Skip to main content
NCBI home page
Journal of Chiropractic Medicine logoLink to Journal of Chiropractic Medicine
. 2005;4(2):61–69. doi: 10.1016/S0899-3467(07)60115-3

A functional pre-manipulative spinal orthopedic assessment maneuver

David E Stude a,*
PMCID: PMC2647035  PMID: 19674648

Abstract

Objective

To introduce and describe a standardized protocol for a functional, pre-manipulative assessment procedure for spinal pain.

Design

Two brief case reports and the clinical utility of this maneuver is compared with another commonly used orthopedic test in a retrospective study involving 50 subjects.

Setting

Northwestern Health Sciences University's Bloomington Natural Care Center.

Results

The use of the proposed pre-manipulative orthopedic assessment maneuver may have clinical utility for patients presenting with back and/or leg pain. There were differences in the subjective responses of some subjects between the use of the torsion test and the straight leg raise and some results that suggest a correlation between the two tests.

Conclusion

The test described may be useful as an additional assessment procedure since it closely reflects those spinal stressors that are commonly present when manual therapy is being employed. Additionally, the torsion test may have practical utility since it can be modified to reflect different techniques employed by different health care providers.

Key Indexing Terms: Spine; Back Pain; Manipulation, Chiropractic; Pre-manipulative Test

Footnotes

Sources of Support: No external funding was received for the preparation of this paper.

References

  • 1.Bergmann TF. The integration of spinal manual adjustive therapies with exercise. In: Stude DE, editor. Spinal rehabilitation. 1st ed. Appleton and Lange; Stamford: 1999. pp. 410–415. [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Curl DD. Chiropractic aspects of headache as a somatovisceral problem. In: Masarsky C, Todres-Masarsky M, editors. Somatovisceral aspects of chiropractic an evidence-based approach. 1st ed. Churchill Livingstone; Philadelphia: 2001. pp. 161–179. [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Mazion JM. Illlustrated manual of neurological reflexes/signs/tests and orthopedic signs/tests/maneuvers for office procedure. 2nd ed. Daniels Publishing Company; Florida: 1980. pp. 297–298. 334–341. [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Cipriano JJ. Photographic manual of regional orthopaedic and neurological tests. 3rd ed. Williams & Wilkins; Baltimore: 1997. pp. 42–188. 219, 222. [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Evans RC. Illustrated orthopedic physical assessment. 2nd ed. Mosby, Inc; St. Louis: 2001. pp. 88–93. 562–5574–5578–9. [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Herzog W. Clinical biomechanics of spinal manipulation. 1st ed. Churchill Livingstone; Philadelphia: 2000. The mechanical, neuromuscular, and physiologic effects produced by spinal manipulation; pp. 191–207. [Google Scholar]
  • 7.White AA, Panjabi MM. Clinical biomechanics of the spine. 2nd ed. JB Lipincott Company; Philadelphia: 1990. pp. 92–111. [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Triano JJ. Studies of the biomechanical effects of a spinal adjustment. J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 1992;15:71–75. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Herzog W, Conway PJ, Kawchuk GN, Zhang Y, Hasler EM. Forces exerted during spinal manipulative therapy. Spine. 1993;18:1206–1212. doi: 10.1097/00007632-199307000-00014. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Conway PJW, Herzog W, Zhang Y. Forces required to cause cavitation during spinal manipulation of the thoracic spine. Clin Biomech. 1993;8:210–214. doi: 10.1016/0268-0033(93)90016-B. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Triano JJ, Schultz AS. Cervical spine manipulation: applied loads, motions and myoelectric responses. Proceedings of the 14th meeting of the American Society of Biomechanics. 1990:187–188. [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Kawchuk GN, Herzog W, Hasler EM. Forces generated during spinal manipulative therapy of the cervical spine: a pilot study. J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 1990;15:275–278. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Haas M. The physics of spinal manipulation. Part IV. A theoretical consideration of the physician impact force and energy requirements needed to produce synovial joint cavitation. J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 1990;13:378–383. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Gal J, Herzog W, Kawchuk G. Biomechanical studies of spinal manipulative therapy (SMT): quantifying the movements of vertebral bodies during SMT. J Can Chiropr Assoc. 1994;38:11–24. [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Gal G, Herzog W, Kawchuk G. Movements of vertebrae during manipulative thrusts to unembalmed human cadavers. J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 1997;20:30–40. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Crowninshield RD, Brand RA. The prediction of forces in joint structures: distribution of intersegmental resultants. Exerc Sport Sci Rev. 1981;9:159–181. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Fischer AA. Pressure algometry over normal muscles: standard values, validity and reproducibility of pressure threshold. Pain. 1987;30:115–126. doi: 10.1016/0304-3959(87)90089-3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Cibulka M, Delitto A, Koldehoff R. Changes in innominate tilt after manipulation of the sacroiliac joint in patients with low back pain. Phys Ther. 1988;68:1359–1363. doi: 10.1093/ptj/68.9.1359. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Nansel DD, Peneff AL, Jansen RD, Cooperstein R. Interexaminer concordance in detecting joint-play asymmetries in the cervical spines of otherwise asymptomatic subjects. J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 1989;12:428–433. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Herzog W, Read LJ, Conway PJ. Reliability of motion palpation procedures to detect sacroiliac joint fixations. J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 1989;12:86–92. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Fuhr AW, Osterbauer PJ. Interexaminer reliability of relative leg length in the prone extended position. J Chiropr Tech. 1989;1:13–18. [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Keating JC. Toward a philosophy of the science of chiropractic: a primer for clinicians. Stockton Foundation for Chiropractic Research; Stockton, CA: 1992. [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Jull G, Bogduk N, Marshland A. The accuracy of manual diagnosis for cervical zygapophyseal joint pain syndromes. Med J Austr. 1988;148:233–236. doi: 10.5694/j.1326-5377.1988.tb99431.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Matyas T, Bach T. The reliability of selected techniques in clinical arthrometrics. Austr J Physiother. 1985;31:175–199. doi: 10.1016/S0004-9514(14)60633-4. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Viikari-Juntrura E, Porras M, Laasonen EM. Validity of clinical tests in the diagnosis of root compression in cervical disc disease. Spine. 1989;14:253–257. doi: 10.1097/00007632-198903000-00003. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Triano J, McGregor M, Doyne M. Criterion-related validity of manual diagnostic maneuvers. North American Spine Society; Vancouver: 1996. [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Farfan HF, Cossett B, Robertson GH, Wells RV, Kraus H. The effects of torsion on the lumbar intervertebral joints, the role of torsion in the production of disc degeneration. J Bone Joint Surg. 1970;52A:468. 494–496. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Cassidy J, Haymo W, Thiel DC, Kirkaldy-Willis W. Side posture manipulation for lumbar intervertebral disc herniation. J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 1993;16:96–103. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Quon J, Cassidy D, O'Connor S, Kirkaldy-Willis W. Lumbar intervertebral disc herniation: treatment by rotational manipulation. J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 1989;12:220–227. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Crawford C, Hannan R. Management of acute lumbar disc herniation initially presenting as mechanical low back pain. J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 1999;22:235–244. doi: 10.1016/s0161-4754(99)70050-3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31.McGill S. Kinetic Potential of the lumbar trunk musculature about three orthogonal orthopedic axes in extreme postures. Spine. 1991;16:809–815. doi: 10.1097/00007632-199107000-00021. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 32.West D, Mathews R, Miller M, Kent G. Effective management of spinal pain in one hundred seventy-seven patients evaluated for manipulation under anesthesia. J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 1999;22:299–308. doi: 10.1016/s0161-4754(99)70062-x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 33.Gordon R. An evaluation of the experimental and investigational status and clinical validity of manipulation of patients under anesthesia: a contemporary opinion. J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 2001;24:603–611. doi: 10.1067/mmt.2001.119859. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 34.Palmiere N, Smoyak S. Chronic low back pain: a study of the effects of manipulation under anesthesia. J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 2002;25:e8–e17. doi: 10.1067/mmt.2002.127072. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 35.Beckett R, Francis R. Spinal manipulation under anesthesia. Adv Chiropr. 1994;1:325–340. [Google Scholar]
  • 36.Williams H. Manipulation under anesthesia: review of the literature and discussion of the state of the art. J Am Chiropr Assoc. 1997;34(12):32–41. [Google Scholar]
  • 37.Siehl D, Olson D, Ross H, Rockwood E. Manipulation of the lumbar spine with the patient under general anesthesia: evaluation by electromyography and clincial-neurologic examination of its use for lumbar nerve root compression syndrome. J Am Osteop Assoc. 1971;70:433–440. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 38.Werneke M, Hart DL. Centralization phenomenon as a prognostic factor for chronic low back pain and disability. Spine. 2001;26:758–764. doi: 10.1097/00007632-200104010-00012. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 39.Werneke M, Hart DL, Cook D. A descriptive study of the centralization phenomenon: a prospective analysis. Spine. 1999;24:676–683. doi: 10.1097/00007632-199904010-00012. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 40.Long AL. The centralization phenomenon. Its usefulness as a predictor or outcome in conservative treatment of chronic low back pain (a pilot study) Spine. 1995;20:2513–2520. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 41.Donelson R, Silva G, Murphy K. Centralization phenomenon: its usefulness in evaluating and treating referred pain. Spine. 1990;15:211–213. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 42.Lisi AJ. The centralization phenomenon in chiropractic spinal manipulation of discogenic low back pain and sciatica. J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 2001;24:596–602. doi: 10.1067/mmt.2001.118986. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 43.Axen I, Resenbaum A, Robech R, Wren T, Leboeuf-Yde C. Can patient reactions to the first chiropractic treatment predict early favorable treatment outcome in persistent low back pain? J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 2002;25:450–454. doi: 10.1067/mmt.2002.126473. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 44.Sufka A, Gauger B, Trenary M, Bishop B, Hagen A, Lozon R, Martens B. Centralization of low back pain and perceived functional outcome. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 1998;27:205–212. doi: 10.2519/jospt.1998.27.3.205. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 45.Karas R, McIntosh G, Hall H, Wilson L, Melles T. The relationship between nonorganic signs and centralization of symptoms in the prediction of return to work for patients with low back pain. Phys Ther. 1997;77:354–360. doi: 10.1093/ptj/77.4.354. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 46.Donelson R, Aprill C, Medcalf R, Grant W. A prospective study of centralization of lumbar and referred pain. A predictor of symptomatic discs and annular competence. Spine. 1997;22:1115–1122. doi: 10.1097/00007632-199705150-00011. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 47.Triano J. The mechanics of spinal manipulation. In: Herzog W., editor. Clinical biomechanics of spinal manipulation. 1st ed. Churchill Livingstone; Philadelphia: 2000. pp. 92–190. [Google Scholar]
  • 48.Aspegren DD, Burt AL. A study of postspinal surgery cases in chiropractic offices. J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 1994;17:88–92. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 49.Panjabi MM, Abumi K, Duraceau J, Crisco JJ, Kramer K. Proceedings of the 12th Annual Meeting of the Society of Biomechanics. Society of Biomechanics; Urbana-Champaine, IL: 1998. A biomechanical study of partial and complete facetectomies of the lumbar spine. [Google Scholar]
  • 50.Pintar FA, Cusuck JF, Yoganandan N. The biomechanics of lumbar facetectomy under compression-flexion. Spine. 1992;17:804–809. doi: 10.1097/00007632-199207000-00013. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 51.Delaney P, Hubka M. The diagnostic utility of McKenzie clinical assessment for lower back pain. J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 1999;22:628–630. doi: 10.1016/s0161-4754(99)70024-2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 52.Troyanovich S, Harrison D. The reliability and validity of chiropractic assessment procedures. Chiropr Tech. 1996;8:10–13. [Google Scholar]

Articles from Journal of Chiropractic Medicine are provided here courtesy of National University of Health Sciences

RESOURCES