Table 3 Description of nine studies included in a systematic review on the effect of spinal manipulation on ‘brain function’, comparing spinal manipulation to another physical stimulus
1st author Yr Ref | Design | Type of study subjects | Number of study subjects (males/females) | -Age (range) -Mean | -Type of spinal manipulation -Type of control | How was cerebral activity measured? | When was cerebral activity measured? | Clinical outcomes assessed (measurement tool and time of assessment) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Dishman 2008a [18] | Randomized controlled trial | Healthy: healthy chiropractic students, volunteers. | 72 (21 / 5) intervention group / (15 / 8) control 1 / (14 /9) control 2 | -? (3 groups, said to be between their 20s and 30s) -? (3 groups) | -HVLA L5-S1 (X1) -Control 1: L5-S1 preloading -Control 2: side posture positioning | MEP amplitudes | Before (10 MEP recorded during 100 s) After: immediately (10 MEP recorded during 100 s) | None |
Gay 2014 [22] | Randomized controlled trial | Symptomatic: volunteers from a previous clinical trial, recruited at the local university, hospital and surrounding community, who completed an exercise-injury protocol to induce myalgia in the low back. | 24 (1 / 5) manipulation group / (1 / 7) mobilization group / (5 / 5) therapeutic touch group (7 / 17) | -? /? /? (required to be between 18 and 44) −21 manipulation group / 21 mobilization group / 23 therapeutic touch group | -HVLA (X1, probably in the lumbar spine) -Control 1: grade III lumbar spinal mobilization -Control 2: therapeutic touch (light pressure with a contact to the sacroiliac joints) | Functional connectivity | Before After: immediately | Pain intensity (101-point numerical rating scale) (before and immediately after in each group) |
Haavik-Taylor 2007aa [20] | Crossover controlled trial (order of interventions randomized) | “Subclinical neck/spinal pain”: volunteers (unknown origin) with a history of recurring neck pain or stiffness and with evidence of cervical spinal dysfunction, pain free at the time of the study. | 13 (5 / 8) | −22-45 −31 | -HVLA cervical (X2 to 3 per subject) -Control 1: passive head movement without loading and thrust -Control 2: nothing | MEP amplitudes CSP durations | Before After: -within 0–10 min -within 10–20 min -within 20–30 min | None |
Haavik-Taylor 2008 [23] | Crossover controlled trial (order of interventions randomized) | “Subclinical neck/spinal pain”: adults (unknown origin) with a history of reoccurring neck pain or stiffness and with evidence of cervical spinal dysfunction, pain free at the time of the study. | 12 (7 / 5) | −19-45 −27 | -HVLA cervical (nb unknown, may be at several levels) -Control: passive head movement without loading and thrust | MEP amplitudes CSP durations SICI SICF | Before After: exact time unknown | None |
Haavik 2016 [24] | Crossover controlled trial | “Subclinical neck/spinal pain”: volunteers (unknown origin) with a history of spinal symptoms and with evidence of spinal and/or pelvic dysfunction but who did not yet sought treatment for this and pain free at the time of the study. | 12 (?) | -? −28 | -HVLA cervical (nb unknown, may be at several levels) -Control: passive head movement without loading and thrust | MEP amplitudes Slope of the steepest part of the curve (k) Stimulus intensity required to obtain a response that is 50% of the max (S50) | Before After: exact time unknown | None |
Haavik-Taylor 2007b [25] | Two groups “pseudo-randomized” trial | “Subclinical neck/spinal pain”: volunteers (origin unknown) with reoccurring neck problems and evidence of cervical spine dysfunction, pain free at the time of the study. | 24 (7 / 5) intervention group / (4 / 8) control group | −20-53 intervention group / 21–35 control group −30 intervention group / 27 control group | -HVLA cervical (X2 to 3 per subject) -Control: passive head movement without loading and thrust | SEP latencies and amplitudes: P14–18 complex, N20 (P14-N20 and N20-P27) and N30 (P22-N30) peaks | Before After: -within 0–10 min -within 10–20 min -within 20–30 min | None |
Haavik-Taylor 2010a [26] | Crossover controlled trial (order of interventions randomized) | “Subclinical neck/spinal pain”: volunteers (origin unknown) with reoccurring neck problems and evidence of cervical spine dysfunction, pain free at the time of the study. | 13 (5 / 8) | −18-40 −28 | -HVLA cervical (nb unknown, may be at several levels) -Control: passive head movement without loading and thrust | SEP MU/M + U peak ratios: P14-N18 complex, N20-P25 complex, and P22-N30 complex ratios | Before After: within 25 min | None |
Niazi 2015 [27] | Crossover controlled trial (order of interventions randomized) | “Subclinical neck/spinal pain”: volunteers (origin unknown) with recurring, intermittent low-grade spinal pain, ache, or tension, with evidence of spine dysfunction, but which did not sought treatment for this problem and are pain free at the time of the study. | 10 (10 / 0) | -? (required to be between 18 and 40) −28 | -HVLA (where needed, in any spine level or sacroiliac joints, nb unknown _ may be at several levels) -Control: passive and active movements of the subject’s head, spine, and body into the manipulation setup positions, without loading and thrust | V-wave amplitude | Before After: exact time unknown | None |
Christiansen 2018 [28] | Crossover controlled trial (order of interventions randomized) | “Subclinical neck/spinal pain”: elite Taekwondo athletes, from the Auckland area, with “subclinical spinal pain” and evidence or spine dysfunction, pain free at the time of the study. | 12 (6 / 6) | -? (required to be between 17 and 50) −25 | -HVLA (where needed, in any spine level or sacroiliac joints, nb unknown _ may be at several levels) -Control: passive and active movements of the subject’s head and spine into the manipulation setup positions, without loading and thrust | V-wave amplitude | Before After: -immediately −30 min −60 mins | None |