Trial reportBMC complementary and alternative medicine2016
Neuromechanical response to spinal manipulation therapy: effects of a constant rate of force application.
Trial report in BMC complementary and alternative medicine, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT02550132 (Neuromechanical Response to Spinal Manipulation Therapy), which is not on this map. Cited by 13 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neuromechanical Response to Spinal Manipulation Therapy: Effects of a Constant Rate of Force Application
Who cites it
13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 23 citations in OpenAlex.
- The acute effects of joint manipulative techniques on markers of autonomic nervous system activity: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized sham-controlled trials.Chiropractic & manual therapies · 2019Pooled it
- Immediate clinical and neuromechanical effects of cervical spine manipulation compared to cervical spine mobilization among individuals with chronic neck pain: a randomized mechanistic cross-over trial.Chiropractic & manual therapies · 2026Trial
- Efficacy of different biomechanical strategies for modulating force-time parameters of high-velocity low-amplitude manipulation of the thoracic spine: a randomized crossover experimental study.Chiropractic & manual therapies · 2025Trial
- The effect of a single spinal manipulation on cardiovascular autonomic activity and the relationship to pressure pain threshold: a randomized, cross-over, sham-controlled trial.Chiropractic & manual therapies · 2020Trial
- Effects of spinal manipulative therapy biomechanical parameters on clinical and biomechanical outcomes of participants with chronic thoracic pain: a randomized controlled experimental trial.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2019Trial
- Chiropractic students' force-time parameters for chiropractic adjustments at the beginning and end of an academic term.The Journal of chiropractic education · 2025Article
- The role of force-sensing devices in spinal manipulative therapy research, education, and clinical practice.The Journal of the Canadian Chiropractic Association · 2025Article
- Neuromuscular Response to High-Velocity, Low-Amplitude Spinal Manipulation-An Overview.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2025Review
- Force Distribution Within Spinal Tissues During Posterior to Anterior Spinal Manipulative Therapy: A Secondary Analysis.Frontiers in integrative neuroscience · 2021Article
- Differences in force-time parameters and electromyographic characteristics of two high-velocity, low-amplitude spinal manipulations following one another in quick succession.Chiropractic & manual therapies · 2020Article
- Assessing forces during spinal manipulation and mobilization: factors influencing the difference between forces at the patient-table and clinician-patient interfaces.Chiropractic & manual therapies · 2020Article
- High-velocity, low-amplitude spinal manipulation training of prescribed forces and thrust duration: A pilot study.The Journal of chiropractic education · 2020Article
- Spinal manipulation frequency and dosage effects on clinical and physiological outcomes: a scoping review.Chiropractic & manual therapies · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundNeuromechanical responses to spinal manipulation therapy (SMT) have been shown to be modulated through the variation of SMT biomechanical parameters: peak force, time to peak force, and preload force. Although rate of force application was modulated by the variation of these parameters, the assumption that neuromuscular responses are modulated by the rate of force application remains to be confirmed. Therefore, the purpose of the present study was to evaluate the effect of a constant rate of force application in neuromechanical responses to SMT in healthy adults.
methodsFour SMT force-time profiles presenting different time to peak force and peak force, but with a constant rate of force application were applied on 25 healthy participants' T7 transverse processes. Muscular responses were recorded through surface electromyography electrodes (T6 and T8 levels), while vertebral displacements were assessed through pasted kinematic markers on T6 to T8 spinous processes. Effects of SMT force-time profiles on neuromechanical responses were assessed using repeated-measures ANOVAs.
resultsThere was no main effect of SMT force-time profile modulation on muscular responses (ps > .05) except for the left T8 (F (3, 72) = 3.23, p = .03) and left T6 (F (3, 72) = 2.94, p = .04). Muscular responses were significantly lower for the lowest peak force condition than the highest (for T8) or second highest (for T6). Analysis showed that increasing the SMT peak force (and concomitantly time to peak force) led to a significant vertebral displacement increase for the contacted vertebra (F T7 (1, 17) = 354.80, p < .001) and both adjacent vertebras (F T6 (1, 12) = 104.71, p < .001 and F T8 (1, 19) = 468.68, p < .001).
conclusionThis study showed that peak force modulation using constant rate of force application leads to similar neuromuscular responses. Coupled with previous investigations of SMT peak force and duration effects, the results suggest that neuromuscular responses to SMT are mostly influenced by the rate of force application, while peak force modulation yields changes in the vertebral displacement. Rate of force application should therefore be defined in future studies. Clinical implications of various SMT dosages in patients with spine related pain should also be investigated.
trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT02550132 . Registered 8 September 2015.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.