Comparison of mechanical force of manually assisted chiropractic adjusting instruments.
OBJECTIVE: To quantify the force-time and force-delivery characteristics of six commonly used handheld chiropractic adjusting devices. METHODS: Four spring-loaded instruments, the Activator Adjusting Instrument; Activator II Adjusting Instrument, Activator III Adjusting Instrument, and Activator IV...
| Publicado en: | Journal of Manipulative & Physiological Therapeutics Vol. 28; no. 6; pp. 414 - 423 |
|---|---|
| Autores principales: | , , , , , |
| Formato: | pictorial research tables/charts Journal Article |
| Publicado: |
Elsevier B.V.
Jul/Aug2005
|
| Acceso en línea: | Ver este registro en EBSCOhost |
| fields | @attributes: recordID: 1 pdfLink: plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ccm&AN=106372729&site=ehost-live header: @attributes: shortDbName: ccm uiTerm: 106372729 longDbName: CINAHL Complete uiTag: AN controlInfo: bkinfo: dissinfo: jinfo: jid: 01614754 8GE jtl: Journal of Manipulative & Physiological Therapeutics issn: 01614754 maglogo: N pubinfo: dt: Jul/Aug2005 vid: 28 iid: 6 pid: 1265 pub: Elsevier B.V. place: Philadelphia, Pennsylvania artinfo: ui: 106372729 2009038159 10.1016/j.jmpt.2005.06.004 NLM16096041 106372729 ppf: 414 ppct: 9 formats: fmt: @attributes: type: P tig: atl: Comparison of mechanical force of manually assisted chiropractic adjusting instruments. aug: au: Colloca CJ Keller TS Black P Normand MC Harrison DE Harrison DD affil: State of the Art Chiropractic Center, PC, 11011 S 48th St, Suite 220, Phoenix, AZ 85044; cjcolloca@neuromechanical.com sug: subj: Biomechanics Manipulation, Chiropractic Equipment and Supplies Descriptive Statistics In Vitro Studies Product Evaluation Human ab: OBJECTIVE: To quantify the force-time and force-delivery characteristics of six commonly used handheld chiropractic adjusting devices. METHODS: Four spring-loaded instruments, the Activator Adjusting Instrument; Activator II Adjusting Instrument, Activator III Adjusting Instrument, and Activator IV Adjusting Instrument, and two electromechanical devices, the Harrison Handheld Adjusting Instrument and Neuromechanical Impulse Adjusting Instrument, were applied to a dynamic load cell. A total of 10 force-time histories were obtained at each of three force excursion settings (minimum to maximum) for each of the six adjusting instruments at preload of approximately 20 N. RESULTS: The minimum-to-maximum force excursion settings for the spring-loaded mechanical adjusting instruments produced similar minimum-to-maximum peak forces that were not appreciably different for most excursion settings. The electromechanical adjusting instruments produced short duration ( approximately 2-4 ms), with more linear minimum-to-maximum peak forces. The force-time profile of the electromechanical devices resulted in a more uniform and greater energy dynamic frequency response in comparison to the spring-loaded mechanical adjusting instruments. CONCLUSIONS: The handheld, electromechanical instruments produced substantially larger peak forces and ranges of forces in comparison to the handheld, spring-loaded mechanical devices. The electromechanical instruments produced greater dynamic frequency area ratios than their mechanical counterparts. Knowledge of the force-time history and force-frequency response characteristics of spinal manipulative instruments may provide basic benchmarks and may assist in understanding mechanical responses in the clinical setting. pubtype: Academic Journal doctype: pictorial research tables/charts Journal Article ougenre: Article language: English refInfo: holdings: @attributes: islocal: N |
|---|