The Effects of Spinal Manipulation on Motor Unit Behavior

Abstract

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.

The Changes of Brain Function After Spinal Manipulation Therapy in Patients with Chronic Low Back Pain: A Rest BOLD fMRI Study

“…The brain region with elevated Reho value was located at the left postcentral gyrus; the brain regions with decreased Reho values were located in the left superior frontal gyrus and left posterior cingulate cortex. (6) The Reho values between TP3 and TP2 in Group 1 were not significantly different (p > 0.05).…”

“…4 SMT has shown good analgesic effect, 5 is easy to implement, and free from the risk of addiction unlike drugs; hence, SMT is widely used in the clinical environment. The mechanism research on the effects in SMT is mostly focused on the peripheral nerve, regional reaction or biomechanical effect, 6 and the central neural antalgic effect has been paid attention, due to the abnormal coding of central neurons and the central attributes in patients with CLBP. 7 SMT acts on the spinal areas, the peripheral nervous system accepts the input signals and the upstream and downstream facilitators and inhibition pathways initiate to alleviate the pain.…”

Therapeutic Effect of Movement Control Exercises Combined With Traditional Physiotherapeutic Rehabilitation in A Patient Suffering With Non-Specific Low Back Pain: A Case Report

“…The pain lacks a clear origin and cannot be linked to a particular incident or illness [ 2 ]. With a global point prevalence of 7.3% and a one-year point prevalence of 38%, LBP affects 540 million individuals globally at any given moment [ 3 ]. Physical risk factors (such as heavy lifting and extended standing or walking) increase the chance of experiencing an episode of nonspecific LBP.…”