scholarly journals Assessment of Bacterial Transfer From Patient to Chiropractor During Spinal Manipulation

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fariha Amod ◽  
Feroz M. Swalaha ◽  
Poovendhree Reddy
Keyword(s):  
Spinal Manipulation

Efeito da manipulação vertebral sobre a modulação autonômica cardíaca

2016 ◽  
Vol 17 (5) ◽  
pp. 498
Author(s):  
Alyssa Conte Da Silva ◽  
Juliana Falcão Padilha ◽  
Jefferson Luiz Brum Marques ◽  
Cláudia Mirian De Godoy Marques
Keyword(s):  
Heart Rate ◽  
Heart Rate Variability ◽  
Nervous System ◽  
Autonomic Nervous System ◽  
Spinal Manipulation ◽  
Autonomic Modulation ◽  
Autonomic Nervous ◽  
Cardiac Autonomic Modulation

Introdução: Existem poucos estudos que evidenciam a manipulação vertebral relacionada à modulação autonômica cardíaca. Objetivo: Revisar a literatura sobre os efeitos da manipulação vertebral sobre a modulação autonômica cardíaca. Métodos: Foi realizada uma busca bibliográfica nas bases de dados da saúde Medline, Pubmed e Cinahl, no período correspondido entre setembro e novembro de 2014. Foram utilizados os descritores em inglês Spinal Manipulation, Cardiac Autonomic Modulation, Autonomic Nervous System, Heart Rate Variability, além de associações entre eles. Resultados: Foram encontrados 190 artigos, sendo excluídos 39 por serem repetidos, restando 151. Destes, 124 não se encaixaram nos critérios de inclusão e após leitura crítica e análise dos materiais foram selecionados 7 artigos. Grande parte dos estudos revelou que a manipulação da coluna, independente do segmento, demonstra alterações autonômicas, tanto em nível simpático quanto parassimpático. Conclusão: Existem diferentes metodologias para avaliação da modulação autonômica cardíaca, sendo a Variabilidade da Frequência cardíaca através do eletrocardiograma a mais utilizada. A manipulação vertebral exerceu influência, na maioria dos artigos, sobre a modulação autonômica cardíaca.Palavras-chave: manipulação da coluna, sistema nervoso autônomo, variabilidade da frequência cardíaca. 

scholarly journals Changes in pain sensitivity and spinal stiffness in relation to responder status following spinal manipulative therapy in chronic low Back pain: a secondary explorative analysis of a randomized trial

2021 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Casper Glissmann Nim ◽  
Gregory Neil Kawchuk ◽  
Berit Schiøttz-Christensen ◽  
Søren O’Neill
Keyword(s):  
Low Back Pain ◽  
Back Pain ◽  
Randomized Trial ◽  
Clinical Improvement ◽  
Spinal Manipulation ◽  
Pain Sensitivity ◽  
Spinal Manipulative Therapy ◽  
Low Back ◽  
Manipulative Therapy ◽  
Pressure Pain Thresholds

Abstract Background In a prior randomized trial, we demonstrated that participants receiving spinal manipulative therapy at a pain-sensitive segment instead of a stiff segment experienced increased mechanical pressure pain thresholds. We hypothesized that the targeted segment mediated this increase through a segment-dependent neurophysiological reflective pathway. Presently, it is not known if this decrease in pain sensitivity is associated with clinical improvement. Therefore, we performed an explorative analysis to examine if changes in experimental pain sensitivity (mechanical and thermal) and lumbar stiffness were further dependent on clinical improvement in disability and patient-reported low back pain. Methods This study is a secondary explorative analysis of data from the randomized trial that compared 132 participants with chronic low back pain who received lumbar spinal manipulative therapy applied at either i) the stiffest segment or ii) the segment having the lowest pain threshold (i.e., the most pain-sensitive segment). We collected data at baseline, after the fourth session of spinal manipulation, and at 14-days follow-up. Participants were dichotomized into responders/non-responders using different clinical variables (disability and patient-reported low back pain) with varying threshold values (0, 30, and 50% improvement). Mixed models were used to assess changes in experimental outcomes (stiffness and pain sensitivity). The fixed interaction terms were time, segment allocation, and responder status. Results We observed a significant increase in mechanical pressure pain thresholds for the group, which received spinal manipulative therapy at the most pain-sensitive segment independent of whether they improved clinically or not. Those who received spinal manipulation at the stiffest segment also demonstrated increased mechanical pain sensitivity, but only in the subgroup with clinical improvement. We did not observe any changes in lumbar stiffness. Conclusion Our results suggest the existence of two different mechanistic pathways associated with the spinal manipulation target. i) A decrease of mechanical pain sensitivity independent of clinical outcome (neurophysiological) and ii) a decrease as a reflection of the clinical outcome. Together, these observations may provide a novel framework that improves our understanding of why some respond to spinal manipulative therapy while others do not. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT04086667 registered retrospectively September 11th 2019.

scholarly journals The Effects of Spinal Manipulation on Motor Unit Behavior

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 105
Author(s):  
Lucien Robinault ◽  
Aleš Holobar ◽  
Sylvain Crémoux ◽  
Usman Rashid ◽  
Imran Khan Niazi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Motor Unit ◽  
Conduction Velocity ◽  
Spinal Manipulation ◽  
Maximum Voluntary Contraction ◽  
Force Production ◽  
Movement Control ◽  
Position Sense ◽  
Joint Position Sense ◽  
Voluntary Contraction ◽  
Passive Movement

Over recent years, a growing body of research has highlighted the neural plastic effects of spinal manipulation on the central nervous system. Recently, it has been shown that spinal manipulation improved outcomes, such as maximum voluntary force and limb joint position sense, reflecting improved sensorimotor integration and processing. This study aimed to further evaluate how spinal manipulation can alter neuromuscular activity. High density electromyography (HD sEMG) signals from the tibialis anterior were recorded and decomposed in order to study motor unit changes in 14 subjects following spinal manipulation or a passive movement control session in a crossover study design. Participants were asked to produce ankle dorsiflexion at two force levels, 5% and 10% of maximum voluntary contraction (MVC), following two different patterns of force production (“ramp” and “ramp and maintain”). A significant decrease in the conduction velocity (p = 0.01) was observed during the “ramp and maintain” condition at 5% MVC after spinal manipulation. A decrease in conduction velocity suggests that spinal manipulation alters motor unit recruitment patterns with an increased recruitment of lower threshold, lower twitch torque motor units.

scholarly journals A mixed treatment comparison of selected osteopathic techniques used to treat acute nonspecific low back pain: a proof of concept and plan for further research

2021 ◽  
Vol 0 (0) ◽  
Author(s):  
James W. Price
Keyword(s):  
Low Back Pain ◽  
Back Pain ◽  
Spinal Manipulation ◽  
Conventional Care ◽  
Mixed Treatment Comparison ◽  
Low Back ◽  
Acute Low Back Pain ◽  
Treatment Comparison ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Mixed Treatment

Abstract Context Back injuries have a high prevalence in the United States and can be costly for both patients and the healthcare system at large. While previous guidelines from the American College of Physicians for the management of acute nonspecific low back pain (ANLBP) have encouraged nonpharmacologic management, those treatment recommendations involved only superficial heat, massage, acupuncture, and spinal manipulation. Investigation about the efficacy of spinal manipulation in the management of ANLBP is warranted. Objectives To compare the results in previously-published literature documenting the outcomes of osteopathic manipulative treatment (OMT) techniques used to treat ANLBP. The secondary objective of this study was to demonstrate the utility of using Bayesian network meta-analysis (NMA) to perform a mixed treatment comparison (MTC) of a variety of osteopathic techniques. Methods A literature search for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of ANLBP treatments was performed in April 2020 according to PRISMA guidelines by searching MEDLINE/PubMed, OVID, Cochrane Central, PEDro, and OSTMED.Dr databases; scanning the reference lists of articles; and using the Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health grey literature checklist. Each database was searched from inception to April 1, 2020. The following search terms were used: acute low back pain, acute low back pain plus physical therapy, acute low back pain plus spinal manipulation, and acute low back pain plus osteopathic manipulation. The validity of eligible trials was assessed by the single author using an adapted National Institute for Health and Care Excellence methodology checklist for randomized, controlled trials and an extraction form based on that checklist. The outcome measure chosen for this NMA was the Visual Analogue Scale of pain. The NMA were performed using the GeMTC user interface for automated NMA utilizing a Bayesian hierarchical model of random effects. Results The literature search initially found 483 unduplicated records. After screening and full text assessment, five RCTs were eligible for the MTC, yielding a total of 430 participants. Results of the MTC model suggested that there was no statistically significant decrease in reported pain when exercise, high-velocity low-amplitude (HVLA), counterstrain, muscle energy technique, or a mix of techniques were added to conventional treatment to treat ANLBP. However, the rank probabilities assessment determined that HVLA and the OMT mixed treatment protocol plus conventional care were ranked superior to conventional care alone for improving ANLBP. Conclusions While this study failed to provide definitive evidence upon which clinical recommendations can be based, it does demonstrate the utility of performing NMA for MTCs of osteopathic modalities used to treat ANLBP. However, to take full advantage of this statistical technique, future studies should be designed with consideration for the methodological shortcomings found in past osteopathic research.

scholarly journals Trends in the use and cost of chiropractic spinal manipulation under Medicare Part B

2013 ◽  
Vol 13 (11) ◽  
pp. 1449-1454 ◽  
Author(s):  
James M. Whedon ◽  
Yunjie Song ◽  
Matthew A. Davis
Keyword(s):  
Spinal Manipulation ◽  
Medicare Part ◽  
Medicare Part B
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document