• The Acupuncture Handbook Of Sports Injuries Pain Pdf Files Download
• Sports Injuries Nba
• The Acupuncture Handbook Of Sports Injuries Pain Pdf Files Online

CHRONIC PAIN PHYSICAL THERAPY TREATMENT FUNDAMENTALS 7th Annual Prescription Drug Abuse & Heroine Symposium Lina Avendano. PT, MHS, DPT, FAAOMPT.Pain can occur in the absence of tissue injury, or remain well. Implication of Past Sports Injuries and Willingness to Compete Among Sports Teams. North American Journal of. The Acupuncture Handbook of Sports Injuries and Pain is a clinical manual that integrates traditional Chinese acupuncture with western orthopedic and sports medicine. It outlines the diagnosis, assessment, and treatment protocol for 25 common sports injuries. The Acupuncture Handbook offers both insight and discipline for treating injuries and pain. Handbook Of Sports Injury Medicine) Download Handbook of Sports Medicine and Science, Sports Injury Prevention (2009) (PDF) (UnitedVRG) torrent or any other torrent from Textbooks category. Addressing uncertainties regarding the nature of injury and treatment will In. Murphy (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of sport and performance psychology (pp.

Abstract

Prior studies suggest manual therapy (MT) as effective in the treatment of musculoskeletal pain; however, the mechanisms through which MT exerts its effects are not established. In this paper we present a comprehensive model to direct future studies in MT. This model provides visualization of potential individual mechanisms of MT that the current literature suggests as pertinent and provides a framework for the consideration of the potential interaction between these individual mechanisms. Specifically, this model suggests that a mechanical force from MT initiates a cascade of neurophysiological responses from the peripheral and central nervous system which are then responsible for the clinical outcomes. This model provides clear direction so that future studies may provide appropriate methodology to account for multiple potential pertinent mechanisms.

Introduction

Available evidence suggests manual therapy (MT) as effective in the treatment of musculoskeletal disorders including low back pain (;), carpal tunnel syndrome (;), knee osteoarthritis (), and hip osteoarthritis (). Moreover, recent studies have provided even stronger evidence when participants are classified into sub-groups (;). Despite the literature supporting its effectiveness, the mechanisms of MT are not established leading to a National Institutes of Health (NIH) call to specifically address this shortcoming ().

A better understanding of the mechanisms of MT is necessary for several reasons. First, recent evidence suggests successful outcomes in MT are dependent on identifying individuals likely to respond rather than identification of a specific lesion. Subsequently, clinical prediction rules based on clusters of signs and symptoms have been proposed to identify responders to MT (;). While helpful in directing clinical practice, an explanation is lacking as to why such patterns of signs and symptoms predicts successful clinical outcomes. Subsequently, the biological plausibility of current clinical prediction rules may not be established leading to concern for chance associations rather than causation. Highlighting this concern, only one clinical prediction rule() has, to our knowledge, been validated with a follow up study (). An understanding of the mechanisms behind MT could assist in the identification of individuals likely to respond to MT by allowing a priori hypotheses as to pertinent predictive factors for future clinical prediction rules and a better understanding of the factors which are determined as predictive.

A second benefit of the identification of MT mechanisms is the potential for increased acceptance of these techniques by health care providers. Despite the literature supporting the effectiveness of MT in specific musculoskeletal conditions, health care practitioners at times provide or refer for MT at a lower than expected rate (;;). The lack of an identifiable mechanism of action for MT may limit the acceptability of these techniques as they may be viewed as less scientific. Knowledge of mechanisms may promote more appropriate use of MT by healthcare providers.

The intention of this manuscript is to present a comprehensive model to guide future studies of MT mechanisms. For our purposes, MT includes a variety of techniques used in clinical practice for the treatment of musculoskeletal pain which target the skeletal system, soft tissue, and nervous system (Table 1).

Table 1

Classification of manual therapy techniques referenced in manuscript along with specific examples of each. Proposed model is general and accounts for all techniques regardless of their theorized anatomical emphasis. Adapted from NCCAM website.(http:nccam.nih.gov/, 2007)

Need for a Comprehensive Model

MT likely works through biomechanical and/or neurophysiological mechanisms. A limitation of the current literature is the failure to acknowledge the potential for a combined effect of these mechanisms. For example, prior studies have noted individual biomechanical (;) and neurophysiological effects (;;;) associated with MT; however the potential interaction of these effects is frequently overlooked. Combined effects may be important to consider as the biomechanical parameters of a given MT may produce unique or dose dependent neurophysiological responses. For example, associated hypoalgesic response () and EMG response () have an observed dependence on the force and force/time profile of a given MT. Additionally, prior studies often focus on a single neurophysiological mechanism without consideration for competing explanations. For example neuromuscular changes such as decreased resting EMG activity () and decreased muscle inhibition (;) have been associated with MT and theorized to occur due to stimulation of the mechanoreceptors or proprioceptors producing a spinal cord mediated effect (;). While helpful in establishing the groundwork for the mechanistic study of MT, conclusions based on studies designed in this fashion may fail to consider other potentially pertinent mechanisms. Psychological factors have an observed association with muscular response in individuals with low back pain () and MT has an observed effect on these psychological factors (). Subsequently, outcomes reported in the prior studies (;;) could be explained by a descending supraspinal mediating effect due to changes in psychological factors such as fear. A consideration of the interaction between biomechanical and multiple potential neurophysiological effects necessitates a comprehensive model to synthesize the current literature and direct future research.

Proposed Model

We propose the following model which provides a compilation of the existing mechanistic literature of MT as a framework for interpreting current and conducting future mechanistic research (Figure 1). Briefly, this model suggests a mechanical stimulus initiates a number of potential neurophysiological effects which produce the clinical outcomes associated with MT in the treatment of musculoskeletal pain.

Figure Key: The model suggests a transient, mechanical stimulus to the tissue produces a chain of neurophysiological effects. Solid arrows denote a direct mediating effect. Broken arrows denote an associative relationship which may include: = an association between a construct and its measure Bold boxes indicate the measurement of a construct ACC = anterior cingular cortex; PAG = periaqueductal gray; RVM = rostral ventromedial medulla

Mechanical Stimulus

Biomechanical effects are associated with MT as motion has been quantified with joint biased MT (;) and nerve biased MT (;); however, the direct implication on clinical outcomes is questionable. First, only transient biomechanical effects are supported by studies which quantify motion (;;;) but not a lasting positional change (;). Second, biomechanical assessment is not reliable. Palpation for position and movement faults has demonstrated poor reliability (;) suggesting an inability to accurately determine a specific area requiring MT. Third, MT techniques lack precision as nerve biased techniques are not specific to a single nerve () and joint biased technique forces are dissipated over a large area (;). Additionally, different kinetic parameters are observed between clinicians in the performance of the same technique (;) and the choice of technique does not seem to matter as much as identifying an individual likely to respond (;). Finally, studies have reported improvements in signs and symptoms away from the site of application such as treating cervical pain with MT directed to the thoracic spine (;) and lateral epicondylitis with MT directed to the cervical spine (). Collectively, the literature suggests a biomechanical effect of MT; however, lasting structural changes have not been identified, clinicians are unable to reliably identify areas requiring MT, the forces associated with MT are not specific to a given location and vary between clinicians, choice of technique does not seem to affect outcomes, and sign and symptom responses occur in areas separate from the region of application. The effectiveness of MT despite the inconsistencies associate with a purported biomechanical mechanism suggests that additional mechanisms may be pertinent. Subsequently, we suggest, that as illustrated by the model, a mechanical force is necessary to initiate a chain of neurophysiological responses which produce the outcomes associated with MT.

Neurophysiological Mechanism

The proposed model accounts for the complex interactions of both the peripheral and central nervous system which comprise the pain experience. Current mechanistic studies of MT in humans are frequently unable to directly observe the central or peripheral nervous system. Subsequently, in the absence of direct observation, conclusions are drawn from associated neurophysiological responses which indirectly implicate specific mechanisms. Studies have measured associated responses of hypoalgesia and sympathetic activity following MT to suggest a mechanism of action mediated by the periaquaductal gray () and lessening of temporal summation following MT to suggest a mechanism mediated by the dorsal horn of the spinal cord () The model makes use of directly measurable associated responses to imply specific neurophysiological mechanisms when direct observations are not possible. The model categorizes neurophysiological mechanisms as those likely originating from a peripheral mechanism, spinal cord mechanisms, and/or supraspinal mechanisms.

Peripheral mechanism

Musculoskeletal injuries induce an inflammatory response in the periphery which initiates the healing process and influences pain processing. Inflammatory mediators and peripheral nociceptors interact in response to injury and MT may directly affect this process. For example, () observed a significant reduction of blood and serum level cytokines in individuals receiving joint biased MT which was not observed in those receiving sham MT or in a control group. Additionally, changes of blood levels of β-endorphin, anandamide, N-palmitoylethanolamide, serotonin, () and endogenous cannabinoids () have been observed following MT. Finally, soft tissue biased MT has been shown to alter acute inflammation in response to exercise () and substance P levels in individuals with fibromyalgia (). Collectively, these studies suggest a potential mechanism of action of MT on musculoskeletal pain mediated by the peripheral nervous system for which mechanistic studies may wish to account.

Spinal mechanisms

MT may exert an effect on the spinal cord. For example, MT has been suggested to act as a counter irritant to modulate pain () and joint biased MT is speculated to “bombard the central nervous system with sensory input from the muscle proprioceptors ().”Subsequently, a spinal cord mediated mechanism of MT must be considered and is accounted for in the model. Direct evidence for such an effect comes from a study () in which joint biased MT was applied to the lower extremity of rats following capsaicin injection. A spinal cord response was quantified by functional MRI during light touch to the hind paw. A trend was noted towards decreased activation of the dorsal horn of the spinal cord following the MT. The model uses associated neuromuscular responses following MT to provide indirect evidence for a spinal cord mediated mechanism. For example, MT is associated with hypoalgesia (;;), afferent discharge (;), motoneuron pool activity (;), and changes in muscle activity (;) all of which may indirectly implicate a spinal cord mediated effect.

Supraspinal mechanisms

Finally, the pain literature suggests the influence of specific supraspinal structures in response to pain. Structures such as the anterior cingular cortex (ACC), amygdala, periaqueductal gray (PAG), and rostral ventromedial medulla (RVM) are considered instrumental in the pain experience.(;;;;;;;;;). Subsequently, the model considers potential supraspinal mechanisms of MT. Direct support for a supraspinal mechanism of action of MT comes from () who applied joint biased MT to the lower extremity of rats following capsaicin injection. Functional MRI of the supraspinal region quantified the response of the hind paw to light touch following the injection. A trend was noted towards decreased activation of the supraspinal regions responsible for central pain processing. The model accounts for direct measures of supraspinal activity along with associated responses such as autonomic responses (;;) (;), and opiod responses () () to indirectly imply a supraspinal mechanism. Additionally, variables such as placebo, expectation, and psychosocial factors may be pertinent in the mechanisms of MT (;). For example expectation for the effectiveness of MT is associated with functional outcomes () and a recent systematic review of the literature has noted that joint biased MT is associated with improved psychological outcomes (). For this paper we categorize such factors as neurophysiological effects related to supraspinal descending inhibition due to associated changes in the opioid system (), dopamine production (), and central nervous system (;;) which have been observed in studies unrelated to MT.

Implementation of Comprehensive Model

This comprehensive model delineates potential mechanisms associated with pain relief from MT allowing researchers to identify domains of interest their studies are designed to evaluate and potential mechanisms not adequately considered. The model is intended to highlight differing possibilities when conclusions are drawn which may be further explored in subsequent studies. For example, studies have reported hypoalgesia following MT (;). () suggested a spinal cord mediated mechanism due to associated hypoalgesia of temporal summation. The model indicates that while monitoring a spinal cord mediating effect (temporal summation), the potential for a peripheral or supraspinal mediating effects was not considered (Figure 2). A recent study attempted to replicate these prior findings while accounting for potential supraspinal influence (). Specifically, a spinal cord mediated effect was measured through an associated response of temporal summation. Additionally, a potential supraspinal mechanism (expectation) was manipulated by randomly assigning participants to receive an instructional set stating MT was expected to either increase, decrease, or have no effect on their pain perception. The model pathway of this study is visualized in Figure 3.

Figure Key: Proposed model pathway of study by suggesting a spinal cord mediating effect of manual therapy. Bold arrows indicate suggested mechanism. Note mediating effect is suggested to be through the spinal cord due to measurement of the associated relationship of temporal summation. Also note, the design of this study neglects to consider potential supraspinal mediated effects.

Figure Key: Proposed model pathway of study by which considers both a spinal cord and supraspinal mediating effect of MT. Bold arrows indicate suggested mechanism. Note mediating effect is suggested to be through both the spinal cord due to measurement of the associated relationship of temporal summation and through a supraspinal mechanism due to measurement of the associated relationship of expectation.

In addition to guiding research, the model also allows clinicians to visualize the potential multiple mechanisms likely involved in the clinical effects of MT. The clinical use of MT is frequently dependent upon a purported biomechanical mechanism in evaluation and treatment. For instance, a clinical examination may focus on locating a mal- aligned joint or a hypomobile joint or soft tissue. A MT technique may then be used as treatment to impart a specific movement to the observed dysfunction. Clinical outcomes are then attributed to alleviation of the biomechanical fault. Such practice is common and has lead to many continuing education dollars and valuable clinic time spent in search of biomechanical dysfunction of questionable validity () and treatments of questionable specificity (). The model provides visualization of what the current literature suggests as mechanisms pertinent to MT and while acknowledging a biomechanical effect allows clinicians to consider other potential mechanisms in the MT evaluation and treatment of individuals with musculoskeletal pain.

Limitations of Proposed Model

The model is intended to be applicable to all forms of MT. While the biomechanical application of joint biased, soft tissue biased and nerve biased MT are different, the related neurophysiological responses are similar and adequately encompassed within the model given the current state of knowledge. The proposed model provides a platform to empirically test hypotheses related to different biomechanical and neurophysiological effects specific to types of MT, an area that is currently lacking in the literature. The proposed comprehensive model is intended to explain the mechanisms of MT on musculoskeletal pain. MT has a postulated role in the treatment of disorders of other body systems such as asthma () and high blood pressure (); however, those effects are beyond the scope of the current model. Finally, this model is strictly intended to guide research questions regarding the mechanisms of MT. A body of literature already exists suggesting the effectiveness of MT. The proposed model is intended to compliment and provide underlying explanations to the existing body of literature suggesting the effectiveness of MT.

Future Directions

A limitation in the current literature is the failure to account for the non- specific mechanisms associated with MT in the treatment of musculoskeletal pain. A number of neurophysiological responses associated with MT are also associated with non- specific effects such as placebo (Figure 4). Current study designs have not adequately accounted for non-specific effects, and subsequently, their role in the clinical outcomes associated with MT is unknown. Future mechanistic studies in MT should consider determining the influence of non- specific effects. The model presents a guide to design future mechanistic studies so that all relevant possibilities are included.

A limitation of the current mechanistic literature in MT is the failure to adequately account for non- specific effects such as placebo and expectation. Italicized references are examples of studies from the placebo and expectation literature which have reported similar neurophysiological effects as have been associated with MT. These similarities emphasize the potential for non- specific effects to play a significant role in the mechanisms behind MT and the need to specifically address these factors in future studies.

The model is based primarily on associated responses as the current body of mechanistic literature is lacking in studies which directly observe regions of interest. As technology improves, the means to directly observe specific regions is becoming possible. More recent studies in the acupuncture literature have reported direct observation of the spinal cord (;) and supraspinal centers (;) in response to treatment. Similar studies are possible in MT and will allow direct observation of the nervous system response to MT with a subsequent improved understanding of where the techniques exert their effect.

The Acupuncture Handbook Of Sports Injuries Pain Pdf Files Download

Interdisciplinary collaboration has been recommended in the study of the mechanisms of MT (). The comprehensive model provides a framework for such efforts to study both specific sections of the model and their interaction. For example, a team of researchers could work together including a manual therapist to provide treatment, a biomechanist to monitor the biomechanical parameters of the studied MT, an endocrinologist to monitor peripheral inflammatory mediators, a neurophysiologist to monitor potential spinal cord and supraspinal mechanisms, and a psychologist to monitor the influence of non- specific effects such as expectation, fear, and catastrophizing.

Conclusion

The mechanisms behind the clinical effectiveness of MT are not established. Limitations of prior mechanistic studies are the study of individual mechanisms without regard for others and a failure to adequately account for non- specific effects. We have proposed a comprehensive model to consolidate the current research and guide future research into the mechanisms of MT.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The project was supported by Grant Number R-21 AT002796-01 from the National Institutes of Health – National Center for Complimentary and Alternative Medicine (SZG, MDB, MER, DDP).

This manuscript was written while JEB received support from the National Institutes of Health T-32 Neural Plasticity Research Training Fellowship (T32HD043730)

Footnotes

Publisher's Disclaimer: This is a PDF file of an unedited manuscript that has been accepted for publication. As a service to our customers we are providing this early version of the manuscript. The manuscript will undergo copyediting, typesetting, and review of the resulting proof before it is published in its final citable form. Please note that during the production process errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain.

Reference List

• Akalin E, El O, Peker O, Senocak O, Tamci S, Gulbahar S, Cakmur R, Oncel S. Treatment of carpal tunnel syndrome with nerve and tendon gliding exercises. Am.J.Phys.Med.Rehabil. 2002;81:108–113. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• Amanzio M, Pollo A, Maggi G, Benedetti F. Response variability to analgesics: a role for non-specific activation of endogenous opioids. Pain. 2001;90:205–215. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• Balon JW, Mior SA. Chiropractic care in asthma and allergy. Ann.Allergy Asthma Immunol. 2004;93:S55–S60. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• Bee LA, Dickenson AH. Rostral ventromedial medulla control of spinal sensory processing in normal and pathophysiological states. Neuroscience. 2007;147:786–793. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• Benedetti F, Amanzio M, Vighetti S, Asteggiano G. The biochemical and neuroendocrine bases of the hyperalgesic nocebo effect. J.Neurosci. 2006;26:12014–12022.[PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• Benedetti F, Pollo A, Lopiano L, Lanotte M, Vighetti S, Rainero I. Conscious expectation and unconscious conditioning in analgesic, motor, and hormonal placebo/nocebo responses. J.Neurosci. 2003;23:4315–4323.[PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• Bialosky JE, Bishop MD, Robinson ME, Barabas JA, George SZ. The influence of expectation on spinal manipulation induced hypoalgesia: an experimental study in normal subjects. BMC.Musculoskelet.Disord. 2008;9:19.[PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• Bingel U, Lorenz J, Schoell E, Weiller C, Buchel C. Mechanisms of placebo analgesia: rACC recruitment of a subcortical antinociceptive network. Pain. 2006;120:8–15. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• Bishop PB, Wing PC. Compliance with clinical practice guidelines in family physicians managing worker's compensation board patients with acute lower back pain. Spine J. 2003;3:442–450. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• Boal RW, Gillette RG. Central neuronal plasticity, low back pain and spinal manipulative therapy. J.Manipulative Physiol Ther. 2004;27:314–326. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• Bulbulian R, Burke J, Dishman JD. Spinal reflex excitability changes after lumbar spine passive flexion mobilization. J.Manipulative Physiol Ther. 2002;25:526–532. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• Chen YX, Kong KM, Wang WD, Xie CH, Wu RH. Functional MR imaging of the spinal cord in cervical spinal cord injury patients by acupuncture at LI 4 (Hegu) and LI 11(Quchi) Conf.Proc.IEEE Eng Med.Biol.Soc. 2007;2007:3388–3391. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• Childs JD, Fritz JM, Flynn TW, Irrgang JJ, Johnson KK, Majkowski GR, Delitto A. A clinical prediction rule to identify patients with low back pain most likely to benefit from spinal manipulation: a validation study. Ann.Intern.Med. 2004;141:920–928. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• Cleland JA, Childs JD, Fritz JM, Whitman JM, Eberhart SL. Development of a clinical prediction rule for guiding treatment of a subgroup of patients with neck pain: use of thoracic spine manipulation, exercise, and patient education. Phys.Ther. 2007;87:9–23. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• Cleland JA, Childs JD, McRae M, Palmer JA, Stowell T. Immediate effects of thoracic manipulation in patients with neck pain: a randomized clinical trial. Man.Ther. 2005;10:127–135. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• Cleland JA, Fritz JM, Whitman JM, Childs JD, Palmer JA. The use of a lumbar spine manipulation technique by physical therapists in patients who satisfy a clinical prediction rule: a case series. J.Orthop.Sports Phys.Ther. 2006;36:209–214. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• Colloca CJ, Keller TS, Gunzburg R. Neuromechanical characterization of in vivo lumbar spinal manipulation. Part II. Neurophysiological response. J.Manipulative Physiol Ther. 2003;26:579–591. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• Colloca CJ, Keller TS, Gunzburg R, Vandeputte K, Fuhr AW. Neurophysiologic response to intraoperative lumbosacral spinal manipulation. J.Manipulative Physiol Ther. 2000;23:447–457. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• Colloca CJ, Keller TS, Harrison DE, Moore RJ, Gunzburg R, Harrison DD. Spinal manipulation force and duration affect vertebral movement and neuromuscular responses. Clin.Biomech.(Bristol., Avon.) 2006;21:254–262. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• Coppieters MW, Alshami AM. Longitudinal excursion and strain in the median nerve during novel nerve gliding exercises for carpal tunnel syndrome. J.Orthop.Res. 2007;25:972–980. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• Coppieters MW, Butler DS. Do ‘sliders’ slide and ‘tensioners’ tension? An analysis of neurodynamic techniques and considerations regarding their application. Man.Ther. 2007 [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• Degenhardt BF, Darmani NA, Johnson JC, Towns LC, Rhodes DC, Trinh C, McClanahan B, DiMarzo V. Role of osteopathic manipulative treatment in altering pain biomarkers: a pilot study. J.Am.Osteopath.Assoc. 2007;107:387–400. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• Delaney JP, Leong KS, Watkins A, Brodie D. The short-term effects of myofascial trigger point massage therapy on cardiac autonomic tone in healthy subjects. J.Adv.Nurs. 2002;37:364–371. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• Derbyshire SW, Jones AK, Gyulai F, Clark S, Townsend D, Firestone LL. Pain processing during three levels of noxious stimulation produces differential patterns of central activity. Pain. 1997;73:431–445. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• DeVocht JW, Pickar JG, Wilder DG. Spinal manipulation alters electromyographic activity of paraspinal muscles: a descriptive study. J.Manipulative Physiol Ther. 2005;28:465–471. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• Deyle GD, Henderson NE, Matekel RL, Ryder MG, Garber MB, Allison SC. Effectiveness of manual physical therapy and exercise in osteoarthritis of the knee. A randomized, controlled trial. Ann.Intern.Med. 2000;132:173–181. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• Dishman JD, Bulbulian R. Spinal reflex attenuation associated with spinal manipulation. Spine. 2000;25:2519–2524. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• Dishman JD, Burke J. Spinal reflex excitability changes after cervical and lumbar spinal manipulation: a comparative study. Spine J. 2003;3:204–212. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• Dougherty DD, Kong J, Webb M, Bonab AA, Fischman AJ, Gollub RL. A combined [11C]diprenorphine PET study and fMRI study of acupuncture analgesia. Behav.Brain Res. 2008[PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• Ernst E. Does spinal manipulation have specific treatment effects? Fam.Pract. 2000;17:554–556. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• Fang J, Jin Z, Wang Y, Li K, Kong J, Nixon EE, Zeng Y, Ren Y, Tong H, Wang Y, Wang P, Hui KK. The salient characteristics of the central effects of acupuncture needling: Limbic-paralimbic-neocortical network modulation. Hum.Brain Mapp. 2008 [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• Field T, Diego M, Cullen C, Hernandez-Reif M, Sunshine W, Douglas S. Fibromyalgia pain and substance P decrease and sleep improves after massage therapy. J.Clin.Rheumatol. 2002;8:72–76. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• Flynn T, Fritz J, Whitman J, Wainner R, Magel J, Rendeiro D, Butler B, Garber M, Allison S. A clinical prediction rule for classifying patients with low back pain who demonstrate short-term improvement with spinal manipulation. Spine. 2002;27:2835–2843. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• Fuente-Fernandez R, Lidstone S, Stoessl AJ. Placebo effect and dopamine release. J.Neural Transm. 2006;(Suppl):415–418. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• Gal J, Herzog W, Kawchuk G, Conway PJ, Zhang YT. Movements of vertebrae during manipulative thrusts to unembalmed human cadavers. J.Manipulative Physiol Ther. 1997;20:30–40. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• George SZ, Bishop MD, Bialosky JE, Zeppieri G, Jr., Robinson ME. Immediate effects of spinal manipulation on thermal pain sensitivity: an experimental study. BMC.Musculoskelet.Disord. 2006;7:68.[PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• Goebel MU, Trebst AE, Steiner J, Xie YF, Exton MS, Frede S, Canbay AE, Michel MC, Heemann U, Schedlowski M. Behavioral conditioning of immunosuppression is possible in humans. FASEB J. 2002;16:1869–1873. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• Goffaux P, Redmond WJ, Rainville P, Marchand S. Descending analgesia - When the spine echoes what the brain expects. Pain. 2007 [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• Guo W, Robbins MT, Wei F, Zou S, Dubner R, Ren K. Supraspinal brain-derived neurotrophic factor signaling: a novel mechanism for descending pain facilitation. J.Neurosci. 2006;26:126–137.[PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• Herzog W, Kats M, Symons B. The effective forces transmitted by high-speed, low-amplitude thoracic manipulation. Spine. 2001;26:2105–2110. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• Herzog W, Scheele D, Conway PJ. Electromyographic responses of back and limb muscles associated with spinal manipulative therapy. Spine. 1999;24:146–152. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• Hessell BW, Herzog W, Conway PJ, McEwen MC. Experimental measurement of the force exerted during spinal manipulation using the Thompson technique. J.Manipulative Physiol Ther. 1990;13:448–453. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• Hsieh CY, Vicenzino B, Yang CH, Hu MH, Yang C. Mulligan's mobilization with movement for the thumb: a single case report using magnetic resonance imaging to evaluate the positional fault hypothesis. Man.Ther. 2002;7:44–49. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• Hsieh JC, Belfrage M, Stone-Elander S, Hansson P, Ingvar M. Central representation of chronic ongoing neuropathic pain studied by positron emission tomography. Pain. 1995;63:225–236. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• Iadarola MJ, Berman KF, Zeffiro TA, Byas-Smith MG, Gracely RH, Max MB, Bennett GJ. Neural activation during acute capsaicin-evoked pain and allodynia assessed with PET. Brain. 1998;121(Pt 5):931–947. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• Jette AM, Delitto A. Physical therapy treatment choices for musculoskeletal impairments. Phys.Ther. 1997;77:145–154. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• Johansen O, Brox J, Flaten MA. Placebo and Nocebo responses, cortisol, and circulating beta-endorphin. Psychosom.Med. 2003;65:786–790. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• Kaada B, Torsteinbo O. Increase of plasma beta-endorphins in connective tissue massage. Gen.Pharmacol. 1989;20:487–489. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• Kalauokalani D, Cherkin DC, Sherman KJ, Koepsell TD, Deyo RA. Lessons from a trial of acupuncture and massage for low back pain: patient expectations and treatment effects. Spine. 2001;26:1418–1424. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• Kaptchuk TJ. The placebo effect in alternative medicine: can the performance of a healing ritual have clinical significance? Ann.Intern.Med. 2002;136:817–825. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• Kent P, Marks D, Pearson W, Keating J. Does clinician treatment choice improve the outcomes of manual therapy for nonspecific low back pain? A metaanalysis. J.Manipulative Physiol Ther. 2005;28:312–322. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• Khalsa PS, Eberhart A, Cotler A, Nahin R. The 2005 conference on the biology of manual therapies. J.Manipulative Physiol Ther. 2006;29:341–346. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• Kleinrensink GJ, Stoeckart R, Mulder PG, Hoek G, Broek T, Vleeming A, Snijders CJ. Upper limb tension tests as tools in the diagnosis of nerve and plexus lesions. Anatomical and biomechanical aspects. Clin.Biomech.(Bristol., Avon.) 2000;15:9–14. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• Kong J, Gollub RL, Rosman IS, Webb JM, Vangel MG, Kirsch I, Kaptchuk TJ. Brain activity associated with expectancy-enhanced placebo analgesia as measured by functional magnetic resonance imaging. J.Neurosci. 2006;26:381–388.[PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• Lanotte M, Lopiano L, Torre E, Bergamasco B, Colloca L, Benedetti F. Expectation enhances autonomic responses to stimulation of the human subthalamic limbic region. Brain Behav.Immun. 2005;19:500–509. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• Li LC, Bombardier C. Physical therapy management of low back pain: an exploratory survey of therapist approaches. Phys.Ther. 2001;81:1018–1028. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• Licciardone JC, Stoll ST, Fulda KG, Russo DP, Siu J, Winn W, Swift J., Jr. Osteopathic manipulative treatment for chronic low back pain: a randomized controlled trial. Spine. 2003;28:1355–1362. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• MacDonald CW, Whitman JM, Cleland JA, Smith M, Hoeksma HL. Clinical outcomes following manual physical therapy and exercise for hip osteoarthritis: A case series. J.Orthop.Sports Phys.Ther. 2006;36:588–599. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• Malisza KL, Gregorash L, Turner A, Foniok T, Stroman PW, Allman AA, Summers R, Wright A. Functional MRI involving painful stimulation of the ankle and the effect of physiotherapy joint mobilization. Magn Reson.Imaging. 2003a;21:489–496. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• Malisza KL, Stroman PW, Turner A, Gregorash L, Foniok T, Wright A. Functional MRI of the rat lumbar spinal cord involving painful stimulation and the effect of peripheral joint mobilization. J.Magn Reson.Imaging. 2003b;18:152–159. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• Matre D, Casey KL, Knardahl S. Placebo-induced changes in spinal cord pain processing. J.Neurosci. 2006;26:559–563.[PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• McLean S, Naish R, Reed L, Urry S, Vicenzino B. A pilot study of the manual force levels required to produce manipulation induced hypoalgesia. Clin.Biomech.(Bristol., Avon.) 2002;17:304–308. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• McPartland JM, Giuffrida A, King J, Skinner E, Scotter J, Musty RE. Cannabimimetic effects of osteopathic manipulative treatment. J.Am.Osteopath.Assoc. 2005;105:283–291. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• Mohammadian P, Gonsalves A, Tsai C, Hummel T, Carpenter T. Areas of capsaicin-induced secondary hyperalgesia and allodynia are reduced by a single chiropractic adjustment: a preliminary study. J.Manipulative Physiol Ther. 2004;27:381–387. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• Moulson A, Watson T. A preliminary investigation into the relationship between cervical snags and sympathetic nervous system activity in the upper limbs of an asymptomatic population. Man.Ther. 2006;11:214–224. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• Moulton EA, Keaser ML, Gullapalli RP, Greenspan JD. Regional intensive and temporal patterns of functional MRI activation distinguishing noxious and innocuous contact heat. J.Neurophysiol. 2005;93:2183–2193. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• Ngan JM, Chow DH, Holmes AD. The kinematics and intra- and inter-therapist consistencies of lower cervical rotational manipulation. Med.Eng Phys. 2005;27:395–401. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• Oshiro Y, Quevedo AS, McHaffie JG, Kraft RA, Coghill RC. Brain mechanisms supporting spatial discrimination of pain. J.Neurosci. 2007;27:3388–3394.[PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• Petrovic P, Kalso E, Petersson KM, Ingvar M. Placebo and opioid analgesia-- imaging a shared neuronal network. Science. 2002;295:1737–1740. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• Peyron R, Laurent B, Garcia-Larrea L. Functional imaging of brain responses to pain. A review and meta-analysis (2000) Neurophysiol.Clin. 2000;30:263–288. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• Pickar JG, Wheeler JD. Response of muscle proprioceptors to spinal manipulative-like loads in the anesthetized cat. J.Manipulative Physiol Ther. 2001;24:2–11. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• Plaugher G, Bachman TR. Chiropractic management of a hypertensive patient. J.Manipulative Physiol Ther. 1993;16:544–549. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• Pollo A, Vighetti S, Rainero I, Benedetti F. Placebo analgesia and the heart. Pain. 2003;102:125–133. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• Price DD, Craggs J, Verne GN, Perlstein WM, Robinson ME. Placebo analgesia is accompanied by large reductions in pain-related brain activity in irritable bowel syndrome patients. Pain. 2007;127:63–72. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• Price DD, Milling LS, Kirsch I, Duff A, Montgomery GH, Nicholls SS. An analysis of factors that contribute to the magnitude of placebo analgesia in an experimental paradigm. Pain. 1999;83:147–156. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• Price DD, Staud R, Robinson ME, Mauderli AP, Cannon R, Vierck CJ. Enhanced temporal summation of second pain and its central modulation in fibromyalgia patients. Pain. 2002;99:49–59. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• Ross JK, Bereznick DE, McGill SM. Determining cavitation location during lumbar and thoracic spinal manipulation: is spinal manipulation accurate and specific? Spine. 2004;29:1452–1457. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• Rozmaryn LM, Dovelle S, Rothman ER, Gorman K, Olvey KM, Bartko JJ. Nerve and tendon gliding exercises and the conservative management of carpal tunnel syndrome. J.Hand Ther. 1998;11:171–179. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• Sauro MD, Greenberg RP. Endogenous opiates and the placebo effect: a meta-analytic review. J.Psychosom.Res. 2005;58:115–120. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• Seffinger MA, Najm WI, Mishra SI, Adams A, Dickerson VM, Murphy LS, Reinsch S. Reliability of spinal palpation for diagnosis of back and neck pain: a systematic review of the literature. Spine. 2004;29:E413–E425. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• Smith LL, Keating MN, Holbert D, Spratt DJ, McCammon MR, Smith SS, Israel RG. The effects of athletic massage on delayed onset muscle soreness, creatine kinase, and neutrophil count: a preliminary report. J.Orthop.Sports Phys.Ther. 1994;19:93–99. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• Staud R, Craggs JG, Robinson ME, Perlstein WM, Price DD. Brain activity related to temporal summation of C-fiber evoked pain. Pain. 2007;129:130–142.[PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• Sterling M, Jull G, Wright A. Cervical mobilisation: concurrent effects on pain, sympathetic nervous system activity and motor activity. Man.Ther. 2001;6:72–81. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• Suter E, McMorland G. Decrease in elbow flexor inhibition after cervical spine manipulation in patients with chronic neck pain. Clin.Biomech.(Bristol., Avon.) 2002;17:541–544. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• Suter E, McMorland G, Herzog W, Bray R. Decrease in quadriceps inhibition after sacroiliac joint manipulation in patients with anterior knee pain. J.Manipulative Physiol Ther. 1999;22:149–153. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• Suter E, McMorland G, Herzog W, Bray R. Conservative lower back treatment reduces inhibition in knee-extensor muscles: a randomized controlled trial. J.Manipulative Physiol Ther. 2000;23:76–80. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• Symons BP, Herzog W, Leonard T, Nguyen H. Reflex responses associated with activator treatment. J.Manipulative Physiol Ther. 2000;23:155–159. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• Teodorczyk-Injeyan JA, Injeyan HS, Ruegg R. Spinal manipulative therapy reduces inflammatory cytokines but not substance P production in normal subjects. J.Manipulative Physiol Ther. 2006;29:14–21. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• Thomas JS, France CR, Sha D, Wiele NV. The influence of pain-related fear on peak muscle activity and force generation during maximal isometric trunk exertions. Spine. 2008;33:342–348. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• Troyanovich SJ, Harrison DD, Harrison DE. Motion palpation: it's time to accept the evidence. J.Manipulative Physiol Ther. 1998;21:568–571. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• Tullberg T, Blomberg S, Branth B, Johnsson R. Manipulation does not alter the position of the sacroiliac joint. A roentgen stereophotogrammetric analysis. Spine. 1998;23:1124–1128. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• Vase L, Riley JL, III, Price DD. A comparison of placebo effects in clinical analgesic trials versus studies of placebo analgesia. Pain. 2002;99:443–452. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• Vernon HT, Dhami MS, Howley TP, Annett R. Spinal manipulation and beta-endorphin: a controlled study of the effect of a spinal manipulation on plasma beta-endorphin levels in normal males. J.Manipulative Physiol Ther. 1986;9:115–123. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• Vicenzino B, Collins D, Benson H, Wright A. An investigation of the interrelationship between manipulative therapy-induced hypoalgesia and sympathoexcitation. J.Manipulative Physiol Ther. 1998;21:448–453. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• Vicenzino B, Collins D, Wright A. The initial effects of a cervical spine manipulative physiotherapy treatment on the pain and dysfunction of lateral epicondylalgia. Pain. 1996;68:69–74. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• Vicenzino B, Paungmali A, Buratowski S, Wright A. Specific manipulative therapy treatment for chronic lateral epicondylalgia produces uniquely characteristic hypoalgesia. Man.Ther. 2001;6:205–212. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• Vogt BA, Derbyshire S, Jones AK. Pain processing in four regions of human cingulate cortex localized with co-registered PET and MR imaging. Eur.J.Neurosci. 1996;8:1461–1473. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• Wager TD, Rilling JK, Smith EE, Sokolik A, Casey KL, Davidson RJ, Kosslyn SM, Rose RM, Cohen JD. Placebo-induced changes in FMRI in the anticipation and experience of pain. Science. 2004;303:1162–1167. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• Wang WD, Kong KM, Xiao YY, Wang XJ, Liang B, Qi WL, Wu RH. Functional MR imaging of the cervical spinal cord by use of electrical stimulation at LI4 (Hegu) Conf.Proc.IEEE Eng Med.Biol.Soc. 2006;1:1029–1031. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• Williams NH, Hendry M, Lewis R, Russell I, Westmoreland A, Wilkinson C. Psychological response in spinal manipulation (PRISM): a systematic review of psychological outcomes in randomised controlled trials. Complement Ther.Med. 2007;15:271–283. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• Wright A. Hypoalgesia post-manipulative therapy: a review of a potential neurophysiological mechanism. Man.Ther. 1995;1:11–16. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• Zhang J, Dean D, Nosco D, Strathopulos D, Floros M. Effect of chiropractic care on heart rate variability and pain in a multisite clinical study. J.Manipulative Physiol Ther. 2006;29:267–274. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• Zubieta JK, Bueller JA, Jackson LR, Scott DJ, Xu Y, Koeppe RA, Nichols TE, Stohler CS. Placebo effects mediated by endogenous opioid activity on mu-opioid receptors. J.Neurosci. 2005;25:7754–7762.[PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

ISBN: ISBN-10: 1405162449, ISBN-13: 978-1405162449; Wiley-Blackwell, West Sussex, UK, 2009; £29.99, 248 pages, paperback.

Subjects: Sport injuries and prevention, medical care.

Sports Injuries Nba

DESCRIPTION This book is a useful guide on the prevention of sports injuries. All Olympic sports, and other international competitive ones, such as rugby, are included.

PURPOSE To alert the athletes about possible and probable dangers of injury and inform them how to avoid such risks.

The Acupuncture Handbook Of Sports Injuries Pain Pdf Files Online

FEATURES This handbook is divided into fourteen chapters addressing the following topics: 1- Why is injury prevention in sports important? 2- A systematic approach to sports injury prevention, 3- Developing and managing an injury prevention program within the team, 4- Preventing ankle injuries, 5- Preventing knee injuries, 6- Preventing hamstring injuries, 7- Preventing groin injuries, 8- Preventing low back pain, 9- Preventing shoulder injuries, 10- Preventing elbow injuries, 11- Preventing injuries to the head and cervical spine, 12- Preventing tendon overuse injuries, 13- Implementing large-scale injury prevention programs, 14-Planning for major events.

ASSESSMENT This is valuable and essential source of information for medical doctors who practice in sports arena, since this book focuses on how to protect the health of athletes by explaining research findings and their practical application. Being published under the support of the Medical Commission of the International Olympic Committee and the prominent authors of this book makes having this book worthwhile for a wide range of students, researchers coaches and other practitioners in the sport and exercise area.

Reviewed by:Fadıl Özyener MD, PhD, Uludag University Medical School, Bursa Turkey.