized mobilization of the cervical spine in a three-dimensional space for the treatment of chronic neck pain. DESIGN: Pilot, open trial. SETTING: Physical therapy outpatient department. PARTICIPANTS: Nine patients with chronic neck pain. INTERVENTIONS: A computerized cradle capable of three-dimensional neck mobilizations was used. Treatment sessions lasted 20 minutes, biweekly, for six weeks. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Visual analog scale (VAS) for pain, cervical range of motion (CROM), neck disability index (NDI), joint position error (JPE), and muscle algometry. RESULTS: Comparing baseline at week one with week six (end of treatment), the VAS scores dropped by 2.9 points (P < 0.01). The six directions of movement studied by the CROM showed a combined increase of 11% (P = 0.01). The NDI decreased significantly from 16 to 10 (P = 0.03), and the JPE decreased significantly from 3.7° to 1.9° (P = 0.047). There was no change in the pressure pain threshold in any muscle tested. There were no significant adverse effects. CONCLUSIONS: These preliminary results demonstrate that this novel, computerized, three-dimensional cervical mobilization device is probably safe. The data also suggest that this method is effective in alleviating neck pain and associated headache, and in increasing the CROM, although the sample size was small in this open trial.