Cervicothoracic Manipulation Techniques Reviewed Utilizing Three-Dimensional Spine Model

Ryan C McCoy, Edsel Bittencourt, William Clifton, Ryan C McCoy, Edsel Bittencourt, William Clifton

Abstract

Currently, there is a paucity of studies that describe prone cervicothoracic joint high-velocity low-amplitude (HVLA) thrust techniques using an anatomically accurate, biomimetic three-dimensional (3D) spine model for educational demonstration. The purpose of this technical report was to present a learning model for two prone cervicothoracic HVLA thrust techniques using a 3D model, review intersegmental mobility observed on a 3D spine model with application of the techniques, and lastly discuss potential applications of this learning model.

Keywords: 3d-printed spine model; learning; manual therapy; spinal manipulation.

Conflict of interest statement

The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Copyright © 2019, McCoy et al.

Figures

Figure 1. Prone right cervicothoracic manipulation technique
Figure 1. Prone right cervicothoracic manipulation technique
(A) Visualization of left facet upglide during prone right cervicothoracic mobilization technique. (B) Palpation of C7 Spinous process with the patient prone in a comfortable position prior to mobilization technique. (C) Set up depicted for prone right cervicothoracic manipulation at C7-T1 with therapist standing to right of patient on a high low table. Left hand point of contact is through second metacarpophalangeal joint at the articular pillar of intended spinal segment and right mobilizing hand at lateral and posterior aspect of head which is supported by a towel roll at the anterior aspect of the subjects right temporal area promoting right rotation up to the cervicothoracic joint junction.
Figure 2. Prone lateral break cervicothoracic maneuver
Figure 2. Prone lateral break cervicothoracic maneuver
(A) Set up for lateral break cervicothoracic joint HVLA thrust on 3D spine model. Right facet upglide depicted at intended segments during application of lateral break cervicothoracic maneuver promoting left side bending. (B) Set up for lateral break cervicothoracic manipulation technique on subject with therapist standing on right side of the high low table with towel roll support to forehead. Left hand point of contact through second metacarpophalangeal joint at intended segment with line of force in the medial direction and right mobilizing hand to lateral aspect of right temporal region.

References

    1. A feasibility study for the production of three-dimensional-printed spine models using simultaneously extruded thermoplastic polymers. Clifton W, Nottmeier E, Damon A, Dove C, Chen SG, Pichelmann M. Cureus. 2019;11:4440.
    1. Bilateral and multiple cavitation sounds during upper cervical thrust manipulation. Dunning J, Mourad F, Barbero M, Leoni D, Cescon C, Butts R. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2013;14:24.
    1. Cavitation sounds during cervicothoracic spinal manipulation. Dunning J, Mourad F, Zingoni A, et al. . Int J Sports Phys Ther. 2017;12:642–654.
    1. Safety of thrust joint manipulation in the thoracic spine: a systematic review. Engel RM, Vemulpad SR, Dougherty P. J Man Manip Ther. 2015;23:173.
    1. Changes in pressure pain thresholds over C5-C6 zygapophyseal joint after a cervicothoracic junction manipulation in healthy subjects. Fernandez-de-Las-Penas C, Alonso-Blanco C, Cleland JA, Rodriguez-Blanco C, Alburquerque-Sendin F. J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 2008;31:332–337.
    1. The immediate effects of manual stretching and cervicothoracic junction manipulation on cervical range of motion and upper trapezius pressure pain thresholds. Hanney WJ, Puentedura EJ, Kolber MJ, Liu X, Pabian PS, Cheatham SW. J Back Musculoskelet Rehabil. 2017;30:1005–1013.
    1. Cervicothoracic manual therapy plus exercise therapy versus exercise therapy alone in the management of individuals with shoulder pain: a multicenter randomized controlled trial. Mintken PE, McDevitt AW, Cleland JA, et al. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2016;46:617–628.
    1. Examination of the validity of a clinical prediction rule to identify patients with shoulder pain likely to benefit from cervicothoracic manipulation. Mintken PE, McDevitt AW, Michener LA, et al. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2017;47:252–260.
    1. Determining cavitation location during lumbar and thoracic spinal manipulation: is spinal manipulation accurate and specific. Ross JK, Bereznick DE, McGill SM. Spine (Phila Pa 1976. 2004;29:1452–1457.
    1. Predictors for identifying patients with mechanical neck pain who are likely to achieve short-term success with manipulative interventions directed at the cervical and thoracic spine. Saavedra-Hernandez M, Castro-Sanchez AM, Fernandez-de-Las-Penas C, Cleland JA, Ortega-Santiago R, Arroyo-Morales M. J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 2011;34:144–152.
    1. Best uses of osteopathic manipulation. Slattengren AH, Nissly T, Blustin J, Bader A, Westfall E. . J Fam Pract. 2017;66:743–747.
    1. Reliability and diagnostic accuracy of cervicothoracic differentiation testing and regional unloading for identifying improvement after thoracic manipulation in individuals with neck pain. Swanson BT, Gans MB, Cullenberg A, Cullenberg EK, Cyr R, Risigo L. Musculoskelet Sci Pract. 2019;39:80–90.

Source: PubMed

3
Tilaa