Musculoskeletal Diseases Nervous System Diseases
Conditions
Interventions
Sponsors
University of Johannesburg
Eligibility
Sex/Gender
All
Inclusion criteria
Inclusion criteria: • Male or female; age ranges from 18 – 65 years • Cervical spine motion restriction of a minimum of one spinal segment between and inclusive of C4-C7 spinal levels, right or left sided, identified by motion palpation • Asymptomatic, pain-free, no current complaint.
Exclusion criteria
Exclusion criteria: • Complaint of acute, subacute or chronic neck pain • History of trauma that may have resulted in nerve damage (i.e. hypoalgesia/hyperalgesia) • History of spinal surgery or lower limb surgery causing nerve damage • Contra-indications or red flags prohibiting SMT (Appendix D), where applicable to lower levels of the cervical spine • Intake of CNS depressants in past 24 hours thus suppressing neurotransmission (i.e. ethanol, barbiturates or benzodiazepines) • Neurological disease causing abnormal sensory perception such as central nervous system diseases (Huntington’s disease, multiple sclerosis, Parkinson’s disease), or peripheral nervous system diseases (peripheral neuropathies) • Complaint of chronic illness/pathology such as cancer and HIV
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame |
|---|---|
| Primary outcome was the assessment of spinal manipulation of the cervical spine on pain receptors locally. Bilaterally articular pillars were identified and stimulated using 2 mechanical stimuli. Pinprick sensitivity that stimulated superficial A-delta nociceptive fibres and pressure pain threshold which stimulated A-delta as well as deep C nociceptive fibres. Devices tested over 3 time periods, for a control group that did not receive spinal manipulation and an experimental group that received spinal manipulation of the cervical spine and measure pre and post-intervention to determine if the manipulation influenced these pain receptors. | — |
Secondary
| Measure | Time frame |
|---|---|
| The secondary outcome was assessing the remote effects of the spinal manipulation on bilateral calf regions using the 2 devices. Readings were taken at the same times as local areas. The remote testing sites assessed for the same potential effects on the pain receptors with the same fibres stimulated. Ultimately these remotes effects would determine if the spinal manipulation affected the central nervous system and afferent input from the peripheral nerves, possibly due to central modulation such as the descending inhibitory pathways. Again, both groups tested at the identified time intervals at the same locations throughout but group B received the intervention, immediately after the initial reading was done, group A did not have an intervention applied. | — |
Countries
South Africa
Contacts
Public ContactRaihaanah Pieterse
Senior Faculty Officer Post Graduate
Outcome results
None listed