Dry needling for the management of thoracic spine pain

Abstract

Thoracic spine pain is as disabling as neck and low back pain; however, it has not received as much attention as the cervical and lumbar spine in the scientific literature. Among the different structures that can refer pain to the thoracic spine, muscles often play a relevant role. In fact, myofascial trigger points (TrPs) from several neck, shoulder and spinal muscles can induce pain in the region of the thoracic spine. There is a lack of evidence reporting the presence of myofascial TrPs in the thoracic spine, but clinical evidence suggests that TrPs can be a potential source of thoracic spine pain. The current paper discusses the role of myofascial TrPs in the thoracic spine and summarises the proper and safe application of dry needling (DN) for the management of myofascial TrPs in two main spinal muscles involved in thoracic spine pain: the thoracic multifidi and longissimus thoracis. In addition, this paper discusses the application of DN in other tissues such as tendons, ligaments and scars.     

Interaction Between Thoracic Movement and Lumbar Spine Muscle Activation Patterns in Young Adults Asymptomatic for Low Back Pain: A Cross-Sectional Study

ObjectiveThe purpose of this study was to investigate the interaction between thoracic movement and lumbar muscle co-contraction when the lumbar spine was held in a relatively neutral posture.MethodsThirty young adults, asymptomatic for back pain, performed 10 trials of upright standing, maximum trunk range of motion, and thoracic movement tasks while lumbar muscle activation was measured. Lumbar co-contraction was calculated, compared between tasks, and correlated to thoracic angles.ResultsMovement tasks typically exhibited greater co-contraction than upright standing. Co-contraction in the lumbar musculature was 67%, 45%, and 55% greater than upright standing for thoracic flex, thoracic bend, and thoracic twist, respectively. Generally, the thoracic movement task demonstrated greater co-contraction than the maximum task in the same direction. Co-contraction was also correlated to thoracic angles in each movement direction.ConclusionTasks with thoracic movement and a neutral lumbar spine posture resulted in increases in co-contraction within the lumbar musculature compared with quiet standing and maximum trunk range-of-motion tasks. Findings indicated an interaction between the 2 spine regions, suggesting that thoracic posture should be accounted for during the investigation of lumbar spine mechanics.     

Immediate effects of thoracic spine self-mobilization in patients with mechanical neck pain: A randomized controlled trial

ObjectivesTo investigate the immediate effects of thoracic spine self-mobilization in patients with mechanical neck pain.Study designRandomized, controlled trial.BackgroundThoracic spine self-mobilization is performed after thoracic spine thrust manipulation to augment and maintain its effects. To the best of our knowledge, no study has investigated the effects of thoracic spine self-mobilization alone in individuals with mechanical neck pain. The purpose of this randomized, controlled trial was to evaluate the immediate effects of thoracic spine self-mobilization alone without any other intervention on disability, pain, and cervical range of motion in patients with mechanical neck pain.MethodsFifty-two patients (39 females and 13 males) with mechanical neck pain were randomly allocated to either a thoracic spine self-mobilization group that was performing a thoracic spine active flexion and extension activity using two tennis balls fixed by athletic tape or a placebo thoracic spine self-mobilization group. Outcome measures were collected at pre-intervention and immediately after intervention, including the Neck Disability Index, visual analogue scale, and active cervical range of motion (ROM). The immediate effect of the intervention was analyzed using two-way repeated measures analysis of variance (ANOVA). If interactions were found, a simple main effect test was performed to compare the pre-post intra-group results.ResultsThe results of two-way repeated measures ANOVA indicated that the main effect of time was significant (p < 0.05) for all measurement outcomes. The main effect of group was not significant for all measurement outcomes (p > 0.05). The group × time interactions for cervical flexion active ROM (p = 0.005) and cervical extension active ROM (p = 0.036) were significant. The tests of simple main effect in cervical flexion active ROM (p < 0.0001) and cervical extension active ROM (p < 0.0001) showed a significant difference before and after intervention in the thoracic spine self-mobilization group.ConclusionPatients with mechanical neck pain who carried out thoracic spine self-mobilization showed increases in active cervical flexion and extension ROM.     

Relationship between neck acceleration and muscle activation in people with chronic neck pain: Implications for functional disability

BackgroundPrevious study has found that people with chronic neck pain moved with a consistently compromised acceleration/deceleration at their cervical and thoracic spines. This study examined the strength of the association between the electromyographic activities and the acceleration/deceleration of the cervical and thoracic spine, and its correlation with the functional disabilities in individuals with neck pain.MethodsTime history of the cervical and thoracic acceleration/deceleration and EMG activity was acquired in thirty-four subjects with chronic neck pain and thirty-four age- and gender-matched asymptomatic subjects during active neck movements. The strength of the association between the electromyographic activity of spinal muscles and the cervical and thoracic acceleration/deceleration was determined using cross-correlation method. Relationship between the strength of this association and the severity of the functional disabilities in neck pain group was examined using correlation analysis.FindingsThe strength of the association between cervical and thoracic acceleration/deceleration and electromyographic activities was significantly lower in neck pain group. Significant negative correlations were found between the functional disability level and the strength of this defined association in the symptomatic group.InterpretationThe compromised capability of the spinal muscles to produce acceleration/deceleration in the neck pain group may imply an impaired electromechanical coupling of these spinal muscles when performing neck movements. Significant negative correlation of the degree of functional disabilities suggests that the present approach can be used as an objective and specific evaluation of the dynamic performance of the spinal muscles and its relationship with the functional disabilities in neck pain subjects.     

Association Among Dyskinesia of the Lumbar Spine Segment,Inclination Angle of the Lumbosacral Spine,and Low Back Pain in Young Athletes: A Predictive Correlational Study

ObjectiveThis predictive correlational study aimed to investigate the association among low back pain (LBP), dyskinesia of the lumbosacral spine segment (determined by inertial sensors), and inclination angles: the inclination angle of the lumbosacral spine (alpha), the inclination angle of the thoracolumbar spine (beta), and the inclination angle of the upper thoracic section (gamma). Our hypothesis was that young athletes with LBP had a particular dyskinesia: nonphysiological movements of the lumbosacral segment of the spine.MethodsThe study group consisted of 108 young athletes aged 10 to 16 years (male/female 44%/56%; 12.3 ± 1.8 years; 160.1 ± 12.0 cm; 51.1 ± 13.8 kg; 4.3 ± 2.4 training years; 3.7 ± 2.1 training h/wk). The alpha, beta, and gamma angles were measured with a digital inclinometer. The position of the lumbosacral segment at the maximum extension was determined with the inertial sensors, positioned at the 11th thoracic vertebra (T11), the third lumbar spine vertebra (L3), and the second sacral spine vertebra (S2).The data were analyzed using Student's t tests, tetrachoric correlation coefficients, and logistic regression.ResultsThere was a significant statistical difference in alpha angles (t = 9.4, P < .001) and lumbar positions in extension (t = 6.4, P < .001) between groups with LBP and without LBP. The logistic regression indicated that LBP in young athletes was significantly associated with the increased alpha angle and nonphysiological lumbar position in extension measured by a sensor at the third lumbar spine vertebra.ConclusionThere was a strong association among LBP, increased inclination angle of the lumbosacral spine, and dyskinesia of the lumbar spine segment in young athletes.     

Consistency of a lumbar movement pattern across functional activities in people with low back pain

BackgroundLimitation in function is a primary reason people with low back pain seek medical treatment. Specific lumbar movement patterns, repeated throughout the day, have been proposed to contribute to the development and course of low back pain. Varying the demands of a functional activity test may provide some insight into whether people display consistent lumbar movement patterns during functional activities. Our purpose was to examine the consistency of the lumbar movement pattern during variations of a functional activity test in people with low back pain and back-healthy people.Methods16 back-healthy adults and 32 people with low back pain participated. Low back pain participants were classified based on the level of self-reported functional limitations. Participants performed 5 different conditions of a functional activity test. Lumbar excursion in the early phase of movement was examined. The association between functional limitations and early phase lumbar excursion for each test condition was examined.FindingsPeople with low back pain and high levels of functional limitation demonstrated a consistent pattern of greater early phase lumbar excursion across test conditions (p < 0.05). For each test condition, the amount of early phase lumbar excursion was associated with functional limitation (r = 0.28–0.62).InterpretationOur research provides preliminary evidence that people with low back pain adopt consistent movement patterns during the performance of functional activities. Our findings indicate that the lumbar spine consistently moves more readily into its available range in people with low back pain and high levels of functional limitation. How the lumbar spine moves during a functional activity may contribute to functional limitations.     

Widespread Proprioceptive Acuity Impairment in Chronic Back Pain: A Cross-sectional Study

ObjectiveTo investigate whether proprioceptive accuracy measured with the Joint Position Sense (JPS) in patients with chronic neck and low back pain is impaired exclusively in affected areas or also in distant areas, not affected by pain.DesignCross-sectional study.SettingInterdisciplinary outpatient rehabilitation clinic for back and neck pain.ParticipantsPatients with chronic neck pain (n=30), patients with chronic low back pain (n=30), and age- and sex-matched asymptomatic control subjects (n=30; N=90).InterventionsNot applicable.Main Outcome MeasuresPatients and asymptomatic control subjects completed a test procedure for the JPS of the cervical spine, lumbar spine, and ankle in a randomized order. Between group differences were analyzed with the univariate analysis of variance and associations of the JPS with clinical features using the Pearson's correlation coefficient.ResultsBoth patients with chronic neck pain (P<.001) and patients with chronic low back pain (P<.01) differed significantly from asymptomatic controls in the JPS of the cervical spine, lumbar spine and ankle joint, regardless of the painful area. No difference was shown between patient groups (P>.05). An association of the JPS with clinical characteristics, however, could not be shown.ConclusionThese results suggest widespread impairment of proprioceptive accuracy in patients with chronic and low back pain and a role for central sensorimotor processes in musculoskeletal pain conditions.     

Defining mild,moderate, and severe pain in young people with physical disabilities

Purpose: The purpose of this study is to identify the cutoffs that are most suitable for classifying average and worst pain intensity as being mild, moderate, or severe in young people with physical disabilities.

Method: Survey study using a convenience sample of 113 young people (mean age?=?14.19; SD?=?2.9; age range: 8–20) with physical disabilities (namely, spinal cord injury, cerebral palsy, spina bifida, limb deficiency (acquired or congenital), or neuromuscular disease).

Results: The findings support a non-linear association between pain intensity and pain interference. In addition, the optimal cutoffs for classifying average and worst pain as mild, moderate, or severe differed. For average pain, the best cutoffs were the following: 0–3 for mild, 4–6 for moderate, and 7–10 for severe pain, whereas the optimal classification for worst pain was 0–4 for mild, 5–6 for moderate, and 7–10 for severe pain.

Conclusions: The findings provide important information that may be used to help make decisions regarding pain treatment in young people with disabilities and also highlight the need to use different cutoffs for classifying pain intensity in young people with disabilities than those that have been suggested for adults with chronic pain.

• Implications for rehabilitation

• Most clinical guidelines make treatment recommendations based on classifications of pain intensity as being mild, moderate, and severe that do not have a clear cut association with pain intensity ratings.

• Cutoffs that are deemed to be the most appropriate for classifying pain intensity as mild, moderate, and severe appear to depend, at least in part, on the pain population that is being studied and pain domain that is being used.

• This work helps to advance our knowledge regarding the meaning of pain intensity ratings in young people with physical disabilities.

• Clinicians can use this information to make empirically guided decisions regarding when to intervene in young people with disabilities and chronic pain.

     

Relationships between sagittal postures of thoracic and cervical spine,presence of neck pain,neck pain severity and disability

This was a cross-sectional correlation study to explore the relationships between sagittal postures of thoracic and cervical spine, presence of neck pain, neck pain severity and disability. Moreover, the reliability of the photographic measurement of the sagittal posture of thoracic and cervical spine was investigated. Forty-five subjects without neck pain and forty-seven subjects with neck pain were recruited. Using a photographic method, the sagittal thoracic and cervical postures were measured by the upper thoracic and the craniovertebral (CV) angles respectively. The Numeric Pain Rating Scale (NPRS) and Chinese version Northwick Park Neck Pain Questionnaire (NPQ) were used to assess neck pain severity and disability. The upper thoracic angle was positively correlated (r_s = 0.63, p < 0.01) while the CV angle was negatively correlated (r_s = ?0.56, p < 0.01) with the presence of neck pain. The upper thoracic angle was negatively correlated with the CV angles (r_s = ?0.62, p < 0.01) in subjects with neck pain. Similar to the CV angle, the upper thoracic angle was moderately correlated with the neck pain severity (r_s = 0.43, p = 0.01) and disability (r_s = 0.44, p = 0.02). The upper thoracic angle (OR = 1.37, p < 0.01) was a good predictor for presence of neck pain even better than that of the CV angle (OR = 0.86, p = 0.04).     

Differences in lumbopelvic motion between people with and people without low back pain during two lower limb movement tests

Background

Clinical data suggest that active limb movements may be associated with early lumbopelvic motion and increased symptoms in people with low back pain.

Methods

Forty-one people without low back pain who did not play rotation-related sports and 50 people with low back pain who played rotation-related sports were examined. Angular measures of limb movement and lumbopelvic motion were calculated across time during active knee flexion and active hip lateral rotation in prone using a three-dimensional motion capture system. Timing of lumbopelvic motion during the limb movement tests was calculated as the difference in time between the initiation of limb movement and lumbopelvic motion normalized to limb movement time.

Findings

During knee flexion and hip lateral rotation, people with low back pain demonstrated a greater maximal lumbopelvic rotation angle and earlier lumbopelvic rotation, compared to people without low back pain (P < 0.05).

Interpretation

The data suggest that people with low back pain who play rotation-related sports may move their lumbopelvic region to a greater extent and earlier during lower limb movements than people without low back pain. Because people perform many of their daily activities in early to midranges of joint motion the lumbopelvic region may move more frequently across the day in people with low back pain. The increased frequency may contribute to increased lumbar region tissue stress and potentially low back pain symptoms. Lower limb movements, therefore, may be important factors related to the development or persistence of low back pain.     

Differences in lumbar spine and lower extremity kinematics during a step down functional task in people with and people without low back pain

BackgroundWhen functional movements are impaired in people with low back pain, they may be a contributing factor to chronicity and recurrence. The purpose of the current study was to examine lumbar spine, pelvis, and lower extremity kinematics during a step down functional task between people with and without a history of low back pain.MethodsA 3-dimensional motion capture system was used to analyze kinematics during a step down task. Total excursion of the lumbar spine, pelvis, and lower extremity segments in each plane were calculated from the start to end of the task. Separate analysis of variance tests (α = 0.05) were conducted to determine the effect of independent variables of group and plane on lumbar spine, pelvis, and lower extremity kinematics. An exploratory analysis was conducted to examine kinematic differences among movement-based low back pain subgroups.FindingsSubjects with low back pain displayed less lumbar spine movement than controls across all three planes of movement (P-values = 0.001–0.043). This group difference was most pronounced in the sagittal plane. For the lower extremity, subjects with low back pain displayed more frontal and axial plane knee movement than controls (P-values = 0.001). There were no significant differences in kinematics among movement-based low back pain subgroups.InterpretationPeople with low back pain displayed less lumbar region movement in the sagittal plane and more off-plane knee movements than the control group during a step down task. Clinicians can use this information when assessing lumbar spine and lower extremity movement during functional tasks, with the goal of developing movement-based interventions.     

Diagnosis of cervical and thoracic musculoskeletal spinal pain receptive to mechanical movement strategies: a multicenter observational study

Background: The McKenzie’s Mechanical Diagnosis and Therapy (MDT), which uses a combination of repeated movements and sustained positions to affect signs and symptoms, is commonly used for the conservative evaluation and management of cervical and thoracic spinal conditions.

Objective: Report a consecutive cohort of neck and thoracic pain patients managed using MDT and to record their classifications and physiotherapy management strategies.

Methods: Therapists provided demographic data on themselves and the patients, clinical data on the patients, and Neck Disability Index scores at baseline and final visit.

Results: Sixteen therapists collected data on 138 patients at baseline, of who 120 (87%) were followed up three to five visits later; these were patients with 131 cervical and seven thoracic problems. The therapists and patients are described. Regarding MDT classifications 83% were recorded as cervical and 100% as thoracic Derangement; there was a Directional Preference for extension in 80% of cervical spine patients, and 100% of thoracic spine patients. In addition, 13% of cervical spine patients were classified as OTHER, for which specific classifications were given. Classifications remained stable between initial and discharge sessions in 94% of patients. Neck Disability Index scores reduced from a mean of 24–12 at discharge (P < 0.001).

Conclusions: Routinely collected data can describe both therapists and patients involved, demonstrate the MDT classification clinical utility in terms of prevalence and stability between visits, provide information on the clinical course of this patients’ population, which could help establish treatment efficacy. Randomized controlled trials are needed to test for efficacy.     

Characteristics of thoracic and lumbar movements during gait in lumbar spinal stenosis patients before and after decompression surgery

BackgroundAlthough gait analysis has been previously conducted for lumbar spinal stenosis patients, the vertebral segmental movements, such as of the thoracic and lumbar regions, and whether the spinal movement during gait changes after decompression surgery remain unclear.MethodsTen patients with lumbar spinal stenosis and 10 healthy controls participated. Clinical outcomes were assessed using the Japanese Orthopaedic Association Back Pain Evaluation Questionnaire and Visual Analogue Scale. Spinal kinematic data of the participants during gait were acquired using a three-dimensional motion analysis system. The trunk (whole spine), thoracic, and lumbar flexion and pelvic tilting values were calculated. Spinal kinematic data and clinical outcomes were collected preoperatively and 1 month postoperatively for the patients.FindingsCompared to that observed preoperatively, the clinical outcomes significantly improved at 1 month postoperatively. In the standing position, the preoperative lumbar extension of the patients was significantly smaller than that of the controls. Moreover, during gait, the lumbar flexion relative to the standing position of the patients was smaller than that of the controls preoperatively, and increased at 1 month postoperatively. The sum of the thoracic and lumbar flexion values during gait negatively correlated with the score for leg pain.InterpretationThe epidural pressure of lumbar spinal stenosis patients is known to be higher than that of normal subjects during gait, and to decrease during walking with lumbar flexion. Preoperatively, smaller thoracic and lumbar flexion movements during gait relative to the standing position cannot decrease epidural pressure; as a result, severe leg pain might be induced.     

Effects of scapular stabilization and upper limb proprioception as an adjunct to cervical stabilization in chronic neck pain patients: A randomized controlled trial

BackgroundChronic neck pain is a prevalent health condition and a leading cause of disability worldwide. Prompt therapeutic measures are required to overcome this condition.ObjectivesTo evaluate the efficacy of incorporation of scapular stabilization and upper limb proprioceptive exercises to cervical stabilization exercises in patients with chronic neck pain (CNP).DesignA single-blinded randomized controlled design.MethodsA sample of convenience was deployed to recruit twenty-eight patients having CNP (18–45 years) and was randomized into two groups: group A (cervical stabilization exercises group) and group B (scapular stabilization and upper limb proprioceptive exercises group + cervical stabilization exercises). Pain intensity, disability, sleep quality, quality of life, scapular muscles strength and proprioception were assessed at 4 weeks follow up to determine the efficacy of the intervention.ResultsA mixed model ANOVA was used. A statistically significant (p < 0.05) group by time interaction for pain intensity (p = 0.000), scapular muscles strength of all muscles (p = 0.000) was observed. Significant group interaction for absolute error (p = 0.00), for pain (p = 0.001), disability (p = 0.04) and scapular muscle's strength (p = 0.000) was also demonstrated.ConclusionThe results indicated that scapular stabilization and upper limb proprioceptive exercises when combined with cervical stabilization exercises are more beneficial in alleviating pain and disability and improving scapular muscle strength and proprioception in patients with CNP.     

Immediate and short-term effects of mulligan concept positional sustained natural apophyseal glides on an athletic young-adult population classified with mechanical neck pain: an exploratory investigation

Objectives: Mechanical neck pain (MNP) is common in the athletic population. While symptoms may present at the cervical spine for patients complaining of MNP, thoracic spinal alignment or dysfunction may influence cervical positioning and overall cervical function. Clinicians often employ cervical high-velocity low-amplitude (HVLA) thrust manipulations to treat MNP, albeit with a small level of inherent risk. Mulligan Concept positional sustained natural apophyseal glides (SNAGs) directed at the cervicothoracic region are emerging to treat patients with cervical pain and dysfunction, as evidence supporting an interdependent relationship between the thoracic and cervical spine grows. The purpose of this a priori study was to evaluate outcome measures of patients classified with MNP treated with the Mulligan Concept Positional SNAGs. Methods: Ten consecutive young-adult patients, ages ranging from 15 to 18 years (mean = 16.5 ± 1.78), classified with MNP were treated utilizing Mulligan Concept Positional SNAGs. The Numeric Rating Scale (NRS), Patient-Specific Functional Scale (PSFS), Neck Disability Index (NDI), Disablement in the Physically Active (DPAS), and Fear-Avoidance Based Questionnaire-Physical Activity (FABQPA) were collected for inclusion criteria and to identify patient-reported pain and dysfunction. Results: Patients reported decreases in pain on the NRS [5.4 to .16, p = .001], increases in function on the PSFS [5.2 to 10, p = .001], and increases in cervical range of motion (CROM) [ext p = .003, flex p = .009, left rot p = .001, right rot p = .002] immediately post-treatment and between treatments. Discussion: Positional SNAGs directed at the cervicothoracic region may address a variety of patient reported symptoms for MNP, and the number of treatment sessions needed for symptom resolution may be closer to a single session rather than multiple treatments. Level of Evidence: 4.     

Comparative effect of lumbar myofascial release with electrotherapy on the elastic modulus of lumbar fascia and pain in patients with non-specific low back pain

ObjectivesLow back pain is a major health issue in most industrialized countries. Lumbar fascia is supported as a potential source of pain in the lumbar region. Myofascial release is a manual therapeutic approach that focuses on restoring altered soft tissue function. On the other hand, one of the most commonly used physical therapy methods for low back pain is electrotherapy. The purpose of this study was to compare the effect of lumbar Myofascial release and electrotherapy on clinical outcomes of Non-specific low back pain and elastic modulus of lumbar myofascial tissue.DesignRandomized, clinical trial.SettingOutpatient Low back pain clinic.Subjects32 subjects with low back pain.InterventionsSubjects were randomized into the myofascial release group (n = 16) and electrotherapy group(n = 16). Subjects in the myofascial release group received 4 sessions of myofascial release in the lumbar region, and the electrotherapy group received 10 sessions of electrotherapy.Main measuresLow back pain severity, and elastic modulus of the lumbar myofascial tissue were assessed before and after treatment.ResultsAn independent sample T-test was used to compare baseline variables in both groups (p > 0.05) (effect size≥0.83), Paired T-test was used to compare within-group changes after performing myofascial release and electrotherapy (p ≤ 0.023) (effect size≥0.56), and the GLM Anova test was used to Comparison of Changes in the Elastic Modulus of the Lumbar Spine and Low Back Pain between-group (F (10,21) = 12.10, P < 0.0005) (effect size = 0.86).ConclusionThe improvements in the outcome measures suggest that lumbar myofascial release may be effective in subjects with non-specific low back pain. Data suggest that the elastic modulus of lumbar fascia and the severity of low back pain are directly linked. Decreasing the elastic modulus after myofascial release can directly affect reducing low back pain.     

Thrust joint manipulation utilization by U.S. physical therapists*

Study Design: Online survey study.

Objective: To determine physical therapists’ utilization of thrust joint manipulation (TJM) and their comfort level in using TJM between the cervical, thoracic, and lumbar regions of the spine. We hypothesized that physical therapists who use TJM would report regular use and comfort providing it to the thoracic and lumbar spines, but not so much for the cervical spine.

Background: Recent surveys of first professional physical therapy degree programs have found that TJM to the cervical spine is not taught to the same degree as to the thoracic and lumbar spines.

Methods: We developed a survey to capture the required information and had a Delphi panel of 15 expert orthopedic physical therapists review it and provide constructive feedback. A revised version of the survey was sent to the same Delphi panel and consensus was obtained on the final survey instrument. The revised survey was made available to any licensed physical therapists in the U.S.A. using an online survey system, from October 2014 through June 2015.

Results: Of 1014 responses collected, 1000 completed surveys were included for analysis. There were 478 (48%) males; the mean age of respondents was 39.7 ± 10.81 years (range 24–92); and mean years of clinical experience was 13.6 ± 10.62. A majority of respondents felt that TJM was safe and effective when applied to lumbar (90.5%) and thoracic (91.1%) spines; however, a smaller percentage (68.9%) felt that about the cervical spine. More therapists reported they would perform additional screening prior to providing TJM to the cervical spine than they would for the lumbar and thoracic spines. Therapists agreed they were less likely to provide and feel comfortable with TJM in the cervical spine compared to the thoracic and lumbar spines. Finally, therapists who are male; practice in orthopedic spine setting; are aware of manipulation clinical prediction rules; and have manual therapy certification, are more likely to use TJM and be comfortable with it in all three regions.

Conclusion: Results indicate that respondents do not believe TJM for the cervical spine to be as safe and efficacious as that for the lumbar and thoracic spines. Further, they are more likely to perform additional screening, abstain from and do not feel comfortable performing TJM for the cervical spine.

Clinical Relevance: Our research reveals there is a discrepancy between utilization of TJM at different spinal levels. This research provides an opportunity to address variability in clinical practice among physical therapists utilizing TJM.     

The effect of lumbar posture on abdominal muscle thickness during an isometric leg task in people with and without non-specific low back pain

This study investigated the effect of lumbar posture on function of transversus abdominis (TrA) and obliquus internus (OI) in people with and without non-specific low back pain (LBP) during a lower limb task. Rehabilitative ultrasound was used to measure thickness change of TrA and OI during a lower limb task that challenged the stability of the spine. Measures were taken in supine in neutral and flexed lumbar postures in 30 patients and 30 healthy subjects. Data were analysed using a two-way (groups, postures) ANOVA. Our results showed that lumbar posture influenced percent thickness change of the TRA muscle but not for OI. An interaction between group and posture was found for TrA thickness change (F_1,56 = 6.818, p = 0.012). For this muscle, only healthy participants showed greater thickness change with neutral posture compared to flexed (mean difference = 6.2%; 95% CI: 3.1–9.3%; p < 0.001). Comparisons between groups for both muscles were not significant. Neutral lumbar posture can facilitate an increase in thickness of the TrA muscle while performing a leg task, however this effect was not observed for this muscle in patients with LBP. No significant difference in TrA and OI thickness change between people with and without non-specific LBP was found.     

Spinal manipulation does not affect pressure pain thresholds in the absence of neuromodulators: a randomized controlled trial

Background: Measurement of pressure pain threshold (PPT) is a way to determine one of the many potential treatment effects of spinal manipulative therapy.

Objective: To determine how multiple spinal manipulations administered in a single-session affected PPTs at local and distal sites in asymptomatic individuals.

Methods: Participants were randomly assigned into one of three groups: Group one (n = 18) received a lumbar manipulation followed by a cervical manipulation. Group two (n = 17) received a cervical manipulation followed by a lumbar manipulation. The control group (n = 19) received two bouts of five minutes of rest. At baseline and after each intervention or rest period, each participant’s PPTs were obtained using a handheld algometer. The PPTs were tested bilaterally over the lateral epicondyles of the humerus and over the mid-bellies of the upper trapezius, lumbar paraspinal, and the tibialis anterior muscles. This study was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, and its Identifier is NCT02828501.

Results: Repeated-measures ANOVAs and Kruskal–Wallis tests showed no significant within- or between-group differences in PPT. Within-group effect sizes in the changes of PPT ranged from ?.48 at the left paraspinal muscles to .24 at the left lateral humeral epicondyle. Statistical power to detect significant differences at α of 0.05 was calculated to be 0.94.

Conclusions: This study suggests that in young adults who do not have current or recent symptoms of spinal pain, multiple within-session treatments of cervical and lumbar spinal manipulation fail to influence PPTs. Changes in PPT that are observed in symptomatic individuals are likely to be primarily influenced by pain-related neuromodulators rather than by an isolated, mechanical effect of spinal manipulation.