Performance based objective outcome measures and spinal manipulation

Factors Associated With Clinical Responses to Spinal Manipulation in Patients With Non-specific Thoracic Back Pain: A Prospective Cohort Study

Introduction: The management of musculoskeletal disorders is complex and requires a multidisciplinary approach. Manual therapies, such as spinal manipulative therapy (SMT), are often recommended as an adjunct treatment and appear to have demonstrable effects on pain and short-term disability in several spinal conditions. However, no definitive mechanism that can explain these effects has been identified. Identifying relevant prognostic factors is therefore recommended for people with back pain.

Objective: The main purpose of this study was to identify short-term candidate prognostic factors for clinically significant responses in pain, disability and global perceived change (GPC) following a spinal manipulation treatment in patients with non-specific thoracic back pain.

Methods: Patients seeking care for thoracic spine pain were invited to participate in the study. Pain levels were recorded at baseline, post-intervention, and 1 week after a single session of SMT. Disability levels were collected at baseline and at 1-week follow-up. GPC was collected post-intervention and at 1-week follow-up. Biomechanical parameters of SMT, expectations for improvement in pain and disability, kinesiophobia, anxiety levels as well as perceived comfort of spinal manipulative therapy were assessed.

Analysis: Differences in baseline characteristics were compared between patients categorized as responders or non-responders based on their pain level, disability level, and GPC at each measurement time point. Binary logistic regression was calculated if the statistical significance level of group comparisons (responder vs. non-responders) was equal to, or <0.2 for candidate prognostic factors.

Results: 107 patients (62 females and 45 males) were recruited. Mean peak force averaged 450.8 N with a mean thrust duration of 134.9 ms. Post-intervention, comfort was associated with pain responder status (p < 0.05) and GPC responder status (p < 0.05), while expectation of disability improvement was associated with GPC responder status (p < 0.05). At follow-up, comfort and expectation of pain improvement were associated with responder GPC status (p < 0.05). No association was found between responder pain, disability or GPC status and biomechanical parameters of SMT at any time point.

Discussion: No specific dosage of SMT was associated with short-term clinical responses to treatment. However, expectations of improvement and patient comfort during SMT were associated with a positive response to treatment.

Short-Term Effects of Global Pelvic Manipulation on Knee Joint Position Sense in Asymptomatic Participants: A Double-Blind Randomized Controlled Trial

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to evaluate short-term effects of the global pelvic manipulation (GPM) on knee joint position sense (JPS).

METHODS

This randomized, controlled double-blind trial included 26 asymptomatic participants (X¯± 25.3; standard deviation ± 4.4 years) who were randomly allocated into 2 groups. Sixteen participants were allocated into the experimental group, in which GPM was performed, and the rest of the participants (n = 10) were included in the control group, which received sham ultrasound therapy. Each participant attended 1 session only, and the evaluations were assessed pretreatment and 5 minutes posttreatment through an isokinetic dynamometer (Biodex Medical Systems), in which the data regarding knee JPS ipsilateral to the manipulated sacroiliac joint were collected. Mann-Whitney and Wilcoxon tests were used, with a 95% significance level.

RESULTS

There were no statistically significant differences between the groups concerning active and passive JPS at 30° and 60° (P > .05). The results showed a lack of significant differences between the moments in both groups (P > .05).

CONCLUSION

This investigation demonstrated that GPM, with high-velocity low-amplitude thrust, has no effect on knee JPS, suggesting that this manipulative technique does not have a relative effect on muscle spindles and Golgi tendon organ activation in asymptomatic participants.

Tactile Perception of Pressure and Volitional Thrust Intensity Modulate Spinal Manipulation Dose Characteristics

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to examine clinicians' ability to modulate spinal manipulation (SM) thrust characteristics based on their tactile perception of pressure and volitional intensity.

METHODS

In a cross-sectional, within-participants design, 13 doctors of chiropractic delivered SM thrusts of perceived least, appropriate, or greatest intensity of their perceived safe output level for an SM thrust on low-fidelity thoracic spine models of 4 different pressure levels. The participants performed SM over the course of 96 trials in a randomized order on combinations of thrust intensity and pressure. Dependent variables included normalized preload force, thrust force, thrust duration, peak acceleration, time to peak acceleration, and displacement. For all dependent measures, 2-factor within-participants analysis of variance models with repeated measures on both factors were performed.

RESULTS

Preload force increased with intensity (F_2,24 = 9.72; P < .001) and model pressure (F_3,36 = 4.27; P = .011). Participants modulated thrust force and displacement as each also increased with intensity escalation (F_2,24 = 22.53, P < .001; F_2,18 = 45.20, P < .001). The highest accelerations were observed during the greatest intensity. Increased thrust force was delivered at higher model pressures (F_3,36 = 6.43; P < .001). A significant interaction demonstrated that as volitional thrust intensity increased, greater displacement was attained, particularly on low pressure models (F_6,54 = 11.06; P < .001). Thrust duration and time to peak acceleration yielded no significant differences.

CONCLUSION

Spinal manipulation thrust dosage was modulated by the chiropractors' tactile perception of pressure and volitional intensity.

Is performance in goal oriented head movements altered in patients with tension type headache?

Background

Head repositioning tasks have been used in different experimental and clinical contexts to quantitatively measure motor control performance. Effects of pain on sensorimotor control have often been described in various musculoskeletal conditions and may provide relevant information with regard to potential mechanisms underlying tension-type headaches. The purpose of the current study was to compare the performance of patients with tension-type headache and healthy participants in a cervical aiming task using the Fitts’ task paradigm.

Methods

Patients with tension-type headache and healthy controls were compared in a cervical aiming task. Participants were asked to move their head as quickly, and precisely as possible to a target under various experimental conditions. Dependent variables included movement time, variable error, constant error and absolute error.

Results

As predicted by Fitts’ law, decreasing target size and increasing head rotation amplitudes yielded longer movement times in both groups. Participants with tension-type headache, when compared to healthy participants showed a significant increase in both constant and absolute errors for each of the four conditions.

Conclusion

Decreased motor performance was observed in participants with tension-type headache, likely due to altered motor control of the neck musculature. Future research is warranted to investigate the clinical aspect related to decrease in motor performance.

Musculoskeletal physical outcome measures in individuals with tension-type headache: A scoping review

Introduction

Individuals with tension-type headache (TTH), in addition to headache pain, typically suffer from pericranial muscle tenderness and increased cervical muscle tone. Physical and physiological outcomes related to musculoskeletal function, however, are not commonly assessed in clinical studies and not systematically proposed as outcome measures in headache-related practice guidelines.

Objectives

To review which musculoskeletal outcomes are used in the clinical assessment of patients with TTH and which are associated with headache pain and related dysfunction. Methods: Literature searches were performed in MEDLINE, PubMed, the Cochrane databases and EMBASE using terms relating to musculoskeletal physical outcomes in TTH.

Results

Twenty-six studies met selection criteria. Physiological outcomes typically reported in laboratory studies were trigger points, pressure pain threshold, range of motion and tenderness. A greater number of trigger points and lower pressure pain threshold were reported in patients with episodic TTH in comparison with healthy subjects. Individuals with chronic TTH, when compared with non-headache controls, consistently showed a greater number of trigger points, a lower value of pressure pain threshold and a more severe forward head posture.

Conclusion

Musculoskeletal outcomes, such as trigger points, pressure pain threshold and forward head posture should inform TTH pathophysiology, diagnosis and interdisciplinary patient care.