ArticleSpine2017
Spinal Tissue Loading Created by Different Methods of Spinal Manipulative Therapy Application.
Article in Spine, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- Biomechanical Comparisons of Two Types of Tuina in Treating Lumbar Disc Herniation: A Finite Element Analysis.Pain research & management · 2026Trial
- Force-time characteristics of hip high velocity, low amplitude manipulation in asymptomatic adults: with and without a drop piece.The Journal of the Canadian Chiropractic Association · 2026Article
- The role of force-sensing devices in spinal manipulative therapy research, education, and clinical practice.The Journal of the Canadian Chiropractic Association · 2025Article
- Measurement of Force and Intramuscular Pressure Changes Related to Thrust Spinal Manipulation in an In Vivo Animal Model.Biology · 2022Article
- In vivo measurement of intradiscal pressure changes related to thrust and non-thrust spinal manipulation in an animal model: a pilot study.Chiropractic & manual therapies · 2022Article
- A Systematic Review of Musculoskeletal Mobilization and Manipulation Techniques Used in Veterinary Medicine.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2021Review
- Devices Used to Measure Force-Time Characteristics of Spinal Manipulations and Mobilizations: A Mixed-Methods Scoping Review on Metrologic Properties and Factors Influencing Use.Frontiers in pain research (Lausanne, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- Force Distribution Within Spinal Tissues During Posterior to Anterior Spinal Manipulative Therapy: A Secondary Analysis.Frontiers in integrative neuroscience · 2021Article
- Chiropractic Spinal Manipulation Prevents Secondary Hyperalgesia Induced by Topical Capsaicin in Healthy Individuals.Frontiers in pain research (Lausanne, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- Potential mechanisms for lumbar spinal stiffness change following spinal manipulative therapy: a scoping review.Chiropractic & manual therapies · 2020Article
- Doing the Same Thing and Expecting a Different Outcome: It Is Time for a Questioning Philosophy and Theory-Driven Chiropractic Research.Journal of chiropractic humanities · 2019Review
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
STUDY
designComparative study using robotic replication of spinal manipulative therapy (SMT) vertebral kinematics together with serial dissection.
objectiveThe aim of this study was to quantify loads created in cadaveric spinal tissues arising from three different forms of SMT application. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: There exist many distinct methods by which to apply SMT. It is not known presently whether different forms of SMT application have different effects on spinal tissues. Should the method of SMT application modulate spinal tissue loading, quantifying this relation may help explain the varied outcomes of SMT in terms of effect and safety.
methodsSMT was applied to the third lumbar vertebra in 12 porcine cadavers using three SMT techniques: a clinical device that applies forces through a hand-held instrument (INST), a manual technique of applying SMT clinically (MAN) and a research device that applies parameters of manual SMT through a servo-controlled linear actuator motor (SERVO). The resulting kinematics from each SMT application were tracked optically via indwelling bone pins. The L3/L4 segment was then removed, mounted in a parallel robot and the resulting kinematics from SMT replayed for each SMT application technique. Serial dissection of spinal structures was conducted to quantify loading characteristics of discrete spinal tissues.
resultsIn terms of load magnitude, SMT application with MAN and SERVO created greater forces than INST in all conditions (P < 0.05). Additionally, MAN and SERVO created comparable posterior forces in the intact specimen, but MAN created greater posterior forces on IVD structures compared to SERVO (P < 0.05).
conclusionSpecific methods of SMT application create unique vertebral loading characteristics, which may help explain the varied outcomes of SMT in terms of effect and safety. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: N/A.
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.