Elsevier

Clinical Biomechanics

Volume 12, Issue 6, September 1997, Pages 393-399
Clinical Biomechanics

Paper
Variability of forces applied by experienced therapists during spinal mobilization

https://doi.org/10.1016/S0268-0033(97)00023-5Get rights and content

Abstract

Objective. To determine the variation in forces used by different therapists during mobilization of the lumbar spine and the repeatability and reproducibility of individual therapists.

Design. An instrumented mobilization couch was developed to measure the forces applied to the trunk during spinal mobilization.

Background. Due to limitations in equipment design and data analysis, previous related studies demonstrate equivocal results.

Methods. The system was used to collect data from a sample of 30 experienced therapists to evaluate variation, repeatability and reproducibility during the application of five mobilization procedures.

Results. The variation in forces used by different therapists when performing the same technique was substantial, ranging between 63 and 347 N for one technique. During this procedure, 30% of the therapists were found to be relatively consistent, repeating the magnitude of the force applied at the first session within 5%. Others demonstrated considerable variation, exhibiting a difference as great as 34%.

Conclusions. The inconsistency between experienced therapists has considerable implications for clinical practice. Changes in the magnitude and rate of loading are likely to have different effects due to the inherent viscoelastic behaviour of soft tissues.

References (14)

  • T.A. Matyas et al.

    The reliability of selected techniques in clinical arthrometrics

    Australian Journal of Physiotherapy

    (1985)
  • T.W. Meade et al.

    Low back of mechanical origin: randomised comparison of chiropractic and hospital outpatient treatment

    British Medical Journal

    (1990)
  • G.D. Maitland
  • G.A. Jull

    Monitoring aspects of the development of undergraduate student skills in manual techniques

  • G.A. Jull et al.

    Aspects of therapist reliability in manual examination of lumbar intersegmental motion

  • G.L. Hardy et al.

    Inter and intratherapist reliability of passive accessory movement technique

    New Zealand Journal of Physiotherapy

    (1991)
  • M.C. Harms et al.

    Instrumentation of a mobilisation couch for dynamic load measurement

    Journal of Medical Engineering Technology

    (1995)
There are more references available in the full text version of this article.

Cited by (72)

  • Intraclinician Variability in Force Application During Anteroposterior Mobilization of the Ankle Joint

    2022, Journal of Chiropractic Medicine
    Citation Excerpt :

    This has the potential for leading a researcher to find smaller clinical effects than if a larger dose were applied. The mean peak force applied during ankle mobilization (65 ± 5 N) is consistent with that reported in spinal mobilization (55-158 N),9,14 but is approximately one-quarter to one-third of those reported by Resende et al6 and Venturini et al,15 in which peak forces on the order of 160 to 200 N were observed during a grade IV Maitland's AP ankle mobilization technique. The discrepancy in the magnitude of the peak force observed between studies may reflect several methodological differences.

  • Quantifying Lumbar Mobilization With Inertial Measurement Unit

    2020, Journal of Manipulative and Physiological Therapeutics
  • Instrumented Measurement of Spinal Stiffness: A Systematic Literature Review of Reliability

    2018, Journal of Manipulative and Physiological Therapeutics
    Citation Excerpt :

    Even though the manual assessment of stiffness often is done in clinical practice, many studies have found that it has poor intra- and interrater reliability.13-15 Some reasons are examiner variability in the magnitude16 or the direction17 of the applied force and the variation in individual perceptions of stiffness.18 Maher et al investigated a reference-based protocol, where examiners received a reference stiffness stimulus to rate the stiffness more objectively.

View all citing articles on Scopus
View full text