Immediate Effects of Cervical Spine Manipulation Compared With Muscle Energy Technique on Neck Muscle Activity and Range of Motion in Asymptomatic Participants: A Randomized Study

Sasha Lee King MTech(Chiro), Aadil Docrat MTech(Chiro), MMedSci, Ashura Abdul-Rasheed PhD, MTech(Chiro)
{"title":"Immediate Effects of Cervical Spine Manipulation Compared With Muscle Energy Technique on Neck Muscle Activity and Range of Motion in Asymptomatic Participants: A Randomized Study","authors":"Sasha Lee King MTech(Chiro),&nbsp;Aadil Docrat MTech(Chiro), MMedSci,&nbsp;Ashura Abdul-Rasheed PhD, MTech(Chiro)","doi":"10.1016/j.jcm.2022.04.001","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objective</h3><p>The purpose of this study was to investigate the immediate effects of cervical spine manipulation (SM) compared with muscle energy technique (MET) on neck muscle activity and range of motion in asymptomatic people.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>A randomized parallel-group study was conducted at a chiropractic<span> teaching clinic in Durban, South Africa. Fifty asymptomatic participants between 18 and 35 years of age were randomly assigned into group 1 or group 2. Group 1 received cervical SM, and group 2 received MET. Participants were blinded to group allocation only. Baseline and post-test measurements consisted of resting upper trapezius and posterior cervical muscle activity and cervical spine range of motion (ROM) in lateral flexion and extension.</span></p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>A significant difference was found in cervical ROM within groups (<em>P</em> &lt; .001), with no significant difference observed between the 2 groups. The right posterior cervical muscles showed a significant difference in group 1 only (<em>P</em> = .012). No significant muscle activity changes occurred in group 2. Resting muscle activity measures showed no statistically significant changes between groups.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>A single application of SM and MET to the cervical spine immediately increased cervical ROM. Neither cervical SM nor MET changed resting posterior cervical and upper trapezius muscle activity.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":94328,"journal":{"name":"Journal of chiropractic medicine","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of chiropractic medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1556370722000621","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Objective

The purpose of this study was to investigate the immediate effects of cervical spine manipulation (SM) compared with muscle energy technique (MET) on neck muscle activity and range of motion in asymptomatic people.

Methods

A randomized parallel-group study was conducted at a chiropractic teaching clinic in Durban, South Africa. Fifty asymptomatic participants between 18 and 35 years of age were randomly assigned into group 1 or group 2. Group 1 received cervical SM, and group 2 received MET. Participants were blinded to group allocation only. Baseline and post-test measurements consisted of resting upper trapezius and posterior cervical muscle activity and cervical spine range of motion (ROM) in lateral flexion and extension.

Results

A significant difference was found in cervical ROM within groups (P < .001), with no significant difference observed between the 2 groups. The right posterior cervical muscles showed a significant difference in group 1 only (P = .012). No significant muscle activity changes occurred in group 2. Resting muscle activity measures showed no statistically significant changes between groups.

Conclusion

A single application of SM and MET to the cervical spine immediately increased cervical ROM. Neither cervical SM nor MET changed resting posterior cervical and upper trapezius muscle activity.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
与肌肉能量技术相比,颈椎操作对无症状参与者颈部肌肉活动和活动范围的直接影响:一项随机研究
目的探讨颈椎手法(SM)与肌能手法(MET)对无症状患者颈部肌肉活动度和活动度的直接影响。方法在南非德班某脊医教学诊所进行随机平行组研究。50名年龄在18至35岁之间的无症状参与者被随机分为第一组或第二组。组1接受宫颈SM治疗,组2接受MET治疗。参与者仅对分组分配不知情。基线和测试后测量包括静息上斜方肌和颈后肌活动以及颈椎侧屈伸活动度(ROM)。结果各组间颈椎ROM差异有统计学意义(P <.001),两组间无显著差异。第一组右颈后肌组差异有统计学意义(P = .012)。2组肌肉活动无明显变化。静息肌肉活动测量在组间没有统计学上的显著变化。结论颈椎单次应用SM和MET可立即增加颈椎ROM, SM和MET均未改变静息后颈和上斜方肌的活动。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Association of Pain-Related Anxiety and Abdominal Muscle Thickness during Standing Postural Tasks in Patients with Non-Specific Chronic Low Back Pain Analgesic Self-medication Among Patients With Chronic Musculoskeletal Pain in a South African Chiropractic Teaching Clinic: A Cross-sectional Study Development of a Headache Diary and Assessment of Tension-Type Headache Diagnostic Criteria and Oral Behaviors, Joint Range of Motion, and Tenderness to Palpation: An Observational Study Editorial board Masthead
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1