Changes in Manipulative Peak Force Modulation and Time to Peak Thrust among First-Year Chiropractic Students Following a 12-Week Detraining Period

Starmer, David; Guist, Brett P.; Tuff, Taylor; Warren, Sarah C.; Williams, Matthew G.R.

doi:10.1016/j.jmpt.2016.02.010

Cited by 16 publications

(21 citation statements)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Results showed an agreement between sessions for the thrust phase with values up to 14% and 7% for STTM and CVTM, respectively. These variations among practitioners are in line with previous variability of approximately 124N observed for chiropractic students performing a standardized thrust peak force of 600N (Starmer et al, 2016). Lower variability during CVTM may be attributed to various parameters, such as the change in regional thorax stiffness or the difference in contact surfaces and tissue interface, but such hypotheses have to be further explored.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 85%

Investigation of reaction force magnitude and orientation during supine thoracic thrust manipulation applied to intervertebral and costovertebral regions.

Beyer

Michaud

Oliver

et al. 2020

Musculoskeletal Science and Practice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 85%

Investigation of reaction force magnitude and orientation during supine thoracic thrust manipulation applied to intervertebral and costovertebral regions.

Beyer

Michaud

Oliver

et al. 2020

Musculoskeletal Science and Practice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…When possible, SM dosages should be described using treatment characteristics derived from the force-time profile. Several studies investigating SM motor control and learning have used force-sensing technologies to quantify SM biomechanical parameters [48, 49]. Such technologies should be considered in clinical trials evaluating not only dosage and frequency effect, but also in any study investigating clinical effects of manual therapy.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Spinal manipulation frequency and dosage effects on clinical and physiological outcomes: a scoping review

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction The burden of musculoskeletal disorders increases every year, with low back and neck pain being the most frequently reported conditions for seeking manual therapy treatment. In recent years, manual therapy research has begun exploring the dose-response relationship between spinal manipulation treatment characteristics and both clinical and physiological response to treatment. Objective The purpose of this scoping review was to identify and appraise the current state of scientific knowledge regarding the effects of spinal manipulation frequency and dosage on both clinical and physiological responses. Methods A scoping review was conducted to identify all available studies pertaining to our research question. Retrieved papers were screened using a 2-phase method, a selective sorting with titles and abstracts. Potentially relevant studies were read, and data was extracted for all included studies. Randomized control trials were assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool for quality assessment. Results The search yielded 4854 publications from which 32 were included for analysis. Results were sorted by dosage or frequency outcomes, and divided into human or animal studies. Animal studies mainly focused on dosage and evaluated physiological outcomes only. Studies investigating spinal manipulation dosage effects involved both human and animal research, and showed that varying thrust forces, or thrust durations can impact vertebral displacement, muscular response amplitude or muscle spindle activity. Risk of bias analysis indicated only two clinical trials assessing frequency effects presented a low risk of bias. Although trends in improvement were observed and indicated that increasing the number of SM visits in a short period of time (few weeks) decreased pain and improve disability, the differences between the studied treatment frequencies, were often not statistically significant and therefore not clinically meaningful. Conclusion The results of this study showed that SM dosage and frequency effects have been mostly studied over the past two decades. Definitions for these two concepts however differ across studies. Overall, the results showed that treatment frequency does not significantly affect clinical outcomes during and following a SM treatment period. Dosage effects clearly influence short-term physiological responses to SM treatment, but relationships between these responses and clinical outcomes remains to be investigated.

show abstract

“…This instrument has been used in previous SM learning studies. 5,8,11 Instruments and Measurements A treatment table (Leander 900 Z Series; Leader Health Technologies Corporation, Port Orchard, WA) with an imbedded force plate (AMTI, Watertown, MA) was used to measure the input force for each SM. The imbedded force plate can reliably assess forces and moments in 3 dimensions with high sensitivity (lV/[V*N] ¼ 0.08), low crosstalk (60.20%), excellent accuracy (60.25%), and long-term stability.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Learning spinal manipulation: Gender and expertise differences in biomechanical parameters, accuracy, and variability*

Pasquier¹,

Barbier-Cazorla²,

Audo³

et al. 2019

Journal of Chiropractic Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: The purpose of this study was to investigate gender differences and expertise effects on biomechanical parameters as well as force accuracy and variability for students learning spinal manipulation. Methods: A total of 137 fourth- and fifth-year students were recruited for the study. Biomechanical parameters (preload, time to peak force, peak force, rate of force), as well as accuracy and variability of thoracic spine manipulation performance, were evaluated during 5 consecutive trials using a force-sensing table and a target force of 450 N. Gender, expertise differences on biomechanical parameters, as well as constant, variable, and absolute error were assessed using 2-way analysis of variance. Results: Analyses showed significant gender differences for several biomechanical parameters, as well as significant gender differences in accuracy and variability. Although women showed lower time to peak force and rate of force values, they were more precise and showed less variability than men when performing thoracic spine manipulations. Students with clinical expertise (fifth-year students) used less force and were more precise. Conclusion: Our results showed that gender differences in spinal manipulation performance exist and that these differences seem to be mainly explained by alternative motor strategies. To develop gender-specific teaching methods, future studies should explore why men and women approach spinal manipulation tasks differently.

show abstract

Changes in Manipulative Peak Force Modulation and Time to Peak Thrust among First-Year Chiropractic Students Following a 12-Week Detraining Period

Cited by 16 publications

References 26 publications

Investigation of reaction force magnitude and orientation during supine thoracic thrust manipulation applied to intervertebral and costovertebral regions.

Investigation of reaction force magnitude and orientation during supine thoracic thrust manipulation applied to intervertebral and costovertebral regions.

Spinal manipulation frequency and dosage effects on clinical and physiological outcomes: a scoping review

Learning spinal manipulation: Gender and expertise differences in biomechanical parameters, accuracy, and variability*

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About