Does inter-vertebral range of motion increase after spinal manipulation? A prospective cohort study
TL;DR: There was a modest dose-response relationship between the number of manipulations given and number of levels increasing IV-RoM - providing evidence that neck manipulation has a mechanical effect at segmental levels, however, patient-reported outcomes were not related to this.
Abstract: Background: Spinal manipulation for nonspecific neck pain is thought to work in part by improving inter-vertebral range of motion (IV-RoM), but it is difficult to measure this or determine whether it is related to clinical outcomes. Objectives: This study undertook to determine whether cervical spine flexion and extension IV-RoM increases after a course of spinal manipulation, to explore relationships between any IV-RoM increases and clinical outcomes and to compare palpation with objective measurement in the detection of hypo-mobile segments. Method: Thirty patients with nonspecific neck pain and 30 healthy controls matched for age and gender received quantitative fluoroscopy (QF) screenings to measure flexion and extension IV-RoM (C1-C6) at baseline and 4-week follow-up between September 2012-13. Patients received up to 12 neck manipulations and completed NRS, NDI and Euroqol 5D-5L at baseline, plus PGIC and satisfaction questionnaires at follow-up. IV-RoM accuracy, repeatability and hypo-mobility cut-offs were determined. Minimal detectable changes (MDC) over 4 weeks were calculated from controls. Patients and control IV-RoMs were compared at baseline as well as changes in patients over 4 weeks. Correlations between outcomes and the number of manipulations received and the agreement (Kappa) between palpated and QF-detected of hypo-mobile segments were calculated. Results: QF had high accuracy (worst RMS error 0.5o) and repeatability (highest SEM 1.1o, lowest ICC 0.90) for IV-RoM measurement. Hypo-mobility cut offs ranged from 0.8o to 3.5o. No outcome was significantly correlated with increased IV-RoM above MDC and there was no significant difference between the number of hypo-mobile segments in patients and controls at baseline or significant increases in IV-RoMs in patients. However, there was a modest and significant correlation between the number of manipulations received and the number of levels and directions whose IV-RoM increased beyond MDC (Rho=0.39, p=0.043). There was also no agreement between palpation and QF in identifying hypo-mobile segments (Kappa 0.04-0.06). Conclusions: This study found no differences in cervical sagittal IV-RoM between patients with non-specific neck pain and matched controls. There was a modest dose-response relationship between the number of manipulations given and number of levels increasing IV-RoM - providing evidence that neck manipulation has a mechanical effect at segmental levels. However, patient-reported outcomes were not related to this.
Citations
More filters
TL;DR: In this article, the intersegmental motor control (MC) at individual levels and its variability was quantified using fluoroscopy during repeated unconstrained flexion and return neck movements, defined as the difference and variation in repeated continuous angular motion from its average path.
Abstract: Spinal control at intervertebral levels is dependent on interactions between the active, passive and neural control elements. However, this has never been quantifiable, and has therefore been outside the reach of clinical assessments and research. This study used fluoroscopy during repeated unconstrained flexion and return neck movements to calculate intersegmental motor control (MC), defined as the difference and variation in repeated continuous angular motion from its average path. The study aimed to determine control values for MC at individual levels and its variability. Twenty male volunteers aged 19–29 received fluoroscopic screening of their cervical spines during 4 repetitions of neutral to full flexion and return motion. Moving vertebral images from C0–C1 to C6–C7 were tracked using cross-correlation codes written in Matlab. MC for each level was defined as the mean of the absolute differences between each repetition’s angular path and their mean and its variability as represented by the SD. 1-way ANOVA and Tukey multiple comparisons were used to identify significant contrasts between levels. The mean MC differences and SDs were highest at C1-2, suggesting that this level has the least control and the most variability. Results at this level alone were highly significant (F-ratio 10.88 and 9.79 P < 0.0001). Significant contrasts were only found between C1-C2 and all other levels. The mean MC difference for summed C1-6 levels was 3.4° (0.7–6.1). This study is the first to quantify intervertebral MC in the cervical spine in asymptomatic people. Studies of neck pain patients are now merited.
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors found significant correlations between maximal intervertebral range of motion (IV-RoMmax) and laxity interactions in the cervical spine during flexion and extension, and if there are differences in IV-RMMmax or laxity parameters between baseline and follow-up in both patients with neck pain and asymptomatic controls.
TL;DR: Motion analysis is capable of detecting the effects of OMT on cervical and jaw ROM in students with bruxism but not without and the study showed the feasibility of introducing usual standards for clinical trials and sham treatment in school led studies with students.
References
More filters
TL;DR: In this article, the authors present a procedure for having two or more judges independently categorize a sample of units and determine the degree, significance, and significance of the units. But they do not discuss the extent to which these judgments are reproducible, i.e., reliable.
Abstract: CONSIDER Table 1. It represents in its formal characteristics a situation which arises in the clinical-social-personality areas of psychology, where it frequently occurs that the only useful level of measurement obtainable is nominal scaling (Stevens, 1951, pp. 2526), i.e. placement in a set of k unordered categories. Because the categorizing of the units is a consequence of some complex judgment process performed by a &dquo;two-legged meter&dquo; (Stevens, 1958), it becomes important to determine the extent to which these judgments are reproducible, i.e., reliable. The procedure which suggests itself is that of having two (or more) judges independently categorize a sample of units and determine the degree, significance, and
34,965 citations
"Does inter-vertebral range of motio..." refers methods in this paper
...Analysis of proportions of dichotomous variables was by 2-way Fisher Exact tests for comparison of cohorts and by Cohen’s Kappa statistic [41] for agreement between palpated and measured hypo-mobility....
[...]
Book•
01 Jan 2000
TL;DR: Suitable for those new to statistics as well as students on intermediate and more advanced courses, the book walks students through from basic to advanced level concepts, all the while reinforcing knowledge through the use of SAS(R).
Abstract: Hot on the heels of the 3rd edition of Andy Field's award-winning Discovering Statistics Using SPSS comes this brand new version for students using SAS(R). Andy has teamed up with a co-author, Jeremy Miles, to adapt the book with all the most up-to-date commands and programming language from SAS(R) 9.2. If you're using SAS(R), this is the only book on statistics that you will need! The book provides a comprehensive collection of statistical methods, tests and procedures, covering everything you're likely to need to know for your course, all presented in Andy's accessible and humourous writing style. Suitable for those new to statistics as well as students on intermediate and more advanced courses, the book walks students through from basic to advanced level concepts, all the while reinforcing knowledge through the use of SAS(R). A 'cast of characters' supports the learning process throughout the book, from providing tips on how to enter data in SAS(R) properly to testing knowledge covered in chapters interactively, and 'real world' and invented examples illustrate the concepts and make the techniques come alive. The book's companion website (see link above) provides students with a wide range of invented and real published research datasets. Lecturers can find multiple choice questions and PowerPoint slides for each chapter to support their teaching.
25,020 citations
"Does inter-vertebral range of motio..." refers background in this paper
...A sample size of 30 participants in each group would allow adequate opportunity for normal distributions of interval data if present [24] with a realistic recruitment target given the time and resources available....
[...]
TL;DR: In this article, the authors present guidelines for choosing among six different forms of the intraclass correlation for reliability studies in which n target are rated by k judges, and the confidence intervals for each of the forms are reviewed.
Abstract: Reliability coefficients often take the form of intraclass correlation coefficients. In this article, guidelines are given for choosing among six different forms of the intraclass correlation for reliability studies in which n target are rated by k judges. Relevant to the choice of the coefficient are the appropriate statistical model for the reliability and the application to be made of the reliability results. Confidence intervals for each of the forms are reviewed.
21,185 citations
"Does inter-vertebral range of motio..." refers methods in this paper
...Agreement was calculated for both tests as standard errors of measurement (SEM) [33] and intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC 2C,1 and 3C,1) for reliability [34]....
[...]
TL;DR: A 5-level version of the EQ-5D has been developed by the EuroQol Group and further testing is required to determine whether the new version improves sensitivity and reduces ceiling effects.
Abstract: This article introduces the new 5-level EQ-5D (EQ-5D-5L) health status measure. EQ-5D currently measures health using three levels of severity in five dimensions. A EuroQol Group task force was established to find ways of improving the instrument's sensitivity and reducing ceiling effects by increasing the number of severity levels. The study was performed in the United Kingdom and Spain. Severity labels for 5 levels in each dimension were identified using response scaling. Focus groups were used to investigate the face and content validity of the new versions, including hypothetical health states generated from those versions. Selecting labels at approximately the 25th, 50th, and 75th centiles produced two alternative 5-level versions. Focus group work showed a slight preference for the wording 'slight-moderate-severe' problems, with anchors of 'no problems' and 'unable to do' in the EQ-5D functional dimensions. Similar wording was used in the Pain/Discomfort and Anxiety/Depression dimensions. Hypothetical health states were well understood though participants stressed the need for the internal coherence of health states. A 5-level version of the EQ-5D has been developed by the EuroQol Group. Further testing is required to determine whether the new version improves sensitivity and reduces ceiling effects.
5,345 citations
"Does inter-vertebral range of motio..." refers methods in this paper
...Patients completed an 11-point numerical rating scale for pain (NRS), the Neck Disability Index (NDI) [26], and the EuroQol EQ-5 L [27]....
[...]
TL;DR: Using a standard outcome across chronic pain studies would greatly enhance the comparability, validity, and clinical applicability of these studies, and the application of these results to future studies may provide a standard definition of clinically important improvement in clinical trials of chronic pain therapies.
Abstract: Pain intensity is frequently measured on an 11-point pain intensity numerical rating scale (PI-NRS), where 0=no pain and 10=worst possible pain. However, it is difficult to interpret the clinical importance of changes from baseline on this scale (such as a 1- or 2-point change). To date, there are no data driven estimates for clinically important differences in pain intensity scales used for chronic pain studies. We have estimated a clinically important difference on this scale by relating it to global assessments of change in multiple studies of chronic pain. Data on 2724 subjects from 10 recently completed placebo-controlled clinical trials of pregabalin in diabetic neuropathy, postherpetic neuralgia, chronic low back pain, fibromyalgia, and osteoarthritis were used. The studies had similar designs and measurement instruments, including the PI-NRS, collected in a daily diary, and the standard seven-point patient global impression of change (PGIC), collected at the endpoint. The changes in the PI-NRS from baseline to the endpoint were compared to the PGIC for each subject. Categories of "much improved" and "very much improved" were used as determinants of a clinically important difference and the relationship to the PI-NRS was explored using graphs, box plots, and sensitivity/specificity analyses. A consistent relationship between the change in PI-NRS and the PGIC was demonstrated regardless of study, disease type, age, sex, study result, or treatment group. On average, a reduction of approximately two points or a reduction of approximately 30% in the PI-NRS represented a clinically important difference. The relationship between percent change and the PGIC was also consistent regardless of baseline pain, while higher baseline scores required larger raw changes to represent a clinically important difference. The application of these results to future studies may provide a standard definition of clinically important improvement in clinical trials of chronic pain therapies. Use of a standard outcome across chronic pain studies would greatly enhance the comparability, validity, and clinical applicability of these studies.
4,568 citations