Eric Olson1, Michael Bodziony1, John Ward2, Jesse Coats3, Bradley Koby4, Doug Goehry1. 1. Graduate Student, Texas Chiropractic College, Pasadena, TX. 2. Associate Professor/Research Fellow, Department of Physiology and Chemistry, Texas Chiropractic College, Pasadena, TX. 3. Professor, Department of Clinical Specialties, Texas Chiropractic College, Pasadena, TX. 4. Assistant Professor, Chair, Department of Principles and Practices, Department of Diagnosis, Texas Chiropractic College, Pasadena, TX.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to measure the impact of midlumbar spinal manipulation on asymptomatic cyclist sprint performance and hip flexibility. METHODS:Twelve cyclists were equally randomized into an AB:BA crossover study design after baseline testing. Six participants were in the AB group, and 6 were in the BA group. The study involved 1 week of rest in between each of the 3 tested conditions: baseline testing (no intervention prior to testing), condition A (bilateral midlumbar spine manipulation prior to testing), and condition B (sham acupuncture prior to testing, as a control). Testing was blinded and involved a sit-and-reach test followed by a 0.5-km cycle ergometer sprint test against 4-kp resistance. Outcome measures were sit-and-reach distance, time to complete 0.5 km, maximum heart rate, and rating of perceived exertion. An additional 8 cyclists were recruited and used as a second set of controls that engaged in 3 testing sessions without any intervention to track test acclimation. An analysis of variance was used to compare dependent variables under each of the 3 conditions for the experimental group and control group #1, and a repeated-measures analysis of variance was used to analyze test acclimation in control group #2. RESULTS:Lumbar spine manipulation did not demonstrate statistically significant between-group changes in sit-and-reach (P = .765), 0.5-km sprint performance time (P = .877), maximum exercise heart rate (P = .944), or rating of perceived exertion (P = .875). CONCLUSIONS: The findings of this preliminary study showed that midlumbar spinal manipulation did not improve hip flexibility or cyclist power output of asymptomatic participants compared with an acupuncture sham and no-treatment control groups.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to measure the impact of midlumbar spinal manipulation on asymptomatic cyclist sprint performance and hip flexibility. METHODS: Twelve cyclists were equally randomized into an AB:BA crossover study design after baseline testing. Six participants were in the AB group, and 6 were in the BA group. The study involved 1 week of rest in between each of the 3 tested conditions: baseline testing (no intervention prior to testing), condition A (bilateral midlumbar spine manipulation prior to testing), and condition B (sham acupuncture prior to testing, as a control). Testing was blinded and involved a sit-and-reach test followed by a 0.5-km cycle ergometer sprint test against 4-kp resistance. Outcome measures were sit-and-reach distance, time to complete 0.5 km, maximum heart rate, and rating of perceived exertion. An additional 8 cyclists were recruited and used as a second set of controls that engaged in 3 testing sessions without any intervention to track test acclimation. An analysis of variance was used to compare dependent variables under each of the 3 conditions for the experimental group and control group #1, and a repeated-measures analysis of variance was used to analyze test acclimation in control group #2. RESULTS: Lumbar spine manipulation did not demonstrate statistically significant between-group changes in sit-and-reach (P = .765), 0.5-km sprint performance time (P = .877), maximum exercise heart rate (P = .944), or rating of perceived exertion (P = .875). CONCLUSIONS: The findings of this preliminary study showed that midlumbar spinal manipulation did not improve hip flexibility or cyclist power output of asymptomatic participants compared with an acupuncture sham and no-treatment control groups.
Authors: Per Gunnar Brolinson; Michael Smolka; Mark Rogers; Suporn Sukpraprut; Michael W Goforth; Greg Tilley; Keith P Doolan Journal: J Am Osteopath Assoc Date: 2012-09
Authors: Vassilis Paschalis; Anastasios A Theodorou; George Panayiotou; Antonios Kyparos; Dimitrios Patikas; Gerasimos V Grivas; Michalis G Nikolaidis; Ioannis S Vrabas Journal: PLoS One Date: 2013-02-21 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Melissa Corso; Silvano A Mior; Sarah Batley; Taylor Tuff; Sophia da Silva-Oolup; Scott Howitt; John Srbely Journal: Chiropr Man Therap Date: 2019-06-07