Martonick Nickolai Jp, North Kyle, Reeves Ashley, McGowan Craig, Baker Russell T
Department of Movement Sciences, University of Idaho, Moscow, Idaho, USA.
Department of Integrative Anatomical Sciences, Keck School of Medicine University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California, USA.
BMJ Open Sport Exerc Med. 2023 Apr 21;9(2):e001483. doi: 10.1136/bmjsem-2022-001483. eCollection 2023.
The purpose of this study was to examine whether the forces used by trained clinicians during a simulated instrument-assisted soft tissue mobilisation (IASTM) treatment varied across five different instruments during one-handed and two-handed IASTM grips.
Nine athletic trainers who previously completed IASTM training and used the technique in professional practice were included in the study. A skin simulant was attached to a force plate and used to evaluate force production during a simulated IASTM treatment scenario. Peak (F) and mean (F) forces were recorded for both one-handed and two-handed grips for each participant across the five instruments. Data were analysed using separate 2 (grip type) × 5 (IASTM instrument) repeated measures analysis of variance for both F and F.
Data for F demonstrated a significant main effect for grip type (F=46.39, p<0.001, =0.34), instrument (F=4.61, p=0.005, =0.06) and interaction (F=10.23, p=0.001, =0.07). For F, there was also a statistically significant main effect for grip type (F=60.47, p<0.001, =0.32), instrument (F=4.03, p=0.009, =0.06) and interaction (F=7.92, p=0.002, =0.06).
Clinicians produced greater IASTM forces when applying a two-handed grip than a one-handed grip. Instrument weight may matter less than instrument shape, size and bevelling for influencing force production as instrument length appears to influence force production when using one-handed or two-handed grips. Although the effects of IASTM force variation on patient outcomes remains unknown, these findings may be considered by clinicians when making instrument and grip choices.
本研究旨在探讨训练有素的临床医生在模拟器械辅助软组织松动术（IASTM）治疗过程中，单手和双手握持IASTM时，使用五种不同器械所施加的力量是否存在差异。
本研究纳入了九名先前完成IASTM培训并在专业实践中使用该技术的运动训练师。将皮肤模拟物附着在测力板上，用于评估模拟IASTM治疗场景中的力量产生情况。记录了每位参与者在五种器械上单手和双手握持时的峰值（F）和平均（F）力量。对F和F分别使用单独的2（握持类型）×5（IASTM器械）重复测量方差分析进行数据分析。
F的数据显示，握持类型（F = 46.39，p < 0.001，= 0.34）、器械（F = 4.61，p = 0.005，= 0.06）和交互作用（F = 10.23，p = 0.001，= 0.07）均有显著的主效应。对于F，握持类型（F = 60.47，p < 0.001，= 0.32）、器械（F = 4.03，p = 0.009，= 0.06）和交互作用（F = 7.92，p = 0.002，= 0.06）也有统计学上的显著主效应。
临床医生在双手握持时比单手握持时产生更大的IASTM力量。在影响力量产生方面，器械重量可能不如器械形状、尺寸和斜面重要，因为器械长度在使用单手或双手握持时似乎会影响力量产生。尽管IASTM力量变化对患者预后的影响尚不清楚，但临床医生在选择器械和握持方式时可考虑这些发现。
