无症状受试者胸椎松动术后的自主神经功能和压痛阈值：一项随机对照试验。
Autonomic function and pressure pain threshold following thoracic mobilization in asymptomatic subjects: A randomized controlled trial.
作者信息
Araujo Francisco Xavier de, Scholl Schell Maurício, Ferreira Giovanni Esteves, Pessoa Mariana Della Valentina, de Oliveira Luiza Raulino, Borges Brian Giacomini, Macagnan Fabrício Edler, Plentz Rodrigo Della Méa, Silva Marcelo Faria
机构信息
Physical Therapy Department, Graduate Program in Rehabilitation Sciences, Universidade Federal de Ciências da Saúde de Porto Alegre (UFCSPA), Porto Alegre, Brazil; Centro Universitário Ritter dos Reis (UniRitter) - Laureate International Universities, Porto Alegre, Brazil.
Physical Therapy Department, Graduate Program in Rehabilitation Sciences, Universidade Federal de Ciências da Saúde de Porto Alegre (UFCSPA), Porto Alegre, Brazil.
出版信息
J Bodyw Mov Ther. 2018 Apr;22(2):313-320. doi: 10.1016/j.jbmt.2017.09.005. Epub 2017 Sep 8.
OBJECTIVE
To compare the effects of two different mobilization techniques and a placebo intervention applied to the thoracic spine on heart rate variability (HRV) and pressure pain threshold (PPT) in asymptomatic individuals.
METHODS
Sixty healthy asymptomatic subjects aged between 18 and 40 years old were randomized to a single session of one of the three interventions: posterior-to-anterior (PA) rotatory thoracic passive accessory intervertebral mobilization (PAIVM) (PA group), unilateral thoracic PA in slump position (SLUMP group) or placebo intervention (Placebo group). HRV and PPT at C7 and T4 spinous process, first dorsal interossei muscles bilaterally, and muscle belly of tibialis anterior bilaterally were measured before and immediately after the intervention. A univariate analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) adjusted for baseline values assessed the effect of "Group". Pairwise comparisons with Bonferroni adjustment for multiple comparisons were performed.
RESULTS
There were no significant between-group differences for HRV. A significant between-group difference for PPT in the ipsilateral tibia was found favoring the SLUMP group in comparison with the PA group. There were no significant between-group differences for PPT in the other landmarks.
CONCLUSION
A single treatment of thoracic PAIVM in prone lying and slump position did not alter PPT and HRV compared to placebo in asymptomatic subjects.
目的
比较两种不同的松动技术及一种安慰剂干预应用于胸椎对无症状个体心率变异性（HRV）和压力疼痛阈值（PPT）的影响。
方法
将60名年龄在18至40岁之间的健康无症状受试者随机分为三组，分别接受以下三种干预中的一种：后前向（PA）旋转胸椎被动椎间辅助松动术（PAIVM）（PA组）、 slumped位单侧胸椎PA（SLUMP组）或安慰剂干预（安慰剂组）。在干预前及干预后即刻测量C7和T4棘突、双侧第一背侧骨间肌以及双侧胫骨前肌肌腹处的HRV和PPT。采用协方差分析（ANCOVA）并对基线值进行校正，以评估“组”的效应。采用Bonferroni校正进行多重比较的两两比较。
结果
HRV在组间无显著差异。发现同侧胫骨PPT在组间存在显著差异，与PA组相比，SLUMP组更具优势。在其他测量部位，PPT在组间无显著差异。
结论
与安慰剂相比，在无症状受试者中，俯卧位和slumped位单次胸椎PAIVM治疗未改变PPT和HRV。
Zotero 插件