Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
Mais filtros










Base de dados
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
J Back Musculoskelet Rehabil ; 30(5): 1053-1059, 2017 Sep 22.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28505959

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Cervical mobilization and manipulation have been shown to improve cervical range of motion and pain. Cervical rotatory thrust manipulation has been associated with adverse patient reaction and damage to the V3 segment of the vertebral artery (VA). OBJECTIVE: To document and describe the effects of an upper cervical (UC) traction based mobilization on participants with restricted and painful cervical rotation and to document if the mobilization changed blood flow velocity through the vertebral artery. METHODS: This case series examined the effects of a traction based spinal mobilization on two different groups of participants. Group I included 93 participants with restricted bilateral cervical rotation that was also painful at end range. Group II included 30 different participants whose VA blood flow velocity was examined during the same mobilization. Pre- and post-mobilization active cervical rotation, pain intensity levels, and VA blood flow velocity during mobilization was documented. RESULTS: Paired T-tests were used to determine statistical significance for changes in cervical rotation, and VA blood flow velocity during mobilization. Ninety-three participants in group I demonstrated an average increase of 16 degrees of cervical rotation. No participant demonstrated an increase in pain, and no participant in group II (N= 30) demonstrated a change in VA blood flow velocity. CONCLUSIONS: The application this UC traction based mobilization improved active cervical rotation, end range rotation pain response, did not cause pain during its application and did not alter blood flow through the VA during application.


Assuntos
Manipulação da Coluna/métodos , Cervicalgia/terapia , Amplitude de Movimento Articular/fisiologia , Adulto , Velocidade do Fluxo Sanguíneo/fisiologia , Vértebras Cervicais/irrigação sanguínea , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Cervicalgia/diagnóstico , Cervicalgia/fisiopatologia , Medição da Dor , Tração/métodos , Resultado do Tratamento , Ultrassonografia Doppler , Artéria Vertebral/diagnóstico por imagem , Artéria Vertebral/fisiopatologia , Adulto Jovem
2.
J Man Manip Ther ; 22(4): 206-12, 2014 Nov.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-25395829

RESUMO

OBJECTIVES: Cervical mobilization and manipulation have been shown to improve cervical range of motion and pain. Rotatory thrust manipulation applied to the lower cervical segments is associated with controversy and the potential for eliciting adverse reactions (AR). The purpose of this clinical trial was to describe two translatory non-thrust mobilization techniques and evaluate their effect on cervical pain, motion restriction, and whether any adverse effects were reported when applied to the C7 segment. METHODS: This trial included 30 participants with painful and restricted cervical rotation. Participants were randomly assigned to receive one of the two mobilization techniques. Active cervical rotation and pain intensity measurements were recorded pre- and post-intervention. Within group comparisons were determined using the Wilcoxon signed-rank test and between group comparisons were analyzed using the Mann-Whitney U test. Significance was set at P = 0.05. RESULTS: Thirty participants were evaluated immediately after one of the two mobilization techniques was applied. There was a statistically significant difference (improvement) for active cervical rotation after application of the C7 facet distraction technique for both right (P = 0.022) and left (P = 0.022) rotation. Statistically significant improvement was also found for the C7 facet gliding technique for both right (P = 0.022) and left rotation (P = 0.020). Pain reduction was statistically significant for both right and left rotation after application of both techniques. Both mobilization techniques produced similar positive effects and one was not statistically superior to the other. DISCUSSION: A single application of both C7 mobilization techniques improved active cervical rotation, reduced perceived pain, and did not produce any AR in 30 patients with neck pain and movement limitation. These two non-thrust techniques may offer clinicians an additional safe and effective manual intervention for patients with limited and painful cervical rotation. A more robust experimental design is recommended to further examine these and similar cervical translatory mobilization techniques.

SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA
...