International Journal of Osteopathic Medicine, 2006/03, 9(1):28. doi: 10.1016/j.ijosm.2006.01.006, type of study: ,rct,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

Full text    (https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1746068906000083)

Keywords:

heart rate [102]
OMT [3925]
osteopathic manipulative treatment [3946]
randomized controlled trial [947]
respiration rate [5]
rib raising [21]

Abstract:

Introduction Articulation or mobilisation is a commonly utilised treatment and diagnostic technique in osteopathic practice.1 Mobilisation techniques have previously been shown to produce a sympathoexcitation,2, 3, 4 which can vary due to the rate of application.5 The effect of rib raising (RR) has been previously postulated to increase lung function in individuals with and without asthma by stimulation of the sympathetic nervous system.6 The aim of the current study was to determine changes in measures of sympathetic markers after the application of a rib raising technique performed at two different rates. Design Randomised, controlled, crossover, prospective study. Methods Participants: Thirty asymptomatic volunteers recruited from the Victoria University student population. Intervention: Each participant attended four sessions over four consecutive weeks and received a rapid RR treatment (2Hz), a slow RR treatment (0.5Hz), a control treatment or a placebo treatment in a randomised order. Outcome Measures: Heart rate (HR) and respiration rate were sampled using PowerLab/8s (ADInstruments) and further analysed using Chart for windows (ADInstruments). Blood pressure both systolic (SBP) and diastolic (DBP) was determined using a calibrated manual sphygmomanometer and stethoscope by a single operator. Measures were calculated as % change from rest. Results One-way ANOVA analysis of respiration rate and SBP indicated a significant difference between groups (P=0.00 and P=0.03, respectively). Post hoc analysis indicated that the significant differences were between the fast RR group and placebo (P=0.00), control (P=0.00) and slow (P=0.02) groups for respiration and the fast RR and slow RR (P=0.02) for SBP. ANOVA analysis of the other sympathetic measures revealed that there were no significant changes in HR (P=0.108) or DBP (P=0.581) in any group. Conclusions Rapid application of an RR technique produces the greatest significant increase in respiration rate in asymptomatic participants. A significant difference in SBP response is also observed between fast and slow application. A faster application rate appears to elicit a greater sympathetic response in asymptomatic individuals.