Healthy
Conditions
Keywords
manipulation, electromyography, sympathetic nervous system
Brief summary
This study evaluates the effects of manual and instrument-assisted cervical manipulation on electromyographic activity and sympathetic nervous system. Subjects were divided in four groups, one group was submitted to a manual cervical manipulation, other group was submitted to an instrument-assisted cervical manipulation, other group was submitted to a sham manipulation and another group served as control.
Detailed description
The manual manipulation was applied over C3/C4, as the participants were positioned in supine with the cervical spine in a neutral position. Slight ipsilateral side flexion and contralateral rotation were introduced until tension was perceived in the tissues at the contact point. A high-velocity, low-amplitude thrust manipulation was directed upward and medially in the direction of the subject's contralateral eye. The instrument-assisted manipulation was applied using a handheld Activator IV Adjusting Instrument. Contacts were made firm enough to prevent slipping of the rubber tip but not so firm as to load the spring, in consistence with customary clinical use of the instrument. The spring was then loaded by means of the instrument's trigger mechanism, and the impulse was delivered in an anterosuperior direction, over the posterolateral aspect of the vertebra on the right lamina-pedicle junction of C3. The sham manipulation to the right C3/C4 segment was administered using the same 'set-up' as for the manual manipulation; however, once the barrier was engaged, the head was re-positioned to neutral with no thrust applied. The control group individuals were positioned supine for the same twenty minutes as the other groups and they received no manual contact.
Interventions
OTHERManual Manipulation
Subject was in supine position, and the therapist applied a manual manipulation with right side bending and left rotation of the neck.
OTHERInstrument-assisted Manipulation
The instrument-assisted manipulation was applied using a handheld Activator IV Adjusting Instrument. Contacts were made firm enough to prevent slipping of the rubber tip but not so firm as to load the spring, in consistence with customary clinical use of the instrument. The spring was then loaded by means of the instrument's trigger mechanism, and the impulse was delivered in an anterosuperior direction, over the posterolateral aspect of the vertebra on the right lamina-pedicle junction of C3.
OTHERPlacebo
Subject was in supine position, and the therapist placed ths subject's cervical with right side bending and left rotation but no manual manipulation was applied.
Sponsors
Escola Superior de Tecnologia da Saúde do Porto
Study design
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
DOUBLE (Subject, Outcomes Assessor)
Masking description
Electromyographic signal and skin conductance were assessed by blinded assessors before and immediately after the intervention. The participants were not aware of their assigned group.
Intervention model description
Double blind randomized control placebo trial
Eligibility
Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to No maximum
Healthy volunteers
Yes
Inclusion criteria
* Asymptomatic individuals * Age above 18 years.
Exclusion criteria
* Presence of cervical pain * History of surgery and/neck trauma * Osteoporosis * Current use of anticoagulant therapy * Presence of dizziness and/or vertigo * Pregnancy * Cancer * Any other contra-indication to spinal manipulation.
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Sympathetic Nervous System activity through change in skin conductance values | 10 minutes post intervention | The effect on sympathetic nervous system was compared between manual manipulation, instrument-assisted manipulation, placebo and control. The endodermic activity amplifier Galvanic Skin Response (GSR100C) was used to collect the skin conductance values. |
| Change of electromyographic activity of upper trapezius after spinal manipulation | 10 minutes post intervention | The effect on basal electromyographic activity of upper trapezius was compared between manual manipulation, instrument-assisted manipulation, placebo and control. Muscle activity was evaluated before and 10 minutes after each intervention. |
| Change of electromyographic activity of biceps brachii after spinal manipulation | 10 minutes post intervention | The effect on basal electromyographic activity of biceps brachii was compared between manual manipulation, instrument-assisted manipulation, placebo and control. Muscle activity was evaluated before and 10 minutes after each intervention. |
Outcome results
None listed