Article

Effect of Sampling Rates on the Quantification of Forces, Durations, and Rates of Loading of Simulated Side Posture High-Velocity, Low-Amplitude Lumbar Spine Manipulation

Associate Professor, Palmer Center for Chiropractic Research, Davenport, Iowa. Electronic address: .
Journal of manipulative and physiological therapeutics (Impact Factor: 1.25). 06/2013; 36(5). DOI: 10.1016/j.jmpt.2013.05.010
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Quantification of chiropractic high-velocity, low-amplitude spinal manipulation (HVLA-SM) may require biomechanical equipment capable of sampling data at high rates. However, there are few studies reported in the literature regarding the minimal sampling rate required to record the HVLA-SM force-time profile data accurately and precisely. The purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of different sampling rates on the quantification of forces, durations, and rates of loading of simulated side posture lumbar spine HVLA-SM delivered by doctors of chiropractic.
Five doctors of chiropractic (DCs) and 5 asymptomatic participants were recruited for this study. Force-time profiles were recorded during (i) 52 simulated HVLA-SM thrusts to a force transducer placed on a force plate by 2 DCs and (ii) 12 lumbar side posture HVLA-SM on 5 participants by 3 DCs. Data sampling rate of the force plate remained the same at 1000 Hz, whereas the sampling rate of the force transducer varied at 50, 100, 200, and 500 Hz. The data were reduced using custom-written MATLAB (Mathworks, Inc, Natick, MA) and MathCad (version 15; Parametric Technologies, Natick, MA) programs and analyzed descriptively.
The average differences in the computed durations and rates of loading are smaller than 5% between 50 and 1000 Hz sampling rates. The differences in the computed preloads and peak loads are smaller than 3%.
The small differences observed in the characteristics of force-time profiles of simulated manual HVLA-SM thrusts measured using various sampling rates suggest that a sampling rate as low as 50 to 100 Hz may be sufficient. The results are applicable to the manipulation performed in this study: manual side posture lumbar spine HVLA-SM.

1 Follower
 · 
73 Views
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Low back pain (LBP) is a major health issue due to its high prevalence rate and socioeconomic cost. While spinal manipulation (SM) is recommended for LBP treatment by recently published clinical guidelines, the underlying therapeutic mechanisms remain unclear. Spinal stiffness is routinely examined and used in clinical decisions for SM delivery. It has also been explored as a predictor for clinical improvement. Flexion-relaxation phenomenon has been demonstrated to distinguish between LBP and healthy populations. The primary objective of the current study is to collect preliminary estimates of variability and effect size for the associations of these two physiological measures with patient-centered outcomes in chronic LBP patients. Additionally biomechanical characteristics of SM delivery are collected with the intention to explore the potential dose-response relationship between SM and LBP improvement.
    BMC Complementary and Alternative Medicine 08/2014; 14(1):292. DOI:10.1186/1472-6882-14-292 · 1.88 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Neck pain is a common musculoskeletal complaint responsive to manual therapies. Doctors of chiropractic commonly use manual cervical distraction, a mobilization procedure, to treat neck pain patients. However, it is unknown if clinicians can consistently apply standardized cervical traction forces, a critical step toward identifying an optimal therapeutic dose. PURPOSE: To assess clinicians' proficiency in delivering manually applied traction forces within specified ranges to neck pain patients. STUDY DESIGN: An observational study nested within a randomized clinical trial. SAMPLE: Two research clinicians provided study interventions to 48 participants with neck pain. OUTCOME MEASURES: Clinician proficiency in delivering cervical traction forces within three specified ranges (low force, less than 20 N; medium force, 21-50 N; and high force 51-100 N). METHODS: Participants were randomly allocated to three force-based treatment groups. Participants received five manual cervical distraction treatments over 2 weeks while lying prone on a treatment table instrumented with force sensors. Two clinicians delivered manual traction forces according to treatment groups. Clinicians treated participants first without real-time visual feedback displaying traction force and then with visual feedback. Peak traction force data were extracted and descriptively analyzed. RESULTS: Clinicians delivered manual cervical distraction treatments within the prescribed traction force ranges 75% of the time without visual feedback and 97% of the time with visual feedback. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates that doctors of chiropractic can successfully deliver prescribed traction forces while treating neck pain patients, enabling the capability to conduct force-based dose response clinical studies. Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
    The Spine Journal 04/2015; 15(4):570-6. DOI:10.1016/j.spinee.2014.10.016. · 2.80 Impact Factor
  • Article: Spine J
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Neck pain is a common musculoskeletal complaint responsive to manual therapies. Doctors of chiropractic commonly use manual cervical distraction, a mobilization procedure, to treat neck pain patients. However, it is unknown if clinicians can consistently apply standardized cervical traction forces, a critical step toward identifying an optimal therapeutic dose. PURPOSE: To assess clinicians' proficiency in delivering manually applied traction forces within specified ranges to neck pain patients. STUDY DESIGN: An observational study nested within a randomized clinical trial. SAMPLE: Two research clinicians provided study interventions to 48 participants with neck pain. OUTCOME MEASURES: Clinician proficiency in delivering cervical traction forces within three specified ranges (low force, less than 20 N; medium force, 21-50 N; and high force 51-100 N). METHODS: Participants were randomly allocated to three force-based treatment groups. Participants received five manual cervical distraction treatments over 2 weeks while lying prone on a treatment table instrumented with force sensors. Two clinicians delivered manual traction forces according to treatment groups. Clinicians treated participants first without real-time visual feedback displaying traction force and then with visual feedback. Peak traction force data were extracted and descriptively analyzed. RESULTS: Clinicians delivered manual cervical distraction treatments within the prescribed traction force ranges 75% of the time without visual feedback and 97% of the time with visual feedback. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates that doctors of chiropractic can successfully deliver prescribed traction forces while treating neck pain patients, enabling the capability to conduct force-based dose response clinical studies. Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
    The Spine Journal 04/2015; 15(4):570-576. DOI:10.1016/j.spinee.2014.10.016 · 2.80 Impact Factor

Preview

Download
0 Downloads
Available from