Joint Mobilization Reduces Hyperalgesia Associated With Chronic Muscle and Joint Inflammation in Rats

Sluka, Kathleen A.; Skyba, David A.; Radhakrishnan, Rajan; Leeper, B J; Wright, Anthony

doi:10.1016/j.jpain.2006.02.009

Cited by 67 publications

(54 citation statements)

References 30 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Physiological studies on animals have demonstrated that joint afferent activity causes a reduction in muscle excitability (Baxendale and Ferrell, 1981;Lundberg et al, 1978). End-range passive movements have been found to have a hypoalgesic effect (Sluka et al, 2006;Vicenzino et al, 1996Vicenzino et al, , 1998Wright and Vicenzino, 1995) and this may then cause a reduction in muscle activity. Passive movements may increase muscle spindle activity (Bolton and Budgell, 2006;Cheng et al, 1995;Dishman and Burke, 2003;Lewis et al, 2001), and at end range stimulate golgi tendon organ activity (Lundberg et al, 1978), leading to a reflex inhibition of muscle.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of surface electromyographic activity of erector spinae before and after the application of central posteroanterior mobilisation on the lumbar spine

Krekoukias¹,

Petty²,

Cheek³

2009

Journal of Electromyography and Kinesiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Lumbar spine accessory movements, used by therapists in the treatment of patients with low back pain, is thought to decrease paravertebral muscular activity; however there is little research to support this suggestion. This study investigated the effects of lumbar spine accessory movements on surface electromyography (sEMG) activity of erector spinae.A condition randomised, placebo controlled, repeated measures design was used. sEMG measurements were recorded from 36 asymptomatic subjects following a control, placebo and central posteroanterior (PA) mobilisation to L3 each for 2 min. The therapist stood on a force platform while applying the PA mobilisation to quantify the force used. The PA mobilisation applied to each subject had a mean maximum force of 103.3 N, mean amplitude of force oscillation of 41.1 N, and a frequency of 1.2 Hz. Surface electromyographic data were recorded from the musculature adjacent to L3, L5 and T10.There were statistically significant reductions of 15.5% (95% CI: 8.0-22.5%) and 17.8% (95% CI: 12.9-22.4%) in mean sEMG values following mobilisation compared with the control and placebo, respectively.This study demonstrates that a central PA mobilisation to L3 results in a statistically significant decrease in the sEMG activity of erector spinae of an asymptomatic population.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of surface electromyographic activity of erector spinae before and after the application of central posteroanterior mobilisation on the lumbar spine

Krekoukias¹,

Petty²,

Cheek³

2009

Journal of Electromyography and Kinesiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Therefore, examining the effect of spinal mobilization alone could help clinical decision-making and complement the current understanding of joint mobilization in animal and lab-based research. 10,11 In a 2008 systematic review by Schmid et al, 12 the authors assessed 15 studies investigating the effects of spinal mobilization alone on pain measures and range of motion. Data were pooled in this review, and the resultant suggestion was that joint mobilization improved outcomes by 20% relative to controls who did not receive mobilizations.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Animal and human studies have both shown neurophysiological manual therapy effects that seem to involve centrally-mediated processes. Sluka et al 10 has not been extensively studied for techniques other than thrust manipulation. There are several limitations with this study.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The relative effectiveness of segment specific level and non-specific level spinal joint mobilization on pain and range of motion: results of a systematic review and meta-analysis

Slaven

Goode

Coronado

et al. 2013

Journal of Manual & Manipulative Therapy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Study design: Systematic literature review and meta-analysis. Objective: In symptomatic subjects to: (1) examine the effects of a single session of joint mobilization on pain at rest and with most painful movement, and (2) compare the effects when joint mobilization is provided to a specific or non-specific spinal level. Background: Joint mobilization is routinely used for treating spinal pain in conjunction with other interventions, but its unique effect is not well understood. Further, there is controversy about the role of 'specific level' techniques in producing benefit. Methods: Searches were performed for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) using electronic databases (MEDLINE, CINAHL, and PEDro) from 1966 through November 2010. Methodological quality was assessed using previously detailed criteria. Meta-analysis and meta-regression were conducted on eligible studies. Results: Eight RCTs with a mean methodological score of 10/12 were included. Significant heterogeneity (P50.075) was found in the overall meta-analysis estimate. When stratified by body location, no significant individual effect was found for pain at rest. However, there was a statistical mean difference [0.71 (95% confidence interval: 0.13-1.28)] between pain at rest for the cervical and lumbar individual means. Conclusions: We found multiple studies which provided evidence that a single session of joint mobilization can lead to a reduction of pain at rest and with most painful movement. When using joint mobilization, the need for specific versus non-specific level mobilization may be influenced by anatomical region; the direction of effect in the cervical spine was toward specific mobilization and in the lumbar spine towards non-specific mobilization.

show abstract

“…This mechanism would, however, also be activated with other physical therapies such as massage (Kessler, Marchant, & Johnson, 2006). Manipulation also activates the descending pain inhibitory system from the dorsal periaqueductal (dPAG) gray (Skyba, Radhakrishnan, Rohlwing, Wright, & Sluka, 2003;Sluka, Skyba, Radhakrishnan, Leeper, & Wright, 2006). Wright (1995) demonstrated the effect of manipulation on this system by noting the specific responses of dPAG activation, most markedly being rapid analgesia.…”

Section: 4mentioning

confidence: 99%

The effect of lumbosacral manipulation on growing pains

Beer

Bester

2015

Health SA Gesondheid

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

a b s t r a c tBackground: Growing pains are a frequent clinical presentation that continues to puzzle practitioners, with very little conclusive evidence in any medical field, including chiropractic.Objective: The aim of this study was to determine whether lumbosacral manipulations have an effect on growing pain symptoms.Methods: Thirty participants with growing pains between the ages of 4 and 12 years were recruited. The participants were placed into two groups of 15 participants each. Group 1 received lumbosacral manipulations to restricted joints as determined by motion palpation, while Group 2 never received any professional intervention. Often parent(s)/guardian(s) of children who suffer from growing pains will rub the child's legs and offer verbal reassurance in an attempt to console their children. Parent(s)/guardian(s) of both groups were encouraged to continue to do this throughout the duration of the trial. Instructions were given to the parents so that the same rubbing technique and rubbing cream (aqueous cream) were used. Subjective changes were tracked using a pain diary that the parent(s)/ guardian(s) were asked to complete, a six-week post-study follow-up question regarding children's growing pains and the Oucher self-report pain scale. Objective measures consisted of pressure algometer readings of the tibialis anterior muscle belly.Results: The statistical data was analysed using the Friedman test, ManneWhitney test and the Wilcoxon Signed-Rank test. The results demonstrated that both groups responded favourably to their specific treatment over time. However, the group that received lumbosacral manipulations proved to show a quicker response to treatment; and the poststudy follow-up of this same group showed markedly more positive feedback than the group that did not receive the treatment. These results highlighted the positive effects of chiropractic manipulation on growing pain symptoms. Conclusion:The results from this study, specifically the feedback from parent(s)/guardians(s) and the pain diaries, indicated that spinal manipulation is beneficial in the treatment of growing pains. The results also showed that other methods of treating growing pains, such as simple leg rubs, may also bring relief. Peer review under responsibility of Johannesburg University. H O S T E D BYh e a l t h s a g e s o n d h e i d 2 0 ( 2 0 1 5 ) 7 5 e8 2http://dx

show abstract

Joint Mobilization Reduces Hyperalgesia Associated With Chronic Muscle and Joint Inflammation in Rats

Cited by 67 publications

References 30 publications

Comparison of surface electromyographic activity of erector spinae before and after the application of central posteroanterior mobilisation on the lumbar spine

Comparison of surface electromyographic activity of erector spinae before and after the application of central posteroanterior mobilisation on the lumbar spine

The relative effectiveness of segment specific level and non-specific level spinal joint mobilization on pain and range of motion: results of a systematic review and meta-analysis

The effect of lumbosacral manipulation on growing pains

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About