Treatment and Response Factors in Muscle Activation during Spinal Manipulation.

The forces applied during a spinal manipulation produce a neuromuscular response in the paraspinal muscles. A systematic evaluation of the factors involved in producing this muscle activity provides a clinical insight. The purpose of this study is to quantify the effect of treatment factors (manipulation sequence and manipulation site) and response factors (muscle layer, muscle location, and muscle side) on the neuromuscular response to spinal manipulation. The surface and indwelling electromyographies of 8 muscle sites were recorded during lumbar side-lying manipulations in 20 asymptomatic participants. The effects of the factors on the number of muscle responses and the muscle activity onset delays were compared using mixed-model linear regressions, effect sizes, and equivalence testing. The treatment factors did not reveal statistical differences between the manipulation sequences (first or second) or manipulation sites (L3 or SI) in the number of muscle responses (p = 0.11, p = 0.28, respectively), or in muscle activity onset delays (p = 0.35 p = 0.35, respectively). There were significantly shorter muscle activity onset delays in the multifidi compared to the superficial muscles (p = 0.02). A small effect size of side (d = 0.44) was observed with significantly greater number of responses (p = 0.02) and shorter muscle activity onset delays (p < 0.001) in the muscles on the left side compared to the right. The location, layer, and side of the neuromuscular responses revealed trends of decreasing muscle response rates and increasing muscle activity onset delays as the distance from the manipulation site increased. These results build on the body of work suggesting that the specificity of manipulation site may not play a role in the neuromuscular response to spinal manipulation-at least within the lumbar spine. In addition, these results demonstrate that multiple manipulations performed in similar areas (L3 and S1) do not change the response significantly, as well as contribute to the clinical understanding that the muscle response rate is higher and with a shorter delay, the closer it is to the manipulation.

Use of high speed stereo radiography to assess the foot orthoses effectiveness in controlling midfoot posture during walking: A pilot study.

BACKGROUND: The intent of this pilot study was to determine the feasibility of using high-speed stereo radiography (HSSR) to assess the effectiveness of footwear and foot orthoses in controlling the change in the position of the midfoot during walking in individuals with a flexible pes planus foot type. METHODS: Four individuals (1 female; 3 male) with a mean age of 25 years (range 22-29) and a bilateral flexible pes planus foot type participated in the study. The HSSR system was used to measure 3-dimensional changes in the longitudinal arch angle (LAA) with each participant walking barefoot, shoe only and shoes with orthoses. RESULTS: The HSSR system was found to be highly effective in measuring the change in the position of the midfoot, as measured using the LAA, when wearing footwear with or without foot orthoses. Based on an assessment of mean values, three out of the four participants demonstrated a change in the LAA as a result of using either shoes only or shoes with orthoses. The methodology used in this pilot study for assessing the effect of footwear and foot orthoses on the posture of the midfoot was highly effective with no side-effects noted by any of the study participants. CONCLUSIONS: Future studies using the HSSR will require modifications to participant inclusion criteria as well as alterations to the data collection methodology. The HSSR system used in this study is feasible for use in larger cohort studies assessing footwear and foot orthosis effectiveness with the described modifications.

The Neuromuscular Response to Spinal Manipulation in the Presence of Pain.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate differences in muscle activity in participants with and without low back pain during a side-lying lumbar diversified spinal manipulation. METHODS: Surface and indwelling electromyography at eight muscle locations were recorded during lumbar side-lying manipulations in 20 asymptomatic participants and 20 participants with low back pain. The number of muscle responses and muscle activity onset delays in relation to the manipulation impulse were compared in the 2 pain groups using mixed linear regressions. Effect sizes for all comparisons were calculated using Cohen's d. RESULTS: Muscle responses occurred in 61.6% ± 23.6% of the EMG locations in the asymptomatic group and 52.8% ± 26.3% of the symptomatic group. The difference was not statistically significant but there was a small effect of pain (d = 0.350). Muscle activity onset delays were longer for the symptomatic group at every EMG location except the right side indwelling L5 electrode, and a small effect of pain was present at the left L2, quadratus lumborum and trapezius surface electrodes (d = 0.311, 0.278, and 0.265) respectively. The indwelling electrodes demonstrated greater muscle responses (P ≤ .01) and shorter muscle activity onset delays (P < .01) than the surface electrodes. CONCLUSIONS: The results revealed trends that indicate participants with low back pain have less muscle responses, and when muscle responses are present they occur with longer onset delays following the onset of a manipulation impulse.

Methods of Muscle Activation Onset Timing Recorded During Spinal Manipulation.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to determine electromyographic threshold parameters that most reliably characterize the muscular response to spinal manipulation and compare 2 methods that detect muscle activity onset delay: the double-threshold method and cross-correlation method. METHODS: Surface and indwelling electromyography were recorded during lumbar side-lying manipulations in 17 asymptomatic participants. Muscle activity onset delays in relation to the thrusting force were compared across methods and muscles using a generalized linear model. RESULTS: The threshold combinations that resulted in the lowest Detection Failures were the "8 SD-0 milliseconds" threshold (Detection Failures = 8) and the "8 SD-10 milliseconds" threshold (Detection Failures = 9). The average muscle activity onset delay for the double-threshold method across all participants was 149 ± 152 milliseconds for the multifidus and 252 ± 204 milliseconds for the erector spinae. The average onset delay for the cross-correlation method was 26 ± 101 for the multifidus and 67 ± 116 for the erector spinae. There were no statistical interactions, and a main effect of method demonstrated that the delays were higher when using the double-threshold method compared with cross-correlation. CONCLUSIONS: The threshold parameters that best characterized activity onset delays were an 8-SD amplitude and a 10-millisecond duration threshold. The double-threshold method correlated well with visual supervision of muscle activity. The cross-correlation method provides several advantages in signal processing; however, supervision was required for some results, negating this advantage. These results help standardize methods when recording neuromuscular responses of spinal manipulation and improve comparisons within and across investigations.