» Articles » PMID: 22902194

Quantification of Cavitation and Gapping of Lumbar Zygapophyseal Joints During Spinal Manipulative Therapy

Overview
Date 2012 Aug 21
PMID 22902194
Citations 14
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Objectives: The purpose of this study was to use previously validated methods to quantify and relate 2 phenomena associated with chiropractic spinal manipulative therapy (SMT): (1) cavitation and (2) the simultaneous gapping (separation) of the lumbar zygapophyseal (Z) joint spaces.

Methods: This was a randomized, controlled, mechanistic clinical trial with blinding. Forty healthy participants (18-30 years old) without a history of low-back pain participated. Seven accelerometers were affixed to the skin overlying the spinous processes of L1 to L5 and the S1 and S2 sacral tubercles. Two additional accelerometers were positioned 3 cm left and right lateral to the L4/L5 interspinous space. Participants were randomized into group 1, side-posture SMT (n = 30), or group 2, side-posture positioning (SPP, n = 10). Cavitations were determined by accelerometer recordings during SMT and SPP (left side = upside for both groups); gapping (gapping difference) was determined by the difference between pre- and postintervention magnetic resonance imaging scan joint space measurements. Results of mean gapping differences were compared.

Results: Upside SMT and SPP joints gapped more than downside joints (0.69 vs -0.17 mm, P < .0001). Spinal manipulative therapy upside joints gapped more than SPP upside joints (0.75 vs 0.52 mm, P = .03). Spinal manipulative therapy upside joints gapped more in men than in women (1.01 vs 0.49 mm, P < .002). Overall, joints that cavitated gapped more than those that did not (0.56 vs 0.22 mm, P = .01). No relationship was found between the occurrence of cavitation and gapping with upside joints alone (P = .43).

Conclusions: Zygapophyseal joints receiving chiropractic SMT gapped more than those receiving SPP alone; Z joints of men gapped more than those of women, and cavitation indicated that a joint had gapped but not how much a joint had gapped.

Citing Articles

The evolution of teaching chiropractic manual skills: part 2 - a narrative review and discussion of the impact of research evidence authored by faculty of the Canadian Memorial Chiropractic College.

Gleberzon B, Ross J, Kinsinger F, Szaraz Z J Can Chiropr Assoc. 2024; 68(2):160-171.

PMID: 39318847 PMC: 11418795.


Mechanisms of manipulation: a systematic review of the literature on immediate anatomical structural or positional changes in response to manually delivered high-velocity, low-amplitude spinal manipulation.

Young K, Leboeuf-Yde C, Gorrell L, Bergstrom C, Evans D, Axen I Chiropr Man Therap. 2024; 32(1):28.

PMID: 39261958 PMC: 11389336. DOI: 10.1186/s12998-024-00549-w.


Conservative Management of Occipital Neuralgia Supported by Physical Therapy: A Review of Available Research and Mechanistic Rationale to Guide Treatment.

Deuel D, Sandgren A, Nelson E, Cropes M, Deacon A, Houdek T Curr Pain Headache Rep. 2024; 28(12):1321-1331.

PMID: 38958920 DOI: 10.1007/s11916-024-01288-6.


Biomechanical Analysis of the Coordinated Movements of the Therapist's Hands and Feet during Lumbopelvic Manipulation: A Preliminary Study.

Lee J, Lee Y Healthcare (Basel). 2023; 11(23).

PMID: 38063591 PMC: 10705993. DOI: 10.3390/healthcare11233023.


Treatment and Response Factors in Muscle Activation during Spinal Manipulation.

Currie S, Myers C, Enebo B, Davidson B J Clin Med. 2023; 12(19).

PMID: 37835021 PMC: 10573245. DOI: 10.3390/jcm12196377.


References
1.
Unsworth A, Dowson D, WRIGHT V . 'Cracking joints'. A bioengineering study of cavitation in the metacarpophalangeal joint. Ann Rheum Dis. 1971; 30(4):348-58. PMC: 1005793. DOI: 10.1136/ard.30.4.348. View

2.
Ross J, Bereznick D, McGill S . Determining cavitation location during lumbar and thoracic spinal manipulation: is spinal manipulation accurate and specific?. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2004; 29(13):1452-7. DOI: 10.1097/01.brs.0000129024.95630.57. View

3.
Nachemson A, Schultz A, Berkson M . Mechanical properties of human lumbar spine motion segments. Influence of age, sex, disc level, and degeneration. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1979; 4(1):1-8. DOI: 10.1097/00007632-197901000-00001. View

4.
Brennan P, Cramer G, Kirstukas S, Cullum M . Basic science research in chiropractic: the state of the art and recommendations for a research agenda. J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 1997; 20(3):150-68. View

5.
Flynn T, Childs J, Fritz J . The audible pop from high-velocity thrust manipulation and outcome in individuals with low back pain. J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 2006; 29(1):40-5. DOI: 10.1016/j.jmpt.2005.11.005. View