Feasibility and effectiveness of thoracic spine mobilization on sympathetic/parasympathetic balance in a healthy population - a randomized controlled double-blinded pilot study.
Slavko Rogan, Jan Taeymans, Peter Clarys and 2 others
PMID 31867125WHAT IT FOUND
In 12 healthy adults, thoracic mobilization was feasible and safe: adherence was 100% and no adverse effects occurred, but the heart-rate variability device stored too little data.
Prone posterior-anterior mobilization produced preliminary heart-rate changes.
Key findings
01Adherence was 100% and no UAE were observed.
02Heart-rate variability data collection was hampered because the Polar watch stored only 5 s R-R interval data instead of the needed 1 s data.
03PAM in prone position significantly decreased HRV HF and HRV ratio LF/HF and significantly increased HR.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for PTs
Read the rest of this summary
You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.
What it does not show
Only twelve healthy adults were studied, so this does not show what happens in patients. The primary aim was feasibility, not clinical benefit, so the autonomic changes are preliminary. Heart-rate variability data collection was hampered because the watch stored only 5 s R-R interval data instead of the needed 1 s data. PAM was performed in prone position and APM in sitting position, so position could explain differences rather than the mobilization direction. Reliability data for the skin perfusion and colour devices were unpublished. Palpation to locate thoracic segments and isolated segmental mobilization are not precise enough.
The easy way to misread this
Do not read the significant HRV and HR changes as evidence that thoracic mobilization changes sympathetic/parasympathetic balance in patients. This was a pilot in 12 healthy adults, the primary aim was feasibility, and the two mobilizations were given in different body positions.