Thoracic spine manipulation

Thoracic Spine Manipulation
Jeffrey A. Turner SPT, CSCS
Special Thanks
Dr. Jason Simmons DPT

What is a Spinal Manipulation?
Definition (IFOMPT):
“A passive, high velocity, low amplitude
thrust applied to a joint complex within
its anatomical limit with the intent to
restore optimal motion, function,
and/or to reduce pain.”
Names Used:
• Thrust Joint Manipulation (TJM)
• HVLA Thrust
• Grade V Mobilization
Who can Perform?
• PT’s, OT’s, DC’s, MD’s & DO’s

Reasons to Mobilize the T-Spine!
Easy to learn, use, and apply.
• Manipulation + exercise = Better than exercise alone for pain/disability
• Manipulation + mobilizations = Better than mobilizations alone for pain/disability
Overview of Benefits:
• Temporary relief of musculoskeletal pain
• Temporary increase of spinal mobility
• Increases benefits from HEP
• Can help improve compliance to HEP

Contraindications
• Any pathology that leads to significant bone weakening
• Osteoporosis, fractures, etc.
• Spinal Surgery*:
• Fusions, laminectomies, etc.
• Pathology:
• Active infection, active cancer, etc.
• Vascular:
• aortic aneurism, bleeding into joints
• Neurological:
• Nerve root compression with increasing neurological deficit
• Lack of diagnosis
• Patient positioning can not be achieved because of pain or resistance.

Who Benefits from T-spine Manipulation?
Mechanical Neck Pain
• Moderate evidence for immediate improvements in pain and disability
• Majority of studies done on 2-day or 1-week outcomes
• 75% of patients improve >2 points on the Numeric Pain Rating Scale (NPRS)
• 70% of patients improve >15% on the Neck Disability Score (NDI)
• Growing evidence for long term improvements in pain and disability
• Improvements in pain and disability can last up to 6 months following treatment
• 80% of patients had a GROC of 5+ by 6 months following treatment
• Global Rating of Change (GROC) of >5+ is indicative of moderate changes in status
Subacromial Impingement Syndrome (SAIS or SIS)
• Growing evidence for short-term and long-term improvements in pain/disability
• Mostly case studies, and added to programs in RCT’s for other interventions

Mechanical Neck Pain
• 70% of the population will have
an episode at some point
• Most prevalent in the 4th and 5th
decade of life
• Majority of neck pain is
mechanical in nature
• Can interfere w/ ADLs and
become a source of chronic pain

Subacromial Impingement Syndrome (SAIS)
• Shoulder pain affects 16-21% of
the population
• Second only to low back pain in
prevalence
• SAIS accounts for 44-60% of all
conditions of the shoulder
• Patients not treated may
develop functional impairments
with chronic symptoms.

Cross et al. (2011) Thoracic Spine Thrust Manipulation
Improves Pain, Range of Motion, and Self-Reported Function in
Patients With Mechanical Neck Pain: SR
Objective:
• Determine effects of T-spine thrust manipulation on pain, ROM, and self
reported function in patients with mechanical neck pain.
Methods:
• 6 high quality RCT’s examined
Conclusion:
• Thoracic spine thrust manipulation may provide short-term improvement in
patients with acute or subacute mechanical neck pain.
• May provide short-term and long-term improvement in neck disability.
• Manipulation + exercise = Better than exercise alone for pain/disability
• Manipulation + mobilizations = Better than mobilizations alone for pain/disability
• Limited number of RCT’s and limited generalizability.

Effect Sizes for Self-Reported Function

Gonzales-Iglesias et al. (2009) Thoracic Spine Manipulation for
the Management of Patients with Neck Pain: RCT
Objective:
• Would patients with mechanical neck pain experience superior outcomes with
thoracic manipulation compared to not receiving it?
Methods:
• 45 participants, ages 18-45, and no contraindications
• Control Group:
• Electro/thermal therapy (6 visits over 3 weeks)
• Experimental Group:
• Control protocol + T-spine manipulation (6 visits, and 1x manipulation/wk over 3 weeks)
Outcomes:
• T-spine manipulation group experienced greater improvements in pain, cervical
ROM, and disability than electro/thermal therapy alone.
• Outcomes were maintained at the 2 week and 4 week follow ups.
• Average improvement of pain by 2.83 points and disability by 13.2%

Cleland et al. (2010) Examination of a CPR to Identify Patients
With Neck Pain Likely to Benefit From Thoracic Spine Thrust
Manipulation and a General Cervical ROM Exercise: RCT.
Objective:
• Examine the validity of the recently proposed CPR for use of thoracic spine thrust
manipulation in patients with mechanical neck pain.
Methods:
• 140 participants, ages 18-45, mean age of 40, and no contraindications
• Pain and disability collected at baseline, 1 week, 4 weeks, and 6 months.
• Control Group:
• 5 sessions of strengthening and stretching exercise
• Experimental Group:
• 2 sessions of thoracic thrust manipulation & cervical AROM exercise
• 3 sessions of control protocol
Outcomes:
• T-spine manipulation & exercise had greater improvements in disability at both the
short & long-term follow-ups and in pain at the 1 week follow-up than just exercise.

Clinical Prediction Rule
• Met 3 or more = “responders”
• Met 2 or less = “non-responders”
• Current study did not support the
validity of the previously proposed
CPR
What this means:
• They ALL benefited from
thoracic spine manipulation

Masaracchio et al. (2013) Short-Term Combined Effects of T-
Spine Thrust Manipulation and C-Spine Non-thrust
Manipulation in Individuals with Mechanical Neck Pain: RCT
Objective:
• Does T-spine manipulations + C-spine non-thrust manipulations work better than C-
spine non-thrust manipulations alone in the short-term?
Methods:
• 64 participants, ages 18-60, >20% NDI, and no contraindications
• Control group:
• C-spine non-thrust manipulations + neck AROM exercises (2 treatments, 2-3 days apart)
• Experimental group:
• Control protocol + T-spine manipulations (2 treatments, 2-3 days apart)
Outcomes:
• T-spine manipulation group demonstrated greater short-term outcomes in pain and
disability when compared to C-spine non-thrust and exercise.
• 75% had pain improvements that met or exceeded the MDC & MCID
• 70% had disability improvements that met or exceeded the MDC & MCID

Short-Term Combined Effects of Thoracic Spine Thrust
Manipulation and Cervical Spine Non-thrust Manipulation in
Individuals with Mechanical Neck Pain: RCT. 2013

How to Implement
1. Find a patient that you think would benefit
• Neck pain with no contraindications
• Shoulder pain with no contraindications
2. Explain the procedure to the patient. Get verbal consent
• “There is a hands-on technique that we can try that has good evidence for improving pain and
mobility in people with your condition.”
• “This technique may produce a “pop” sound and sudden relief, but some don’t feel the relief
until the next day. The “pop” sound is just a side effect of the maneuver, and some people
never get one.”
• “I think you would benefit from this technique, what do you think?”
3. Give patient the options for positioning
• “There are multiple positions that we can perform the technique: seated, one your stomach,
or on your back. There is no difference in regards to benefits.”

How to Implement
4. Position the patient
• Supine, prone, or seated
• Choose based off patient comfort and/or therapist confidence.
5. Re-explain procedure if needed
6. Perform technique!
8
2 2 2

Seated Thrust Prone Thrust
8
2

Supine Thrust (“The Pistol”)
2 2

Self Mobilization Prone Mobilization
88 6
Prone Mobilization

References
1. Boyles RE, Ritland BM, Miracle BM, Barclay DM, Faul MS, Moore JH, Koppenhaver SL, and Wainner RS. The short-term effects of thoracic
spine thrust manipulation on patients with shoulder impingement syndrome. Man Ther. 2009; 14(4):375-80.
2. Cleland JA, Childs JD, Fritz JM, Whitman JM, and Eberhart SL. Development of a CPR for Guiding Treatment of a Subgroup of Patients
with Neck Pain: Use of Throacic Spine Manipulation, Exercise, and Patient Education. Physical Therapy. 2007; 87:9-23.
3. Cleland JA, Mintken PE, Carpenter K, Fritz JM, Glynn P, Whitman J, Childs JD. Examination of a clinical prediction rule to identify patients
with neck pain likely to benefit from thoracic spine thrust manipulation and a general cervical range of motion exercise: multi-center
randomized clinical trial. Phys Ther. 2010; 90(9):1239-50.
4. Cross KM, Kuenze C, Grindstaff T, Hertel J. Thoracic Spine Manipulation Improves Range of Motion, and Self-Reported Function in
Patients with Mechanical Neck Pain: A Systematic Review. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2011; 41(9):633-642.
5. Gonzalez-Iglesias J, Fernandez-De-Las-Penas C, Cleland JA, and Glutierrez-Vega MR. Thoracic Spine Manipulation for the Management of
Patients with Neck Pain: A Randomized Clinical Trial. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2009; 39(1):20-27.
6. Masaracchio M, Cleland JA, Hellman M, and Hagins M. Short-Term Combined Effects of Thoracic Spine Thrust and Cervical Spine
Nontrhust Manipulation in Individuals with Mechanical Neck Pain: A Randomized Clinical Trial. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2013;
43(3):118-127.
7. Puentedura EJ, Landers MR, Cleland JA, Mintken P, Huijbregts P, and Fernandez-De-Las-Penas C. Thoracic Spine Thrust Manipulation
Versus Cervical Spine Thrust Manipulation in Patients With Acute Neck Pain: A Randomized Clinical Trial. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther.
2011; 41(4):208-220.
8. Salvatori R, Rowe RH, Osbourne R, and Beneciuk JM. Use of Thoracic Spine Thrust Manipulation for Neck Pain and Headache in a Patient
Following Multiple-Level Anterior Discectomy and Fusion: A Case Report. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2014; 44(6)440-449.
9. Tate AR, McClure PW, Young IA, Salvatori R, and Michener LA. Comprehensive Impairment-Based Exercise and Manual Therapy
Intervention for Patients With Subacromial Impingement Syndrome: A Case Series. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2010; 40(8):474-493.

Thoracic spine manipulation

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (20)

Viewers also liked

Viewers also liked (10)

Similar to Thoracic spine manipulation

Similar to Thoracic spine manipulation (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Thoracic spine manipulation