Medical Hypotheses
Volume 66, Issue 2 , Pages 258-262, 2006

Spinal manipulation and spinal mobilization influence different axial sensory beds

  • Philip S. Bolton

      Affiliations

    • School of Biomedical Sciences, Faculty of Health, University of Newcastle, University Drive, Callaghan, NSW 2308, Australia
    • Corresponding Author InformationCorresponding author. Tel.: +61 2 49217020; fax: +61 2 49217406.
  • ,
  • Brian S. Budgell

      Affiliations

    • School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, Kyoto University, Kyoto 606-8507, Japan

Received 21 August 2005; accepted 25 August 2005. published online 21 October 2005.

Summary 

Manipulation and mobilization are two forms of manual therapy commonly employed in the management of musculoskeletal disorders. Spinal manipulation and mobilization are often distinguished from one another by reference to certain biomechanical parameters such as peak force, duration and magnitude of translation. However, as of yet, there is relatively little research which distinguishes between them in terms of neurological mechanisms or clinical effectiveness. Theories concerning the mechanisms underlying the therapeutic effects of manipulation and mobilization commonly make reference to mechanical events such as the release of entrapped tissue or the disruption of intra-articular adhesions. Relatively less attention is given to neural effects. In this paper, we hypothesize that, at least in part, spinal manipulation preferentially influences a sensory bed which, in terms of anatomical location and function, is different from the sensory bed influenced by spinal mobilization techniques. More specifically, we hypothesize that manipulation may particularly stimulate receptors within deep intervertebral muscles, while mobilization techniques most likely affect more superficial axial muscles. In part, our rationale for this hypothesis is based on differences in mechanical advantage of the respective manual procedures on multi-segmental versus short intervertebral muscles.

To access this article, please choose from the options below

Login to an existing account or Register a new account.

  • Purchase this article for 31.50 USD (You must login/register to purchase this article)

    Online access for 24 hours. The PDF version can be downloaded as your permanent record.

  • Subscribe to this title

    Get unlimited online access to this article and all other articles in this title 24/7 for one year.

  • Claim access now

    For current subscribers with Society Membership or Account Number.

  • Visit SciVerse ScienceDirect to see if you have access via your institution.
 

PII: S0306-9877(05)00476-7

doi:10.1016/j.mehy.2005.08.054

Medical Hypotheses
Volume 66, Issue 2 , Pages 258-262, 2006