Repository logo
 

Faculty of Health Sciences

Permanent URI for this communityhttp://ir-dev.dut.ac.za/handle/10321/11

Browse

Filters

2016 - 20182

Settings

Subject: search.filters.subject.Hip joint

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    The effect of lumbar spine, sacro-iliac and/or hip joint manipulation on muscle activity and performance in road cycling
    (2018) Fuller, Pia Alexa; Matkovich, Grant; Puckree, Threethambal
    BACKGROUND Cycling is a highly competitive sport where athletes are continuously looking for ways to improve their performances in order to gain what might be seconds over their components. Chiropractic manipulation has been shown to restore the balances of the kinematic chain and stimulate motoneuron pools and therefore by implementing this technique into their training regime, it may show improvement in muscle activity distributions, demands and efficiency thus resulting in better cycling performance. OBJECTIVES To determine the participants muscle activity (amplitude of surface EMG) and cycling performance in terms of power output (W), cycling speed (km/h), cadence (rpm), and completion time (seconds) before and after lumbar spine, sacro-iliac joint and/or hip joint manipulation intervention. METHOD Sixty-one asymptomatic amateur cyclists performed two 1.5km time-trials pre- and post- manipulative intervention. The pre- and post-intervention data of muscle activity (amplitude of surface EMG) and cycling performance (power output (W), cycling speed (km/h), cadence (rpm), and completion time (seconds)) were captured. IBM SPSS version 24 was used to analyse the data. A p value <0.05 was considered as statistically significant. RESULTS There was no significant change in muscle activity post-lumbar spine manipulation. There was a significant decrease in cycling performance post-lumbar spine manipulation. Sacro-iliac joint showed no significant change in muscle activity post-manipulation. The study data demonstrated a significant decrease in cycling performance post sacro-iliac joint manipulation. There was no significant change in muscle activity post hip joint manipulation. A significant decrease in power output and speed post hip joint manipulation, no significant effect of overall performance. Combination manipulation intervention showed a significant decrease in muscle activity of iliopsoas muscle. Combination manipulation showed no significant change in cycling performance. CONCLUSIONS There was a visual trend that showed, although there was a decrease in overall cycling performance in the lumbar spine and sacro-iliac joint manipulation groups post-intervention, with no significant changes in the hip joint and combination manipulation groups post- intervention – these athletes were more efficient cyclists post manipulative intervention particularly those who received the combination of adjustments.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    The effect of four different manipulative techniques on Iliotibial Band Friction Syndrome (ITBFS) in terms of primary and secondary outcome measures
    (2016) Botes, Jacques Andre; Gomes, Adrian Neil; Korporaal, Charmaine Maria
    Background: Iliotibial band friction syndrome is a common dysfunction seen in athletes. Athletes develop biomechanical changes yet still continue with their sport. However, this syndrome limits their ability to participate at peak performance. This study determined which participants benefitted in terms of biomechanical and clinical outcomes in one of four groups: ankle joint, superior tibio-fibular joint, sacroiliac joint or a combination manipulation group (which contained any two of the three joint restrictions). Methods: This Durban University of Technology Institutional Research and Ethics Committee approved prospective clinical trial, utilised stratified sampling, with 48 participants across four groups: ankle (14); superior tibio-fibular (11), sacroiliac (12) and combination (11). The participants underwent six treatments in three weeks. Data collection occurred before consultations one, three, five and seven. The data included primary measures of the knee score questionnaire (KSQ), the algometer, the visual analogue scale (VAS) and the secondary measures of the Feiss line, the heel leg alignment, bilateral leg length, Q angle and tibio-femoral angle. All data was computed utilising the ANOVA testing, with a p-value <0.05 being significant and a 95% confidence interval. Pearson’s correlations were completed for intragroup associations between primary and secondary outcome measures. Results: The intragroup analysis revealed that all groups had significant changes in the KSQ and VAS, with the exception of the sacroiliac joint manipulation group (KSQ outcome not significant). Intergroup analysis revealed no differences between the groups with the exception of the combination group, which showed a significant increase in the tibio-femoral angle. Most commonly, the Pearson’s correlation revealed that changes in leg length were related to differences in primary outcome measures, irrespective of the group being tested. Conclusion: The outcomes of this study indicated that manipulation of the distal kinematic chain improved alignment and clinical outcomes to a greater degree than manipulating proximal restrictions. It is suggested with caution (due to limited sample size) that patients should first have their distal kinematic chain manipulated before more proximal joints are manipulated to achieve better outcomes.