Index to Chiropractic Literature
Index to Chiropractic Literature
My ICL     Sign In
Monday, October 27, 2025
Index to Chiropractic LiteratureIndex to Chiropractic LiteratureIndex to Chiropractic Literature
Share:

For best results switch to Advanced Search.
Article Detail
Return to Search Results
Article ID
Title
URL http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4688558/
Journal J Chiropr Med. 2015 Dec;14(4):240-248
Author(s)
Subject(s)
Peer Review Yes
Publication Type Randomized Controlled Trial
Abstract/Notes

Objective: The purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of manual manipulations targeting the lumbar spine and/or sacroiliac joint on concentric knee extension and flexion forces. Torque production was measured during isometric and isokinetic contractions.

Methods: This was a randomized, controlled, single-blind crossover design with 21 asymptomatic, college-aged subjects who had never received spinal manipulation. During 2 separate sessions, subjects’ peak torques were recorded while performing maximal voluntary contractions on an isokinetic dynamometer. Isometric knee extension and flexion were recorded at 60° of knee flexion, in addition to isokinetic measurements obtained at 60°/s and 180°/s. Baseline measurements were acquired before either treatment form of lumbosacral manipulation or sham manipulation, followed by identical peak torque measurements within 5 and 20 minutes posttreatment. Data were analyzed with a repeated measures analysis of variance.

Results: A statistically significant difference did not occur between the effects of lumbosacral manipulation or the sham manipulation in the percentage changes of knee extension and flexion peak torques at 5 and 20 minutes posttreatment. Similar, nonsignificant results were observed in the overall percentage changes of isometric contractions (spinal manipulation 4.0 ± 9.5 vs sham 1.2 ± 6.3, P = .067), isokinetic contractions at 60°/s (spinal manipulation − 4.0 ± 14.2 vs sham − 0.3 ± 8.2, P = .34), and isokinetic contractions at 180°/s (spinal manipulation − 1.4 ± 13.9 vs sham − 5.5 ± 20.0, P = .18).

Conclusion: The results of the current study suggest that spinal manipulation does not yield an immediate strength-enhancing effect about the knee in healthy, college-aged subjects when measured with isokinetic dynamometry.

This abstract is reproduced with the permission of the publisher; click on the above link for free full text.


 

      

Search Tips
  • Enclose phrases in "quotation marks".  Examples: "low back pain", "evidence-based"
  • Retrieve all forms of a word with an "asterisk*", also called a wildcard or truncation.  Example: "chiropract*" retrieves chiropractic, chiropractor, chiropractors
  • Register an account in My ICL to save search histories (My Searches) and collections of records (My Collections)
Advanced Search Tips