Asymptomatic ConditionNCT04387032
Impact of Manipulation of Sacroiliac Joints on the Static Balance of the Body
A study testing HVLA Manipulations in people with Asymptomatic Condition and Sacroiliac Disorder, run by Poznan University of Physical Education at 1 site in Poland.
Trial summary
The study can be identified as an experimental study with a quasi-randomized control. It consisted of HVLA manipulation on blocked sacroiliac joints (SIJ) and it was checked whether it affected the appropriate parameters determining the pressure center (COP). Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 19 to 24 yearsHealthy volunteers can take part
- Conditions the study is for
- Asymptomatic Condition, Sacroiliac Disorder
- What is being tested?
- HVLA Manipulations
- Could I receive a placebo?
- Yes, some participants may receive a placebo
- How many people
- 59 participants
- Where
- 1 sitePoland
- Study dates
- 15 Jun 2019to 15 Oct 2019
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 19 to 24 years
- All sexes
- Healthy volunteers accepted
- Adult
Who may be able to join
- Student at the Poznan University of Physical Education;
- age 19-24;
- asymptomaticity in the form of no pain symptoms in the LS segment of the spine;
- written consent to participate in the study;
- presenting no disqualification criteria;
- no health contraindications to perform manipulation;
Show all 10Show fewer
- no hypomobility of the SI joints, negative mobility test results PRE (to the control group);
- occurrence of hypomobility of the SI joint on one or both sides PRE (to the experimental group);
- noting the sound of cavitation during the procedure (in the experimental group);
- confirmation of a treatment effectiveness by noting negative results of SI joints mobility tests POST (in the experimental group).
Who cannot join
- Persons who were characterized by LBP, neurological symptoms, rheumatic problems, orthopedic, or ongoing treatment in the lumbar spine and pelvis area were excluded. Pregnancy and the anatomical difference in the length of the lower limbs exceeding 5mm were also an excluding criterion.
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
Poland1 site
Poznan University of Physical Education, Department of Biology and Anatomy
Poznan, Wielkopolska, 61-871
About this study
Official title: The Influence of the Sacroiliac Joint Manipulation on Changes in the Values of the Center of Pressure in the Process of Maintaining Static Body Balance
The study can be identified as an experimental study with a quasi-randomized control. It consisted of HVLA manipulation on blocked sacroiliac joints (SIJ) and it was checked whether it affected the appropriate parameters determining the pressure center (COP). The value of the parameters were examined twice, before (PRE) and after (POST) manipulation. The results were compared with the control group (people without hypomobility SIJ) in which sham manipulation was performed, and COP parameters (PRE and POST) were measured twice. In addition, PRE and POST results were compared within the group, i.e. separately in the experimental group (E) and separately in the control group (C) to check the effect of HVLA manipulation and placebo manipulation.
The first hypothesis assumes that persons belonging to the experimental group are characterized by significantly higher values of COP parameters before manipulation than values in the control group. The second hypothesis assumes that COP parameters will normalize as a result of sacroiliac joint mobilization performed in the experimental group.
Read the detailed description
The aim of the project was to determine the effectiveness of HVLA manipulation in maintaining static body balance. To implement it, it was necessary to conduct an experiment consisting in performing HVLA manipulation in people with SIJs hypomobility and checking whether it affects the COP parameters. It was assumed to measure these parameters twice (before (PRE) and after (POST) manipulation) and compare them with the measurements in the C group (sham manipulation).
The sample size necessary to power the study was determined at the test planning stage, using the G * Power 3.1.9 software. The standard threshold α = .05 was established; then the acceptable power level of the 1-β = .90 test and the expected moderate effect size η2 = .30 were determined for within-between interaction. The calculated total expected size of the sample is N = 32, i.e. 16 subjects in one research group, assuming that their number will not decrease during the study. With a higher test power 1-β = .95 and a moderate achieved result for observed effect size η2 = .25, the sample should have to consist of 26 subjects per subgroup. It was decided to examine a slightly larger number of available entities due to the possibility of excluding incorrect data.
Poznan University of Physical Education's students were invited to the research, electronically. Before starting the research, they were informed about the purpose and manner of conducting the research, and the type of methods used. Participation in the experiment was voluntary and free. Participants could withdraw from cooperation in the research at any time. They obtained assurance that the data obtained will be used only for scientific purposes and their processing will be fully anonymous.
Among 202 students of the Poznań University of Physical Education who responded to the invitation to the study project interview has been conducted, as a result of which 22 people were excluded from further actions due to disqualification criteria. Then sacroiliac mobility tests has been performed which made it possible to recognize hypomobility in 72 people. From the group of people with hypomobility, 36 people were randomly selected and included in the E group. From among people without hypomobility, 31 people were randomly selected for the C group. An random number table was used in the draw. The subjects did not know any group they were assigned to.
Subsequently, the examination of each project participant consisted of performing podometric measurements and SIJs mobilization in the E group or placebo in the C group, and re-performing functional tests and podometrics in both groups after the procedure. At the stage of analyzing data rejected 8 people who did not meet the assumed criteria, thus finally there were 30 people in the experimental group and 29 in the control group.
Functional tests
Qualification of the subjects to the E and C group was conducted by a researcher who had seven years of experience in using manual therapy techniques. The following tests of SIJs mobility were performed:
- Standing forward flexion test: the symmetry of posterior superior iliac spine (PSIS) displacement during forward flexion is assessed. In the case of hamstrings tension, the result may be false positive, so it should be repeated in a sitting position or with slightly bent knees.
- One leg standing / Stork / Gillet test: the hip joint is bent in the standing position, the downward and medial displacement of PSIS in relation to S2 is observed.
- Measurement of the Derbolowsky symptom (Pidellou symptom / long sitting test): was performed as determined by Bemis and Daniel. It allows determining the dysfunctional side and the rotation of iliac bone. The level of medial ankles during lifting of the torso from lying back position to straight sit with simultaneous traction of legs is observed.
- Lower limb adduction test: the patient is lying back, upper anterior iliac spine stabilization (ASIS) is required. The adduction of the bent at the hip and knee joint lower limb follows it. On the limited side, the adduction angle will be smaller compared to the healthy side. The test has screening character, because blockage of the joint may occur without limitation of adduction in the case of hip over-mobility, but due to the simplicity of implementation, it is a valuable indicator.
The majority of SIJs mobility tests are burdened with the accuracy and reliability errors in situations when they are performed individually. However, performing more tests increases the accuracy of the diagnosis. For this reason, there were performed four SIJs mobility tests, as well as complementary measurements of PSIS, ASIS, and iliac crest levels before (PRE) and after (POST) treatment to determine its effectiveness.
Podometric measurement After conducting functional tests, the study participants were directed to a podometric measurement, which was performed twice - PRE and POST. The measurement was carried out using the Medicapteurs PEL 38 platform, which allows conducting both static and dynamic measurements, and it cooperates with the TWINN software in Windows. The equipment was designed and tested in leading medical centers in Europe and put into use in the USA by Physical Support Systems. The platform has 1024 sensors with a total measuring surface of 320x320 [mm] and the appropriate resolution for testing the distribution of foot pressure and tracking the position of COP. The platform was calibrated automatically accordingly to the bodyweight of each participant, and the measurement was taken in a standing (Frankfurt) position with upper limbs hanging freely. Participants were asked to maintain a stable position without unnecessary movements and to look straight ahead at eye level. During the study, patients did not have visual access to a graphical record of the measurement carried out to avoid attempts to correct body posture. Each measurement was conducted for 30 seconds, recording the current COP position at a frequency of 10 frames per second.
Experimental manipulation Persons with blocked SIJ on one or both sides, constituting an E group, were manipulated on the blocked joints. People without blocked SIJs constituted a C group that underwent placebo manipulation.
The procedure of experimental manipulation: the patient lay on the healthy side with the straight lower limb, and the torso turned towards the dysfunctional side, whose lower limb was bent in the hip and knee joint, and the hands rest on the lower ribs on the same side. The therapist allowed the initial loosening of the tissues and chose the movement barrier with his stabilizing hand. Then, with the treatment hand, he introduced the HVLA thrust through the iliac bone towards the bottom, while giving the iliac bone a posterior or anterior rotation - meaning, the opposite to the occurring dysfunction. If during the manipulation, no cavitation sound was heard, the HVLA thrust was repeated once. In the C group, the placebo procedure was the same, but no external force was introduced in the form of a therapeutic impulse.
Statistical methods The collected data were analyzed in a statistical program Statistica version 13. The normality of the distribution of all measured variables on the quantitative scale in both groups was checked by the Shapiro-Wilk test .
In order to study the effect of the manipulation on the measured variables, there was carried out quantitative analysis of variance with repeated measures, plus a number of comparisons using the Student's t-test for dependent and independent attempts, and in some cases for the characteristics whose distribution differed from the standard - with the use of non-parametric the Mann-Whitney U-test for independent pairs or Wilcoxon test for dependent pairs. The Cohen d effect power measure was also used in data analysis.
- Conditions
- Asymptomatic Condition, Sacroiliac Disorder
- Being tested
- HVLA Manipulations, Sham Manipulation
- Keywords
- manual therapy, HVLA manipulation, sacroiliac joint, center of pressure (COP), hypomobility
- Medical subject headings
- Asymptomatic Diseases
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
HVLA ManipulationsOther
Also called manual therapy
The procedure of experimental manipulation: the patient lay on the healthy side with the straight lower limb, and the torso turned towards the dysfunctional side, whose lower limb was bent in the hip and knee joint, and the hands rest on the lower ribs on the same side. The therapist allowed the initial loosening of the tissues and chose the movement barrier with his stabilizing hand. Then, with the treatment hand, he introduced the HVLA thrust through the iliac bone towards the bottom, while giving the iliac bone a posterior or anterior rotation - meaning, the opposite to the occurring dysfunction. If during the manipulation, no cavitation sound was heard, the HVLA thrust was repeated once.
Sham ManipulationOther
The sham procedure was the same, but no external force was introduced in the form of a therapeutic impulse.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Experimental group | Experimental | Experimental group (students with hypomobile SIJs) Receives: Other: HVLA Manipulations |
| Control group | Sham comparator | control group (students without hypomobile SIJs) Receives: Other: Sham Manipulation |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
COP X PRE
deflection of the COP in the X axis before manipulation
Measured: PRE (immediately before the intervention)
COP X POST
deflection of the COP in the X axis after manipulation
Measured: POST (immediately after the intervention)
COP Y PRE
deflection of the COP in the Y axis before manipulation
Measured: PRE (immediately before the intervention)
COP Y POST
deflection of the COP in the Y axis after manipulation
Measured: POST (immediately after the intervention)
COP Length PRE
path travelled by COP before manipulation;
Measured: PRE (immediately before the intervention)
COP Length POST
path travelled by COP after manipulation;
Measured: POSt (immediately after the intervention)
COP Area PRE
COP area before manipulation
Measured: PRE (immediately before the intervention)
COP Area POST
COP area after manipulation
Measured: POST (immediately after the intervention)
COP Av.Q-speed PRE
the average speed of COP before manipulation
Measured: PRE (immediately before the intervention)
COP Av.Q-speed POST
the average speed of COP after manipulation
Measured: POST (immediately after the intervention)
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted13 May 2020
- Study start15 Jun 2019
- Primary completion15 Oct 2019
- Study completion15 Oct 2019
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (9)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Asymptomatic ConditionStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Prevention
- Allocation
- Non-randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Model description
- Experimental group - HVLA manipulations on blocked sacroiliac joints (SIJs) Control group (people without hypomobile SIJs), in which we performed sham manipulation
- Masking
- Double blind
- Who is masked
- Participant, Outcomes assessor
- Enrolment
- 59 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Poznan University of Physical Education
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Małgorzata Waszak, Poznan University of Physical Education
- Investigators
- Małgorzata Waszak, PhD, Study director, Poznan University of Physical EducationMichał Posłuszny, MSc, Principal investigator, Poznan University of Physical Education
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT04387032
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- HVLA manipulations
- Status last verified
- May 2020
- First submitted
- 9 May 2020
- Last updated
- 15 May 2020
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- Yes: University IPD sharing platform is under preparation. All data will also be available to researchers via the study's director email (waszak@awf.poznan.pl) or Research Gate website.
Publications
Vleeming A, Schuenke MD, Masi AT, Carreiro JE, Danneels L, Willard FH. The sacroiliac joint: an overview of its anatomy, function and potential clinical implications. J Anat. 2012 Dec;221(6):537-67. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-7580.2012.01564.x. Epub 2012 Sep 19.
PubMed 22994881Coulter ID, Crawford C, Hurwitz EL, Vernon H, Khorsan R, Suttorp Booth M, Herman PM. Manipulation and mobilization for treating chronic low back pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Spine J. 2018 May;18(5):866-879. doi: 10.1016/j.spinee.2018.01.013. Epub 2018 Jan 31.
PubMed 29371112Lord SR, Clark RD, Webster IW. Physiological factors associated with falls in an elderly population. J Am Geriatr Soc. 1991 Dec;39(12):1194-200. doi: 10.1111/j.1532-5415.1991.tb03574.x.
PubMed 1960365Bemis T, Daniel M. Validation of the Long Sitting Test on Subjects with lliosacral Dysfunction*. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 1987;8(7):336-45. doi: 10.2519/jospt.1987.8.7.336.
PubMed 18797042Arab AM, Abdollahi I, Joghataei MT, Golafshani Z, Kazemnejad A. Inter- and intra-examiner reliability of single and composites of selected motion palpation and pain provocation tests for sacroiliac joint. Man Ther. 2009 Apr;14(2):213-21. doi: 10.1016/j.math.2008.02.004. Epub 2008 Mar 25.
PubMed 18373938Grassi Dde O, de Souza MZ, Ferrareto SB, Montebelo MI, Guirro EC. Immediate and lasting improvements in weight distribution seen in baropodometry following a high-velocity, low-amplitude thrust manipulation of the sacroiliac joint. Man Ther. 2011 Oct;16(5):495-500. doi: 10.1016/j.math.2011.04.003. Epub 2011 May 14.
PubMed 21570892Koes BW, Assendelft WJ, van der Heijden GJ, Bouter LM. Spinal manipulation for low back pain. An updated systematic review of randomized clinical trials. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1996 Dec 15;21(24):2860-71; discussion 2872-3. doi: 10.1097/00007632-199612150-00013.
PubMed 9112710von Heymann WJ, Schloemer P, Timm J, Muehlbauer B. Spinal high-velocity low amplitude manipulation in acute nonspecific low back pain: a double-blinded randomized controlled trial in comparison with diclofenac and placebo. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2013 Apr 1;38(7):540-8. doi: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e318275d09c.
PubMed 23026869Farazdaghi MR, Motealleh A, Abtahi F, Panjan A, Sarabon N, Ghaffarinejad F. Effect of sacroiliac manipulation on postural sway in quiet standing: a randomized controlled trial. Braz J Phys Ther. 2018 Mar-Apr;22(2):120-126. doi: 10.1016/j.bjpt.2017.09.002. Epub 2017 Sep 8.
PubMed 28993042
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 15 May 2020. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- The Influence of the Sacroiliac Joint Manipulation on Changes in the Values of the Center of Pressure in the Process of Maintaining Static Body Balance
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT04387032
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- HVLA manipulations
- Conditions
- Asymptomatic Condition, Sacroiliac Disorder
- Keywords
- manual therapy, HVLA manipulation, sacroiliac joint, center of pressure (COP), hypomobility
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 59 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Poznan University of Physical EducationUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- 15 Jun 2019 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 15 Oct 2019 (actual)
- Study completion
- 15 Oct 2019 (actual)
- First posted
- 13 May 2020 (actual)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
The study can be identified as an experimental study with a quasi-randomized control. It consisted of HVLA manipulation on blocked sacroiliac joints (SIJ) and it was checked whether it affected the appropriate parameters determining the pressure center (COP). The value of the parameters were examined twice, before (PRE) and after (POST) manipulation. The results were compared with the control group (people without hypomobility SIJ) in which sham manipulation was performed, and COP parameters (PRE and POST) were measured twice. In addition, PRE and POST results were compared within the group, i.e. separately in the experimental group (E) and separately in the control group (C) to check the effect of HVLA manipulation and placebo manipulation.
The first hypothesis assumes that persons belonging to the experimental group are characterized by significantly higher values of COP parameters before manipulation than values in the control group. The second hypothesis assumes that COP parameters will normalize as a result of sacroiliac joint mobilization performed in the experimental group.
Detailed description
The aim of the project was to determine the effectiveness of HVLA manipulation in maintaining static body balance. To implement it, it was necessary to conduct an experiment consisting in performing HVLA manipulation in people with SIJs hypomobility and checking whether it affects the COP parameters. It was assumed to measure these parameters twice (before (PRE) and after (POST) manipulation) and compare them with the measurements in the C group (sham manipulation).
The sample size necessary to power the study was determined at the test planning stage, using the G * Power 3.1.9 software. The standard threshold α = .05 was established; then the acceptable power level of the 1-β = .90 test and the expected moderate effect size η2 = .30 were determined for within-between interaction. The calculated total expected size of the sample is N = 32, i.e. 16 subjects in one research group, assuming that their number will not decrease during the study. With a higher test power 1-β = .95 and a moderate achieved result for observed effect size η2 = .25, the sample should have to consist of 26 subjects per subgroup. It was decided to examine a slightly larger number of available entities due to the possibility of excluding incorrect data.
Poznan University of Physical Education's students were invited to the research, electronically. Before starting the research, they were informed about the purpose and manner of conducting the research, and the type of methods used. Participation in the experiment was voluntary and free. Participants could withdraw from cooperation in the research at any time. They obtained assurance that the data obtained will be used only for scientific purposes and their processing will be fully anonymous.
Among 202 students of the Poznań University of Physical Education who responded to the invitation to the study project interview has been conducted, as a result of which 22 people were excluded from further actions due to disqualification criteria. Then sacroiliac mobility tests has been performed which made it possible to recognize hypomobility in 72 people. From the group of people with hypomobility, 36 people were randomly selected and included in the E group. From among people without hypomobility, 31 people were randomly selected for the C group. An random number table was used in the draw. The subjects did not know any group they were assigned to.
Subsequently, the examination of each project participant consisted of performing podometric measurements and SIJs mobilization in the E group or placebo in the C group, and re-performing functional tests and podometrics in both groups after the procedure. At the stage of analyzing data rejected 8 people who did not meet the assumed criteria, thus finally there were 30 people in the experimental group and 29 in the control group.
Functional tests
Qualification of the subjects to the E and C group was conducted by a researcher who had seven years of experience in using manual therapy techniques. The following tests of SIJs mobility were performed:
- Standing forward flexion test: the symmetry of posterior superior iliac spine (PSIS) displacement during forward flexion is assessed. In the case of hamstrings tension, the result may be false positive, so it should be repeated in a sitting position or with slightly bent knees.
- One leg standing / Stork / Gillet test: the hip joint is bent in the standing position, the downward and medial displacement of PSIS in relation to S2 is observed.
- Measurement of the Derbolowsky symptom (Pidellou symptom / long sitting test): was performed as determined by Bemis and Daniel. It allows determining the dysfunctional side and the rotation of iliac bone. The level of medial ankles during lifting of the torso from lying back position to straight sit with simultaneous traction of legs is observed.
- Lower limb adduction test: the patient is lying back, upper anterior iliac spine stabilization (ASIS) is required. The adduction of the bent at the hip and knee joint lower limb follows it. On the limited side, the adduction angle will be smaller compared to the healthy side. The test has screening character, because blockage of the joint may occur without limitation of adduction in the case of hip over-mobility, but due to the simplicity of implementation, it is a valuable indicator.
The majority of SIJs mobility tests are burdened with the accuracy and reliability errors in situations when they are performed individually. However, performing more tests increases the accuracy of the diagnosis. For this reason, there were performed four SIJs mobility tests, as well as complementary measurements of PSIS, ASIS, and iliac crest levels before (PRE) and after (POST) treatment to determine its effectiveness.
Podometric measurement After conducting functional tests, the study participants were directed to a podometric measurement, which was performed twice - PRE and POST. The measurement was carried out using the Medicapteurs PEL 38 platform, which allows conducting both static and dynamic measurements, and it cooperates with the TWINN software in Windows. The equipment was designed and tested in leading medical centers in Europe and put into use in the USA by Physical Support Systems. The platform has 1024 sensors with a total measuring surface of 320x320 [mm] and the appropriate resolution for testing the distribution of foot pressure and tracking the position of COP. The platform was calibrated automatically accordingly to the bodyweight of each participant, and the measurement was taken in a standing (Frankfurt) position with upper limbs hanging freely. Participants were asked to maintain a stable position without unnecessary movements and to look straight ahead at eye level. During the study, patients did not have visual access to a graphical record of the measurement carried out to avoid attempts to correct body posture. Each measurement was conducted for 30 seconds, recording the current COP position at a frequency of 10 frames per second.
Experimental manipulation Persons with blocked SIJ on one or both sides, constituting an E group, were manipulated on the blocked joints. People without blocked SIJs constituted a C group that underwent placebo manipulation.
The procedure of experimental manipulation: the patient lay on the healthy side with the straight lower limb, and the torso turned towards the dysfunctional side, whose lower limb was bent in the hip and knee joint, and the hands rest on the lower ribs on the same side. The therapist allowed the initial loosening of the tissues and chose the movement barrier with his stabilizing hand. Then, with the treatment hand, he introduced the HVLA thrust through the iliac bone towards the bottom, while giving the iliac bone a posterior or anterior rotation - meaning, the opposite to the occurring dysfunction. If during the manipulation, no cavitation sound was heard, the HVLA thrust was repeated once. In the C group, the placebo procedure was the same, but no external force was introduced in the form of a therapeutic impulse.
Statistical methods The collected data were analyzed in a statistical program Statistica version 13. The normality of the distribution of all measured variables on the quantitative scale in both groups was checked by the Shapiro-Wilk test .
In order to study the effect of the manipulation on the measured variables, there was carried out quantitative analysis of variance with repeated measures, plus a number of comparisons using the Student's t-test for dependent and independent attempts, and in some cases for the characteristics whose distribution differed from the standard - with the use of non-parametric the Mann-Whitney U-test for independent pairs or Wilcoxon test for dependent pairs. The Cohen d effect power measure was also used in data analysis.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Prevention
- Allocation
- Non-randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Double blind (participant, outcomes assessor)
- Number of arms
- 2
- Model description
- Experimental group - HVLA manipulations on blocked sacroiliac joints (SIJs) Control group (people without hypomobile SIJs), in which we performed sham manipulation
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Experimental group | Experimental | Other: HVLA ManipulationsExperimental group (students with hypomobile SIJs) |
| Control group | Sham comparator | Other: Sham Manipulationcontrol group (students without hypomobile SIJs) |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 19 to 24 years
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Accepted
- Age groups
- Adult
Key inclusion criteria (10 listed)
- Student at the Poznan University of Physical Education;
- age 19-24;
- asymptomaticity in the form of no pain symptoms in the LS segment of the spine;
- written consent to participate in the study;
- presenting no disqualification criteria;
Key exclusion criteria (1 listed)
- Persons who were characterized by LBP, neurological symptoms, rheumatic problems, orthopedic, or ongoing treatment in the lumbar spine and pelvis area were excluded. Pregnancy and the anatomical difference in the length of the lower limbs exceeding 5mm were also an excluding criterion.
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| HVLA ManipulationsAlso: manual therapyThe procedure of experimental manipulation: the patient lay on the healthy side with the straight lower limb, and the torso turned towards the dysfunctional side, whose lower limb was bent in the hip and knee joint, and the hands rest on the lower ribs on the same side. The therapist allowed the initial loosening of the tissues and chose the movement barrier with his stabilizing hand. Then, with the treatment hand, he introduced the HVLA thrust through the iliac bone towards the bottom, while giving the iliac bone a posterior or anterior rotation - meaning, the opposite to the occurring dysfunction. If during the manipulation, no cavitation sound was heard, the HVLA thrust was repeated once. | Other | Experimental group |
| Sham ManipulationThe sham procedure was the same, but no external force was introduced in the form of a therapeutic impulse. | Other | Control group |
Primary outcome
COP X PRE
Time frame: PRE (immediately before the intervention)
deflection of the COP in the X axis before manipulation
COP X POST
Time frame: POST (immediately after the intervention)
deflection of the COP in the X axis after manipulation
COP Y PRE
Time frame: PRE (immediately before the intervention)
deflection of the COP in the Y axis before manipulation
COP Y POST
Time frame: POST (immediately after the intervention)
deflection of the COP in the Y axis after manipulation
COP Length PRE
Time frame: PRE (immediately before the intervention)
path travelled by COP before manipulation;
COP Length POST
Time frame: POSt (immediately after the intervention)
path travelled by COP after manipulation;
COP Area PRE
Time frame: PRE (immediately before the intervention)
COP area before manipulation
COP Area POST
Time frame: POST (immediately after the intervention)
COP area after manipulation
COP Av.Q-speed PRE
Time frame: PRE (immediately before the intervention)
the average speed of COP before manipulation
COP Av.Q-speed POST
Time frame: POST (immediately after the intervention)
the average speed of COP after manipulation
Results and safety
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 15 May 2020.
- Background: PubMed 22994881Vleeming A, Schuenke MD, Masi AT, Carreiro JE, Danneels L, Willard FH. The sacroiliac joint: an overview of its anatomy, function and potential clinical implications. J Anat. 2012 Dec;221(6):537-67. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-7580.2012.01564.x. Epub 2012 Sep 19.
- Background: PubMed 29371112Coulter ID, Crawford C, Hurwitz EL, Vernon H, Khorsan R, Suttorp Booth M, Herman PM. Manipulation and mobilization for treating chronic low back pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Spine J. 2018 May;18(5):866-879. doi: 10.1016/j.spinee.2018.01.013. Epub 2018 Jan 31.
- Background: PubMed 1960365Lord SR, Clark RD, Webster IW. Physiological factors associated with falls in an elderly population. J Am Geriatr Soc. 1991 Dec;39(12):1194-200. doi: 10.1111/j.1532-5415.1991.tb03574.x.
- Background: PubMed 18797042Bemis T, Daniel M. Validation of the Long Sitting Test on Subjects with lliosacral Dysfunction*. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 1987;8(7):336-45. doi: 10.2519/jospt.1987.8.7.336.
- Background: PubMed 18373938Arab AM, Abdollahi I, Joghataei MT, Golafshani Z, Kazemnejad A. Inter- and intra-examiner reliability of single and composites of selected motion palpation and pain provocation tests for sacroiliac joint. Man Ther. 2009 Apr;14(2):213-21. doi: 10.1016/j.math.2008.02.004. Epub 2008 Mar 25.
- Results publication: PubMed 21570892Grassi Dde O, de Souza MZ, Ferrareto SB, Montebelo MI, Guirro EC. Immediate and lasting improvements in weight distribution seen in baropodometry following a high-velocity, low-amplitude thrust manipulation of the sacroiliac joint. Man Ther. 2011 Oct;16(5):495-500. doi: 10.1016/j.math.2011.04.003. Epub 2011 May 14.
- Results publication: PubMed 9112710Koes BW, Assendelft WJ, van der Heijden GJ, Bouter LM. Spinal manipulation for low back pain. An updated systematic review of randomized clinical trials. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1996 Dec 15;21(24):2860-71; discussion 2872-3. doi: 10.1097/00007632-199612150-00013.
- Results publication: PubMed 23026869von Heymann WJ, Schloemer P, Timm J, Muehlbauer B. Spinal high-velocity low amplitude manipulation in acute nonspecific low back pain: a double-blinded randomized controlled trial in comparison with diclofenac and placebo. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2013 Apr 1;38(7):540-8. doi: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e318275d09c.
- Results publication: PubMed 28993042Farazdaghi MR, Motealleh A, Abtahi F, Panjan A, Sarabon N, Ghaffarinejad F. Effect of sacroiliac manipulation on postural sway in quiet standing: a randomized controlled trial. Braz J Phys Ther. 2018 Mar-Apr;22(2):120-126. doi: 10.1016/j.bjpt.2017.09.002. Epub 2017 Sep 8.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: Yes. University IPD sharing platform is under preparation. All data will also be available to researchers via the study's director email (waszak@awf.poznan.pl) or Research Gate website.
Related trials for Asymptomatic Condition
RecruitingPhase 3
Testing Early Treatment for Patients With High-Risk Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia (CLL) or Small Lymphocytic Leukemia (SLL), EVOLVE CLL/SLL Study
Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia, Small Lymphocytic Lymphoma
Not yet recruitingObservational study
PET-MR Imaging of Natriuretic Peptide Receptor C (NPR-C) in Carotid Atherosclerosis With 64Cu-NODAGA-CANF (Multisite)
Carotid Atherosclerosis, Carotid Artery Stenosis Asymptomatic
Recruiting
Assessment of a Portable Digital Device for Quantified Analysis of Markerless Walking in Volunteers With Neuromuscular Diseases or Asymptomatic Volunteers
Spinal Muscular Atrophy (SMA), Charcot-Marie-Tooth
RecruitingPhase 2
The COSMYC Trial (COmbined Suppression of MYC)
Metastatic Castration-resistant Prostate Cancer
Active, not recruitingObservational study
Analysis of Coronavirus Disease 19 (COVID-19) Convalescent Plasma
Asymptomatic COVID-19 Infection Laboratory-Confirmed, Symptomatic COVID-19 Infection Laboratory-Confirmed
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Małgorzata Waszak, PhD study director
Poznan University of Physical Education
Michał Posłuszny, MSc principal investigator
Poznan University of Physical Education
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing HVLA Manipulations in people with Asymptomatic Condition and Sacroiliac Disorder, run by Poznan University of Physical Education at 1 site in Poland.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 10 inclusion and 1 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 15 May 2020. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in Poland. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. Some participants in this study may receive a placebo. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
COP X PRE (time frame: PRE (immediately before the intervention)). The study lists 10 primary outcomes in all. It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT04387032, which also lists 9 linked publications.
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 15 May 2020.