Differing Characteristics of Human-Shaped Visual Stimuli Affect Clinicians’ Dosage of a Spinal Manipulative Thrust on a Low-Fidelity Model: A Cross-Sectional Study

Passmore, Steven; Malone, Quinn; MacNeil, Brian; Sanli, Elizabeth; González, David

doi:10.1016/j.jmpt.2022.06.005

Cited by 2 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…sex, height and BMI) influence the application of manual therapy treatments (i.e. SMob and SM) (44)(45)(46)(47). Specifically, these interventions are delivered more forcefully to males with a higher BMI.…”

Section: Detailed Reporting Of the Intervention Is Necessarymentioning

confidence: 99%

Spinal mobilization characteristics: a scoping literature review of biomechanical parameters

Gorrell¹,

Nyirö²,

Pasquier³

et al. 2023

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Spinal mobilization (SMob) is often included in the conservative management of spinal pain conditions as a recommended and effective treatment. While some studies quantify the biomechanical (kinetic) parameters of SMob, interpretation of findings is difficult due to poor reporting of methodological details. The aim of this study was to synthesise the literature describing biomechanical parameters of manually applied SMob. Methods This study is reported in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) statement. Databases were searched from inception to October 2022: MEDLINE (Ovid), Embase, CINAHL, ICL, PEDro and Cochrane Library. Data were extracted and reported descriptively for the following domains: general study characteristics, number of and characteristics of individuals who delivered/received SMob, region treated, equipment used and biomechanical parameters of SMob. Results Of 7,607 records identified, 36 (0.5%) were included in the analysis. Of these, SMob was delivered to the cervical spine in 13 (36.1%), the thoracic spine in 3 (8.3%) and the lumbopelvic spine in 18 (50.0%) studies. In 2 (5.6%) studies, spinal region was not specified. For SMob applied to all spinal regions, biomechanical parameters were: peak force (0-128N); duration (10-120s); frequency (0.1-4.5Hz); and force amplitude (1-102N). Conclusions This study reports considerable variability of the biomechanical parameters of SMob. In studies reporting biomechanical parameters, SMob was most frequently delivered to the lumbar and cervical spine of humans and most commonly peak force was reported. Future studies should focus on the detailed reporting of biomechanical parameters to facilitate the investigation of clinical dose-response effects.

show abstract

Section: Detailed Reporting Of the Intervention Is Necessarymentioning

confidence: 99%

Spinal mobilization characteristics: a scoping literature review of biomechanical parameters

Gorrell¹,

Nyirö²,

Pasquier³

et al. 2023

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…sex, height and BMI) influence the application of manual therapy treatments (i.e. SMob and SM) [47][48][49][50]. Specifically, these interventions are delivered more forcefully to males with a higher BMI.…”

Section: Plos Onementioning

confidence: 99%

Spinal mobilization force-time characteristics: A scoping literature review

Gorrell MChiroprac,

Nyirö,

Pasquier

et al. 2023

PLoS ONE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Spinal mobilization (SMob) is often included in the conservative management of spinal pain conditions as a recommended and effective treatment. While some studies quantify the biomechanical (kinetic) parameters of SMob, interpretation of findings is difficult due to poor reporting of methodological details. The aim of this study was to synthesise the literature describing force-time characteristics of manually applied SMob. Methods This study is reported in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) statement. Databases were searched from inception to October 2022: MEDLINE (Ovid), Embase, CINAHL, ICL, PEDro and Cochrane Library. Data were extracted and reported descriptively for the following domains: general study characteristics, number of and characteristics of individuals who delivered/received SMob, region treated, equipment used and force-time characteristics of SMob. Results There were 7,607 records identified and of these, 36 (0.5%) were included in the analysis. SMob was delivered to the cervical spine in 13 (36.1%), the thoracic spine in 3 (8.3%) and the lumbopelvic spine in 18 (50.0%) studies. In 2 (5.6%) studies, spinal region was not specified. For SMob applied to all spinal regions, force-time characteristics were: peak force (0-128N); duration (10-120s); frequency (0.1–4.5Hz); and force amplitude (1-102N). Conclusions This study reports considerable variability of the force-time characteristics of SMob. In studies reporting force-time characteristics, SMob was most frequently delivered to the lumbar and cervical spine of humans and most commonly peak force was reported. Future studies should focus on the detailed reporting of force-time characteristics to facilitate the investigation of clinical dose-response effects.

show abstract

Differing Characteristics of Human-Shaped Visual Stimuli Affect Clinicians’ Dosage of a Spinal Manipulative Thrust on a Low-Fidelity Model: A Cross-Sectional Study

Cited by 2 publications

References 24 publications

Spinal mobilization characteristics: a scoping literature review of biomechanical parameters

Spinal mobilization characteristics: a scoping literature review of biomechanical parameters

Spinal mobilization force-time characteristics: A scoping literature review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About