Literature DB >> 15626991

Effect of spinal manipulation duration on low threshold mechanoreceptors in lumbar paraspinal muscles: a preliminary report.

Paul S Sung1, Yu-Ming Kang, Joel G Pickar.   

Abstract

STUDY
DESIGN: Electrophysiologic recordings were obtained from low threshold primary afferent neurons innervating lumbar multifidus and longissimus muscles in the anesthetized cat.
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to classify sensory nerve endings in lumbar paraspinal muscles and characterize their responses to biomechanical loads applied over a range of durations that encompass those occurring during spinal manipulation. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Neural responses arising from the mechanical input during spinal manipulation are thought to contribute to this maneuver's therapeutic effects. Because manual therapies are distinguished to a large extent on the basis of the speed with which they are applied, it is important to understand how their rate of application affects the signaling properties of primary afferent neurons innervating paraspinal tissues. If alterations in sensory input do contribute to the mechanism of spinal manipulation's therapeutic effect, it seems reasonable to expect that these primary afferents would respond to spinal manipulation in some unique fashion.
METHODS: Experiments were performed on 6 adult cats. A L4-L5 laminectomy was performed and the L6 dorsal roots exposed. The L6-L7 vertebrae and associated paraspinal tissues remained intact bilaterally, including lumbodorsal fascia, multifidus, longissimus, iliocostalis muscles, and deeper tissues. Forceps were clamped tightly onto the lateral surfaces of the L6 spinous process through a thin narrow, slit in the lumbodorsal fascia. Single unit afferent activity was recorded from fine filaments teased from the L6 dorsal root. Instantaneous discharge frequency was calculated. Afferents were classified based on von Frey threshold, conduction velocity, and responses to direct muscle stimulation and to succinylcholine injection. Spinal manipulative-like loads were applied to the L6 vertebra (posterior to anterior) using a programmable electronic feedback control system. Force-time profiles were half-sine waves with durations of 25, 50, 100, 200, 400, and 800 milliseconds delivered at constant magnitudes of 33%, 66%, or 100% body weight.
RESULTS: The 6 afferents were classified as low threshold mechanoreceptors based on von Frey thresholds being less than 6 g. Five afferents were Group I or II muscle proprioceptors and one afferent was a Group III muscle mechanoreceptor. The receptive field for 2 of the 6 afferents was in the multifidus muscle and the receptive field of the remaining 4 afferents was in the longissimus muscle. In general, the mean instantaneous discharge frequency for all 6 afferents increased abruptly as the duration of the impulse approached 100 milliseconds. An increase in loading magnitude (33% vs. 66% vs. 100% body weight) did not appear to systematically affect the discharge from the 6 low threshold mechanoreceptors.
CONCLUSIONS: This preliminary report suggests that abrupt changes in neural discharge (instantaneous frequency) of low threshold muscle mechanoreceptors of the lumbar spine occur as the duration of a biomechanical load approaches that typically used during spinal manipulation. These changes could comprise part of the mechanism contributing to this intervention's physiologic effects. Further studies are warranted to better understand the signaling properties of a wider range of sensory receptors as well as determine the central effects of these high frequency discharges.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 15626991     DOI: 10.1097/01.brs.0000147800.88242.48

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)        ISSN: 0362-2436            Impact factor:   3.468


  23 in total

1.  Effects of spinal manipulation on sensorimotor function in low back pain patients--A randomised controlled trial.

Authors:  Christine M Goertz; Ting Xia; Cynthia R Long; Robert D Vining; Katherine A Pohlman; James W DeVocht; Maruti R Gudavalli; Edward F Owens; William C Meeker; David G Wilder
Journal:  Man Ther       Date:  2015-08-08

2.  Response of lumbar paraspinal muscles spindles is greater to spinal manipulative loading compared with slower loading under length control.

Authors:  Joel G Pickar; Paul S Sung; Yu-Ming Kang; Weiqing Ge
Journal:  Spine J       Date:  2007-01-10       Impact factor: 4.166

3.  A randomized control trial to determine the effectiveness and physiological effects of spinal manipulation and spinal mobilization compared to each other and a sham condition in patients with chronic low back pain: Study protocol for The RELIEF Study.

Authors:  Brian C Clark; David W Russ; Masato Nakazawa; Christopher R France; Stevan Walkowski; Timothy D Law; Megan Applegate; Niladri Mahato; Samuel Lietkam; James Odenthal; Daniel Corcos; Simeon Hain; Betty Sindelar; Robert J Ploutz-Snyder; James S Thomas
Journal:  Contemp Clin Trials       Date:  2018-05-21       Impact factor: 2.226

4.  Neural responses to the mechanical characteristics of high velocity, low amplitude spinal manipulation: Effect of specific contact site.

Authors:  William R Reed; Cynthia R Long; Gregory N Kawchuk; Joel G Pickar
Journal:  Man Ther       Date:  2015-03-27

5.  Effect of spinal manipulation on the development of history-dependent responsiveness of lumbar paraspinal muscle spindles in the cat.

Authors:  Dong-Yuan Cao; Joel G Pickar
Journal:  J Can Chiropr Assoc       Date:  2014-06

6.  Effect of spinal manipulation thrust magnitude on trunk mechanical activation thresholds of lateral thalamic neurons.

Authors:  William R Reed; Joel G Pickar; Randall S Sozio; Cynthia R Long
Journal:  J Manipulative Physiol Ther       Date:  2014-06       Impact factor: 1.437

7.  Paraspinal Muscle Spindle Response to Intervertebral Fixation and Segmental Thrust Level During Spinal Manipulation in an Animal Model.

Authors:  William R Reed; Joel G Pickar
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2015-07-01       Impact factor: 3.468

Review 8.  Spinal manipulative therapy and somatosensory activation.

Authors:  J G Pickar; P S Bolton
Journal:  J Electromyogr Kinesiol       Date:  2012-02-19       Impact factor: 2.368

9.  Neural responses to the mechanical parameters of a high-velocity, low-amplitude spinal manipulation: effect of preload parameters.

Authors:  William R Reed; Cynthia R Long; Gregory N Kawchuk; Joel G Pickar
Journal:  J Manipulative Physiol Ther       Date:  2014-01-03       Impact factor: 1.437

10.  Effects of thrust amplitude and duration of high-velocity, low-amplitude spinal manipulation on lumbar muscle spindle responses to vertebral position and movement.

Authors:  Dong-Yuan Cao; William R Reed; Cynthia R Long; Gregory N Kawchuk; Joel G Pickar
Journal:  J Manipulative Physiol Ther       Date:  2013-02       Impact factor: 1.437

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.