Manipulation Effect on Lumbar Kinematics in Patients with Unilateral Innominate Rotation and Comparison with Asymptomatic Subjects

Overview

Journal J Biomed Phys Eng

Publisher Shiraz University of Medical Sciences

Specialty Biomedical Engineering

Date 2019 Jul 26

PMID 31341875

Citations 2

Authors

Zamanlou M

Akbari M

Jamshidi A A

Amiri A

Nabiyouni I

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Background: Lumbar motion analysis is used as a clinical method in the diagnosis and treatment of low back pain (LBP). So far, no studies have shown if manipulating the sacroiliac joint (SIJ) will change spinal kinematics.

Objective: The main objectives of this study were to investigate the effects of SIJ manipulation on the lumbar kinematics in subjects with innominate rotation and to compare lumbar kinematics among experiment and control groups.

Material And Methods: This study was a quasi-experiment-control trial study. 21 LBP patients with anterior or posterior innominate rotations in experiment group and 22 asymptomatic subjects in control group were evaluated. Lumbar kinematic variables (LKV) include lumbar range of motion (ROM) and speed, lumbar lateral flexion and rotation asymmetry were evaluated using Qualysis Track Manager (QTM) twice within two days in control group, and these parameters with pelvic asymmetry and disability were tested before and after intervention in the experiment group.

Results: While pre-intervention experiment group exhibited significantly lower lumbar lateral flexion (p=0.0001), rotation (p=0.008) ROM and lower lateral flexion speed (p=0.014), post-intervention experiment group exhibited significantly lower lumbar lateral flexion (p=0.01) ROM in comparison with control group. Pelvic asymmetry (p=0.049) and disability (p=0.01) significantly decreased in the experiment group after manipulation, but LKV did not change significantly after the intervention (p˃0.05).

Conclusion: Experiment groups had different lumbar kinematics in comparison with control group before and after SIJ manipulation. Despite the changes in pelvic asymmetry and disability, intervention had no effect on lumbar kinematics.

Citing Articles

Minimally Invasive and Conservative Interventions for the Treatment of Sacroiliac Joint Pain: A Review of Recent Literature.

Aranke M, McCrudy G, Rooney K, Patel K, Lee C, Hasoon J Orthop Rev (Pavia). 2022; 14(3):31915.

PMID: 36415486 PMC: 9674090. DOI: 10.52965/001c.31915.

Minimally Invasive and Conservative Interventions for the Treatment of Sacroiliac Joint Pain: A Review of Recent Literature.

Aranke M, McCrudy G, Rooney K, Patel K, Lee C, Hasoon J Orthop Rev (Pavia). 2022; 14(4):34098.

PMID: 35769646 PMC: 9235436. DOI: 10.52965/001c.34098.

References

Nattrass C, Nitschke J, Disler P, Chou M, Ooi K . Lumbar spine range of motion as a measure of physical and functional impairment: an investigation of validity. Clin Rehabil. 1999; 13(3):211-8. DOI: 10.1177/026921559901300305. View

Mannion A, Troke M . A comparison of two motion analysis devices used in the measurement of lumbar spinal mobility. Clin Biomech (Bristol). 1999; 14(9):612-9. DOI: 10.1016/s0268-0033(99)00017-0. View

Poitras S, Loisel P, Prince F, Lemaire J . Disability measurement in persons with back pain: a validity study of spinal range of motion and velocity. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2000; 81(10):1394-400. DOI: 10.1053/apmr.2000.9165. View

Lehman G, McGill S . Spinal manipulation causes variable spine kinematic and trunk muscle electromyographic responses. Clin Biomech (Bristol). 2001; 16(4):293-9. DOI: 10.1016/s0268-0033(00)00085-1. View

Danneels L, Cools A, Vanderstraeten G, Cambier D, Witvrouw E, Bourgois J . The effects of three different training modalities on the cross-sectional area of the paravertebral muscles. Scand J Med Sci Sports. 2002; 11(6):335-41. DOI: 10.1034/j.1600-0838.2001.110604.x. View

Giles L, Muller R . Chronic spinal pain: a randomized clinical trial comparing medication, acupuncture, and spinal manipulation. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2003; 28(14):1490-502; discussion 1502-3. DOI: 10.1097/00007632-200307150-00003. View

Haas M, Peterson D . A roentgenological evaluation of the relationship between segmental motion and malalignment in lateral bending. J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 1992; 15(6):350-60. View

Childs J, Piva S, Erhard R . Immediate improvements in side-to-side weight bearing and iliac crest symmetry after manipulation in patients with low back pain. J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 2004; 27(5):306-13. DOI: 10.1016/j.jmpt.2004.04.004. View

Evans D, Burke M, LLOYD K, Roberts E, Roberts G . Lumbar spinal manipulation on trial. Part I--clinical assessment. Rheumatol Rehabil. 1978; 17(1):46-53. DOI: 10.1093/rheumatology/17.1.46. View

10.

Koumantakis G, Watson P, Oldham J . Trunk muscle stabilization training plus general exercise versus general exercise only: randomized controlled trial of patients with recurrent low back pain. Phys Ther. 2005; 85(3):209-25. View

11.

Al-Eisa E, Egan D, Deluzio K, Wassersug R . Effects of pelvic skeletal asymmetry on trunk movement: three-dimensional analysis in healthy individuals versus patients with mechanical low back pain. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2006; 31(3):E71-9. DOI: 10.1097/01.brs.0000197665.93559.04. View

12.

George S, Childs J, Teyhen D, Wu S, Wright A, Dugan J . Rationale, design, and protocol for the prevention of low back pain in the military (POLM) trial (NCT00373009). BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2007; 8:92. PMC: 2034557. DOI: 10.1186/1471-2474-8-92. View

13.

Chou R, Qaseem A, Snow V, Casey D, Cross Jr J, Shekelle P . Diagnosis and treatment of low back pain: a joint clinical practice guideline from the American College of Physicians and the American Pain Society. Ann Intern Med. 2007; 147(7):478-91. DOI: 10.7326/0003-4819-147-7-200710020-00006. View

14.

Arab A, Abdollahi I, Joghataei M, Golafshani Z, Kazemnejad A . Inter- and intra-examiner reliability of single and composites of selected motion palpation and pain provocation tests for sacroiliac joint. Man Ther. 2008; 14(2):213-21. DOI: 10.1016/j.math.2008.02.004. View

15.

Intolo P, Milosavljevic S, Baxter D, Carman A, Pal P, Munn J . The effect of age on lumbar range of motion: a systematic review. Man Ther. 2009; 14(6):596-604. DOI: 10.1016/j.math.2009.08.006. View

16.

Stamos-Papastamos N, Petty N, Williams J . Changes in bending stiffness and lumbar spine range of movement following lumbar mobilization and manipulation. J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 2011; 34(1):46-53. DOI: 10.1016/j.jmpt.2010.11.006. View

17.

Tenhula J, Rose S, Delitto A . Association between direction of lateral lumbar shift, movement tests, and side of symptoms in patients with low back pain syndrome. Phys Ther. 1990; 70(8):480-6. DOI: 10.1093/ptj/70.8.480. View

18.

Delitto A, George S, Van Dillen L, Whitman J, Sowa G, Shekelle P . Low back pain. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2012; 42(4):A1-57. PMC: 4893951. DOI: 10.2519/jospt.2012.42.4.A1. View

19.

Hidalgo B, Gilliaux M, Poncin W, Detrembleur C . Reliability and validity of a kinematic spine model during active trunk movement in healthy subjects and patients with chronic non-specific low back pain. J Rehabil Med. 2012; 44(9):756-63. DOI: 10.2340/16501977-1015. View

20.

Millan M, Leboeuf-Yde C, Budgell B, Descarreaux M, Amorim M . The effect of spinal manipulative therapy on spinal range of motion: a systematic literature review. Chiropr Man Therap. 2012; 20(1):23. PMC: 3487906. DOI: 10.1186/2045-709X-20-23. View