Cervical spine manipulation-Clinical Neurophysiology 2007

Posted by:   Kevin G. Parker, D.C.

Abstract

Clinical Neurophysiology, February 2007, Vol. 118, No. 2, pp. 391-402.

Haavik-Taylor H, Murphy B;

Human Neurophysiology and Rehabilitation Laboratory, Department of Sport and Exercise Science, Tamaki Campus, University of Auckland, New Zealand.

Cervical spine manipulation alters sensorimotor integration: A somatosensory evoked potential study

This article notes the following concepts:

1.   “Spinal manipulation is a commonly used conservative treatment for neck, back, and pelvic pain.”

2. “The effectiveness of spinal manipulation in the treatment of acute and chronic low back and neck pain has been well established by outcome-based research.”

3.   Spinal dysfunction will alter afferent input to the central nervous system.

4.  Altered afferent input to the central nervous system leads to plastic changes in the central nervous system.

5.  “Neural plastic changes take place both following increased and decreased afferent input.”

6.   Both painful and painless joint dysfunction will inhibit surrounding muscles.

7.   Joint dysfunction causes afferent driven increases in neural excitability (facilitation) to muscles that can persist even after the initiating afferent abnormality is corrected. (This suggests that a muscle afferent problem can persist even after the joint component of the dysfunction is corrected.  The chronic component of the joint dysfunction may be plastic changes that cause long-term alteration of muscle afferentation.) This article clearly supports that the joint component, the muscle component, and the neurological component of a joint dysfunction complex is influenced by traditional joint-cavitation spinal adjusting.

8.  The altered neural processing that occurs as a consequence of joint dysfunction provides a “rationale for the effects of spinal manipulation on neural processing that have been described in the literature.”

9.  Spinal dysfunction alters the “balance of afferent input to the central nervous system” and this altered afferent input may lead to “maladaptive neural plastic changes in the central nervous system,” and “spinal manipulation can effect this.”

10.  The clinical evidence for joint dysfunction that requires manipulation includes:

A. Tenderness on joint palpation.
B. Restricted intersegmental range of motion.
C. Palpable asymmetry of intervertebral muscle tension
D. Abnormal or blocked joint play
E. Sensorimotor changes in the upper extremity.

11.  High velocity, low amplitude thrust spinal manipulation with the head held in lateral flexion, with slight rotation and slight extension “is a standard manipulative technique used by manipulative physicians, physiotherapists and chiropractors.” (This is important because this is the type of spinal adjusting that many chiropractors perform on cervical vertebrae. This article indicates such adjustments are “standard.”)

12.  High-velocity manipulation causes significant cortical SEP amplitude attenuation in at least the frontal and parietal cortexes.

13.  Passive head movements do not cause changes in cortical firing.

14.  “A single session of spinal manipulation of dysfunctional joints resulted in attenuated cortical (parietal and frontal) evoked responses.” These changes “most likely reflect central changes.”

15.  The cortical (brain) function of different individuals responded differently to spinal adjusting. (This indicates that variables other than the adjustment/manipulation itself can influence the cortical responses in a given individual)

16.  The significantly decreased somatosensory cortical SEP occurred in all post-manipulation measurements, indicating “enhanced active inhibition” because the “cervical manipulations could have altered the afferent information originating from the cervical spine (from joints, muscles, etc.)”

17.  “The passive head movement SEP experiment demonstrated that no significant changes occurred following a simple movement of the subject’s head. Our results are therefore not simply due to altered input from vestibular, muscle or cutaneous afferents as a result of the chiropractor’s touch or due to the actual movement of the subject’s head. This therefore suggests that the results in this study are specific to the delivery of the high-velocity, low-amplitude  adjustment/manipulation to dysfunctional joints.”

18.   “Displacement of vertebrae is signaled to the central nervous system by afferent nerves arising from deep intervertebral muscles,” and this is improved with adjusting the adjacent dysfunctional joint.

19.   “Joint dysfunction leads to bombardment of the central nervous system with afferent signaling from surrounding intervertebral muscles.” Spinal manipulation reduces excessive afferent signals from adjacent intervertebral muscles which improves altered afferent input to the central nervous system. This changes the way the central nervous system “responds to any subsequent input.”

20.   Episodes of acute pain following injury induce plastic changes in the sensorimotor system, prolonging the episode of pain and playing a roll in establishing chronic neck pain conditions.

“The reduced cortical SEP amplitudes observed in this study following spinal manipulation may reflect a normalization of such injury/pain-induced central plastic changes, which may reflect one mechanism for the improvement of functional ability reported following spinal manipulation.”

21.   “Spinal manipulation of dysfunctional joints may modify transmission of neuronal circuitries not only at a spinal level but at a cortical level, and possibly also deeper brain structures such as the basal ganglia.” (WOW!)

22.  Cervical spine manipulation alters cortical (brain) somatosensory processing and sensorimotor integration.

23.  These findings may help to elucidate the mechanisms responsible for the effective relief of pain and restoration of functional ability documented following spinal manipulation treatment.

Other related articles

Spinal Manipulation-significantly better than NSAID’s for lowback pain-Spine Sept 2012

Healing Time of Soft Tissue

Back Pain-Insider Secrets revealed-San Fran Gate 2012

A New Gatekeeper for Back Pain

Why Does Back Pain Recur?

Fibroblast cells in Healing

Fish oil-Neurosurgeon for the Pittsburgh Steelers

Foam Roller for Back Pain

Exercise Makes Us Feel Good-NY Times 2011

Gluten Free Diet helped Nerve Pain-Neurology 2010

Inflammation-13 Tips To Fight Inflammation

Laser Therapy in Rehabilitation-Irvine California

Low Back Pain Studies 2010

Magnesium Deficiency

Muscle Trigger points vs Acupuncture points

Neck pain-Journal of the American Board of Family Practice 2004

Nerve ingrowth into chronic painful disc-Lancet 1997

Nerve Supply of the lumbar disc-JBJS 2007

Omega 3’s-Molecular Neurobiology-January 2011

Omega 3′s and Nerve pain-Clinical Journal of Pain 2010

Self Movement Screen

Sitting-Can sitting too much kill you? Scientific American Jan 2011

Vit. D-What We Have Learned About Vitamin D Dosing

If you are suffering from: Sports Injuries, Sprains, Strains, Car accident,  Herniated Disc, Disc Bulge, Degenerative Disc Disease, Neck pain, Headaches, Low back pain, of just want to feel better and have better life performance– please call our office in Irvine, California- at 949.857.1888or visit our website at ADJUST2IT to learn more about Functional Fitness ChiropracticSports massageMyofascial Release, Corrective Exercise, Non Surgical Spinal Decompression, Class IV laser, Functional Endocrinology and Functional Nutrition.

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: