Validation of the cat as a model for the human lumbar spine during simulated high-velocity, low-amplitude spinal manipulation.
ABSTRACT High-velocity, low-amplitude spinal manipulation (HVLA-SM) is an efficacious treatment for low back pain, although the physiological mechanisms underlying its effects remain elusive. The lumbar facet joint capsule (FJC) is innervated with mechanically sensitive neurons and it has been theorized that the neurophysiological benefits of HVLA-SM are partially induced by stimulation of FJC neurons. Biomechanical aspects of this theory have been investigated in humans while neurophysiological aspects have been investigated using cat models. The purpose of this study was to determine the relationship between human and cat lumbar spines during HVLA-SM. Cat lumbar spine specimens were mechanically tested, using a displacement-controlled apparatus, during simulated HVLA-SM applied at L5, L6, and L7 that produced preload forces of approximately 25% bodyweight for 0.5 s and peak forces that rose to 50-100% bodyweight within approximately 125 ms, similar to that delivered clinically. Joint kinematics and FJC strain were measured optically. Human FJC strain and kinematics data were taken from a prior study. Regression models were established for FJC strain magnitudes as functions of factors species, manipulation site, and interactions thereof. During simulated HVLA-SM, joint kinematics in cat spines were greater in magnitude compared with humans. Similar to human spines, site-specific HVLA-SM produced regional cat FJC strains at distant motion segments. Joint motions and FJC strain magnitudes for cat spines were larger than those for human spine specimens. Regression relationships demonstrated that species, HVLA-SM site, and interactions thereof were significantly and moderately well correlated for HVLA-SM that generated tensile strain in the FJC. The relationships established in the current study can be used in future neurophysiological studies conducted in cats to extrapolate how human FJC afferents might respond to HVLA-SM. The data from the current study warrant further investigation into the clinical relevance of site targeted HVLA-SM.
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: To review and discuss the methods used for measuring spinal stiffness and factors associated with stiffness, how stiffness is used in diagnosis, prognosis, and treatment decision-making and the effects of manipulative techniques on stiffness. A systematic search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, AMED and ICL databases was conducted. Included studies addressed one of four constructs related to stiffness: measurement, diagnosis, prognosis and/or treatment decision-making, and the effects of manipulation on stiffness. Spinal stiffness was defined as the relationship between force and displacement. One hundred and four studies are discussed in this review, with the majority of studies focused on the measurement of stiffness, most often in asymptomatic persons. Eight studies investigated spinal stiffness in diagnosis, providing limited evidence that practitioner-judged stiffness is associated with radiographic findings of sagittal rotational mobility. Fifteen studies investigated spinal stiffness in prognosis or treatment decision-making, providing limited evidence that spinal stiffness is unlikely to independently predict patient outcomes, though stiffness may influence a practitioner's application of non-thrust manipulative techniques. Nine studies investigating the effects of manipulative techniques on spinal stiffness provide very limited evidence that there is no change in spinal stiffness following thrust or non-thrust manipulation in asymptomatic individuals and non-thrust techniques in symptomatic persons, with only one study supporting an immediate, but not sustained, stiffness decrease following thrust manipulation in symptomatic individuals. The existing limited evidence does not support an association between spinal stiffness and manipulative treatment outcomes. There is a need for additional research investigating the effects of manipulation on spinal stiffness in persons with spinal pain.Journal of electromyography and kinesiology: official journal of the International Society of Electrophysiological Kinesiology 06/2012; 22(5):708-23. · 2.00 Impact Factor
- Free Radical Biology and Medicine 01/2010; 49. · 5.71 Impact Factor
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Manual therapy practitioners commonly assess lumbar intervertebral mobility before deciding treatment regimens. Changes in mechanoreceptor activity during the manipulative thrust are theorized to be an underlying mechanism of spinal manipulation (SM) efficacy. The objective of this study was to determine if facet fixation or facetectomy at a single lumbar level alters muscle spindle activity during 5 SM thrust durations in an animal model. Spinal stiffness was determined using the slope of a force-displacement curve. Changes in the mean instantaneous frequency of spindle discharge were measured during simulated SM of the L6 vertebra in the same 20 afferents for laminectomy-only and 19 laminectomy and facet screw conditions; only 5 also had data for the laminectomy and facetectomy condition. Neural responses were compared across conditions and 5 thrust durations (≤250 milliseconds) using linear-mixed models. Significant decreases in afferent activity between the laminectomy-only and laminectomy and facet screw conditions were seen during 75-millisecond (P < .001), 100-millisecond (P = .04), and 150-millisecond (P = .02) SM thrust durations. Significant increases in spindle activity between the laminectomy-only and laminectomy and facetectomy conditions were seen during the 75-millisecond (P < .001) and 100-millisecond (P < .001) thrust durations. Intervertebral mobility at a single segmental level alters paraspinal sensory response during clinically relevant high-velocity, low-amplitude SM thrust durations (≤150 milliseconds). The relationship between intervertebral joint mobility and alterations of primary afferent activity during and after various manual therapy interventions may be used to help to identify patient subpopulations who respond to different types of manual therapy and better inform practitioners (eg, chiropractic and osteopathic) delivering the therapeutic intervention.Journal of manipulative and physiological therapeutics 10/2013; · 1.06 Impact Factor