Kristan Giggey1, Rodger Tepe. 1. Research Faculty, Research Division, College of Chiropractic, Logan University.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to determine if an orthopedic pelvic blocking procedure affects cervical spine extensor isometric strength. METHODS: Twenty-two participants were sequentially assigned into treatment and control groups. Treatment consisted of a 2-minute procedure using orthopedic blocks (padded wedges with a 45 degrees incline) that were placed bilaterally under the ilia as determined by leg length assessment. Isometric strength measurements took place in 2 sessions with a day of rest between. The treatment group received therapy at the second session immediate to postisometric measures. RESULTS: Outcome measures were the pre- and posttreatment measurements of cervical isometric extension strength in pounds. The t tests showed no statistically significant difference between groups in isometric extension strength before treatment. One-way analysis of variance demonstrated a significant difference between groups after treatment (F(1,21) = 7.174, P = .014). The treatment group demonstrated an average increase of 6.35 (8.18) lb in extensor strength. CONCLUSIONS: The current study showed a statistically significant change in cervical isometric extensor strength after sacroiliac joint blocking.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to determine if an orthopedic pelvic blocking procedure affects cervical spine extensor isometric strength. METHODS: Twenty-two participants were sequentially assigned into treatment and control groups. Treatment consisted of a 2-minute procedure using orthopedic blocks (padded wedges with a 45 degrees incline) that were placed bilaterally under the ilia as determined by leg length assessment. Isometric strength measurements took place in 2 sessions with a day of rest between. The treatment group received therapy at the second session immediate to postisometric measures. RESULTS: Outcome measures were the pre- and posttreatment measurements of cervical isometric extension strength in pounds. The t tests showed no statistically significant difference between groups in isometric extension strength before treatment. One-way analysis of variance demonstrated a significant difference between groups after treatment (F(1,21) = 7.174, P = .014). The treatment group demonstrated an average increase of 6.35 (8.18) lb in extensor strength. CONCLUSIONS: The current study showed a statistically significant change in cervical isometric extensor strength after sacroiliac joint blocking.
Authors: Joel A Vilensky; Brian L O'Connor; Joseph D Fortin; Glenn J Merkel; Ana M Jimenez; Barbara A Scofield; Jeffrey B Kleiner Journal: Spine (Phila Pa 1976) Date: 2002-06-01 Impact factor: 3.468
Authors: Anita R Gross; Jan L Hoving; Ted A Haines; Charles H Goldsmith; T Kay; Peter Aker; Gert Bronfort Journal: Spine (Phila Pa 1976) Date: 2004-07-15 Impact factor: 3.468
Authors: Bernd Hillermann; Adrian Neil Gomes; Charmaine Korporaal; Dennis Jackson Journal: J Manipulative Physiol Ther Date: 2006-02 Impact factor: 1.437
Authors: Grant D Sanders; Arthur J Nitz; Mark G Abel; T Brock Symons; Robert Shapiro; W Scott Black; James W Yates Journal: J Chiropr Med Date: 2015-11-06