Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Initial development of a device for controlling manually applied forces.

Gordon S Waddington1, Roger D Adams

  • 1Physiotherapy, School of Health Sciences, University of Canberra, ACT 2601, Australia. gordon.waddington@canberra.edu.au

Manual Therapy
|September 15, 2006
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Developing a multivariate prediction model of falls among older community-dwelling adults using measures of neuromuscular control and proprioceptive acuity: A pilot study.

Australasian journal on ageing·2023
Same author

Daily surveillance of falls is feasible and reveals a high incidence of falls among older adults.

Australasian journal on ageing·2022
Same author

Elite athletes with COVID-19; predictors of the course of disease.

Journal of science and medicine in sport·2021
Same author

Pelvic floor disorders stop women exercising.

Journal of science and medicine in sport·2021
Same author

Eating disorder diagnosis and the female athlete.

Journal of science and medicine in sport·2021
Same author

Editorial.

Journal of science and medicine in sport·2021
Same journal

Agreement between a physiotherapist and an orthopaedic surgeon regarding management and prescription of corticosteroid injection for patients with shoulder pain.

Manual therapy·2016
Same journal

Do subjects with acute/subacute temporomandibular disorder have associated cervical impairments: A cross-sectional study.

Manual therapy·2016
Same journal

Classification characteristics of a chronic low back pain population using a combined McKenzie and patho-anatomical assessment.

Manual therapy·2016
Same journal

How do they feel? Patients' perspectives on draping and dignity in a physiotherapy outpatient setting: A pilot study.

Manual therapy·2016
Same journal

What do patients value about spinal manipulation and home exercise for back-related leg pain? A qualitative study within a controlled clinical trial.

Manual therapy·2016
Same journal

Reliability of physical examination tests for the diagnosis of knee disorders: Evidence from a systematic review.

Manual therapy·2016
See all related articles

A new manual therapy dynamometer significantly reduced force variability during spinal mobilization. Therapists also reported greater comfort when using the device, improving treatment consistency and patient experience.

Area of Science:

  • Manual Therapy
  • Biomechanics
  • Rehabilitation Engineering

Background:

  • Manual therapy studies reveal significant force variability among therapists attempting to replicate applied forces.
  • Understanding treatment forces is crucial for reducing variability in manual therapy.
  • A prototype mobilizing device with an integrated dynamometer was developed to address this issue.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To assess the impact of a novel mobilizing device with a dynamometer on force application variability.
  • To compare therapist comfort levels when using the device versus traditional manual techniques.
  • To quantify the consistency of force application in simulated spinal mobilization.

Main Methods:

  • Thirty physiotherapists were randomly assigned to two groups: manual force estimation or device-assisted 100N force application.

Related Experiment Videos

  • Participants rated comfort using a 100mm visual analogue scale during simulated spinal mobilization.
  • Force variability was measured during both techniques.

    • Main Results:

    • Force application variability was significantly lower when using the dynamometer-guided device compared to therapist-guided force.
    • The mean force applied at grade III mobilization was not significantly different from 100N.
    • Therapist comfort ratings were significantly higher when using the manual therapy dynamometer (P<0.01).

    Conclusions:

    • A mobilizing device with a visual dynamometer readout significantly reduces manual force variability.
    • The device enhances therapist comfort during simulated spinal mobilization.
    • This technology offers potential for more consistent and comfortable manual therapy interventions.