Dissertation submitted in partial compliance with the requirements for the Masters Degree in Technology: Chiropractic at the Durban University of Technology, 2009. / It has been noted that in many recent research studies mechanical neck pain is a serious problem in the world today. There are epidemiological and statistical studies documenting the high incidence and prevalence of mechanical neck pain, which effects people’s daily living (Drew, 1995; Ferrari and Russell, 2003; Cote et al., 2000, Venketsamy, 2007 and Haldeman et al., 2008). Background: Treatments for chronic neck pain, which are non-surgical, appear to be the most beneficial for patients (Haldeman, 2008). In brief, the presentation of chronic mechanical neck pain is defined as localised, asymmetrical neck pain with restricted range of motion and dysfunctional musculature (Grieve, 1988). The muscular dysfunction known as the upper cross syndrome is defined as tightness of the upper trapezius, pectoralis major and levator scapulae and weakness of rhomboids, serratus anterior, middle and lower trapezius and deep neck flexors. These muscles are responsible for stabilizing the scapula and the patient may present with rounded, elevated shoulders and anterior head carriage when diagnosed with this syndrome (Liebenson, 1996). Clinical trials conducted by Cassidy et al., (1992 a, b) concluded that spinal manipulative therapy (SMT) was highly effective in treating mechanical dysfunctions within the cervical spine. However, due to multi systemic involvement of the muscular, neural and passive systems in mechanical neck pain, the treatment may need to target all three of the subsystems of spinal stability to be most effective (Panjabi, 1992 a, b; Lee et al., 1998; Lee 2004 and Richardson et al., 2002). No research has been conducted on the effects and benefits of treatment directed on the cervical spine and upper cross syndromes. This research will compare scapula stabilization training and SMT to SMT in isolation, as a treatment for chronic mechanical neck pain. Objectives: The purpose of this study was to determine the effect that scapula stabilization had on chronic mechanical neck pain. Pilates exercises were used to strengthen and stabilize the scapula muscles (this included stretching out the hypertonic musculature of the upper cross syndrome). The aim was to improve posture as well as to decrease the mechanical stress on the neck. SMT was also concomitantly used to correct any cervical restrictions that were present. These results were then compared to the results of a group that only received spinal manipulative therapy. The null hypothesis was that the intervention group would not respond differently to the treatment protocol in terms of the subjective and objectives measurements. iv Method: This clinical trial was conducted on a sample population of 30 patients with chronic mechanical neck pain. Each patient was assigned to one of two groups (n=15) according to convenience sampling. Both groups received SMT to the cervical spine, while group B (intervention group) also received pilates classes twice weekly for four weeks, which retrained the scapula stabilization muscles to function optimally. The patients each underwent six spinal manipulative treatments over four weeks and a seventh consultation in the fifth week for data collection. Both groups were evaluated in terms of subjective and objective clinical findings. Subjectively the assessment included 2 questionnaires (Numerical Pain Rating Scale and Canadian Memorial Chiropractic College [CMCC] neck disability index). Objective assessment included cervical motion palpation, Cervical Range Of Motion goniometer (CROM) measurements, scapula stabilization tests and a postural analysis with the use of digital photography. The statistics were completed under the guidance of a biostatistician, from the College of Health Science, University of KwaZulu – Natal, (Esterhuizen, 2008) who analyzed the captured data with the use of SPSS version 15. All outcome measures were quantitative. Repeated measures ANOVA testing was used to assess the presence of a different effect for each outcome measure over time between the two treatment groups. A statistically significant time by group effect would indicate a significant treatment effect. The minimum significance level was 0.05. The trends and direction of the effect were assessed via profile plots. Result: According to the statistical analysis, both groups showed improvements - subjectively and objectively - with regards to chronic mechanical neck pain, which is in keeping with the literature. In terms of the inter-group comparison the SMT group (Group A) showed a more constant improvement in range of motion, pain and disability indexes with the SMT only group while the SMT and pilates group (Group B) showed a greater effect in stabilizing the scapula and increasing the functionality of the surrounding musculature. Conclusions and Recommendations: The intervention treatment (Group B) did not have a greater effect on the short-term treatment of chronic mechanical neck pain than the reference group (Group A). It was also evident that the intervention group (Group B) often continued to improve when the SMT (Group A) only group often regressed at the follow up sessions. This improvement was either not significant enough or v the follow up session did not allow for enough time for a true reflection to be noted. It is recommended that more research be carried out to gain conclusive results indicating whether there is a more beneficial long term result to this treatment protocol.

Dissertation completed in partial compliance with the requirements for the Master’s Degree in Technology: Chiropractic, Durban University of Technology, 2013. / Background: Mechanical neck pain is a common complaint characterized by pain, limited range of motion and myofascial trigger points. The most common treatments for it are manual therapy and drug therapy. The former includes massage and exercise therapy and more specific to this study spinal manipulation and dry needling. The latter includes non-steroidal anti-inflammatories (NSAIDs) and analgesics. Manipulation assists in increasing range of movement and reduces muscle spasm, while dry-needling inactivates trigger points and decreases local and referred pain. NSAIDs reduce pain and muscle spasm by inhibiting inflammatory pathways. Traumeel®S is a commonly used, safe and well tolerated homoeopathic anti-inflammatory with similar efficacy as NSAIDs but without the adverse gastrointestinal effects. It has also been shown to be highly effective in the treatment of myofascial pain. Methodology: This study was designed as a randomized comparative clinical trial. Fourty participants between ages 18-55 years of age were randomly allocated to two groups of twenty participants each. Group A received spinal manipulation and dry needling in trapezius trigger point two; while Group B received spinal manipulation and Traumeel®S solution injection in trapezius trigger point two. The study took place over a period of two weeks and involved four consultations. Subjective and objective readings were taken at every consultation. Subjective tools included the Numerical pain rating scale (NRS) and Canadian Memorial Chiropractic College (CMCC) neck disability index. Objective tools included the pressure algometer and cervical range of motion (CROM-II) goniometer. SPSS version 20.0 was used in the data analysis. A p-value of <0.05 was considered as statistically significant. Results: The results showed that no statistically significant differences were observed between the two groups in terms of subjective and objective measurements. However, there were statistically significant improvements seen in both groups equally in terms of subjective and objective measurements i.e. both groups showed improvement. Conclusion: The results of this study concluded that the effectiveness of spinal manipulation and dry needling versus spinal manipulation and Traumeel®S Injectable solution in the treatment of mechanical neck pain associated with trapezius myofascial trigger points is equivalent to each other. No statistically or clinically significant changes were noticed between the groups.

Submitted in partial compliance with the requirements for the Masters’ Degree in Technology: Chiropractic, Department of Chiropractic, Durban University of Technology, Durban, South Africa, 2014. / Background: Spinal manipulation has been shown to result in neurophysiological changes, most often noted in the paraspinal muscles. These effects have been associated with an increase in paraspinal muscle contractibility; it is unclear if this leads to an increase in paraspinal muscle endurance. Objectives: To determine the effect of sacroiliac joint (SIJ) manipulation compared to a placebo treatment of the SIJ on lumbar extensor muscle endurance time. Method: A randomised, placebo-controlled pre-test post-test experimental trial, involving 40 asymptomatic male participants divided into an intervention group receiving SIJ manipulation using an impulse adjusting instrument and a placebo group receiving a pre-load force without the delivery of an impulse thrust. Outcome measures were lumbar extensor muscle endurance time, surface electromyographic (SEMG) readings, lumbar spinal range of motion, paraspinal muscle length assessment and a subjective pain measurement. Results: There was a significant difference between the groups (p=0.004) with the SIJ manipulation group showing an increase in endurance time compared to the placebo group which showed a decrease. SEMG readings increased for both groups with no statistically significant difference between the groups (p>0.05). Only extension lumbar spinal range of motion significantly improved in both groups (p=˂0.001) with no significant differences between groups (p=0.876). Only one participant reported pain during the research procedure. Conclusions: SIJ manipulation may enhance the endurance of the paraspinal muscles. This study should be conducted in a larger sample to validate the findings.

Submitted in partial compliance with the requirements for the Masters’ Degree in Technology: Chiropractic, Department of Chiropractic, Durban University of Technology, Durban, South Africa, 2014. / Background Spinal manipulative therapy (SMT) is a commonly used therapeutic modality. It has been shown that neuromuscular reflexes are elicited during spinal manipulation resulting in changes in the surrounding muscle tonicity and seen as changes in surface electromyography. Despite this little is known about the effect that SMT may have on muscle function. Increased maximum voluntary contraction (MVC) of the paraspinal muscles has been observed following lumbar SMT compared to a control and sham treatment; however its effect on muscle endurance has not been investigated. The aim of this study was to determine the effect of lumbar SMT compared to a placebo treatment on lumbar extensor muscle endurance in asymptomatic individuals. Method This study was a quantitative double blinded, pre-test and post-test placebo controlled experimental trial. Forty asymptomatic participants were randomly allocated to one of two treatment groups. One group received a single SMT applied to the L3 vertebrae and the other received the pre-load force of the SMT but no thrust. Subjective (a self-report of pain/discomfort while performing the Biering-Sorensen test) and objective [surface electromyography (sEMG), paraspinal muscle endurance time and lumbar spine range of motion] measurements were taken pre- and post-intervention. The latest version of SPSS version (IBM SPSS Inc.) was used to analyse the data. A p-value < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Independent t-tests were used to compare means and two-way factor ANOVA (for repeated measures) was used to compare the change in the two time points between the two treatment groups (intervention and control). RESULTS There were no statistically significant differences between the intervention and placebo groups in terms of subjective reports of pain/discomfort and objective evidence of surface EMG readings, paraspinal muscle endurance time and lumbar spine range of motion.

Submitted in partial compliance with the requirements for the Master’s Degree in Technology: Chiropractic, Department of Chiropractic, Durban University of Technology, Durban, South Africa, 2015. / Background: Spinal manipulative therapy (SMT) is a commonly used treatment for many musculoskeletal conditions although the exact mechanism explaining its effectiveness is not well understood. Several studies have investigated the effect of SMT on the paraspinal muscles where neuromuscular effects have been observed, however few studies have assessed whether these changes result in a change in the functioning of the paraspinal muscles. This study aimed to determine the effect of lower thoracic spinal manipulation compared to a placebo intervention on lumbar extensor muscle endurance in asymptomatic participants. Methodology: This was a quantitative, pre-test post-test, placebo controlled trial involving 40 male participants between the ages of 20 and 40 years. The participants were randomly allocated to either the lower thoracic spinal manipulation group or a placebo group. Manipulation was delivered using the Impulse Adjusting Instrument®. Objective measures included lumbar spinal range of motion, a paraspinal muscle endurance test, and surface electromyography readings. Subjective measures were the verbalisation of pain and/or discomfort during the paraspinal muscle endurance test. IBM® SPSS® statistics version 21 and STATA 11 were used to analyse the data. A p-value of <0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results: There were no statistically significant differences between the groups in terms of subjective and objective measurements. A trend of treatment effect was observed for paraspinal muscle endurance where the intervention group showed noticeable improvements in endurance scores. Conclusion: Further studies need to be conducted to determine if the trends observed would occur in a larger study population.

Dissertation submitted in partial compliance with the requirements for the Masters Degree in Technology: Chiropractic at the Durban University of Technology, 2009. / It has been noted that in many recent research studies mechanical neck pain is a serious problem in the world today. There are epidemiological and statistical studies documenting the high incidence and prevalence of mechanical neck pain, which effects people’s daily living (Drew, 1995; Ferrari and Russell, 2003; Cote et al., 2000, Venketsamy, 2007 and Haldeman et al., 2008). Background: Treatments for chronic neck pain, which are non-surgical, appear to be the most beneficial for patients (Haldeman, 2008). In brief, the presentation of chronic mechanical neck pain is defined as localised, asymmetrical neck pain with restricted range of motion and dysfunctional musculature (Grieve, 1988). The muscular dysfunction known as the upper cross syndrome is defined as tightness of the upper trapezius, pectoralis major and levator scapulae and weakness of rhomboids, serratus anterior, middle and lower trapezius and deep neck flexors. These muscles are responsible for stabilizing the scapula and the patient may present with rounded, elevated shoulders and anterior head carriage when diagnosed with this syndrome (Liebenson, 1996). Clinical trials conducted by Cassidy et al., (1992 a, b) concluded that spinal manipulative therapy (SMT) was highly effective in treating mechanical dysfunctions within the cervical spine. However, due to multi systemic involvement of the muscular, neural and passive systems in mechanical neck pain, the treatment may need to target all three of the subsystems of spinal stability to be most effective (Panjabi, 1992 a, b; Lee et al., 1998; Lee 2004 and Richardson et al., 2002). No research has been conducted on the effects and benefits of treatment directed on the cervical spine and upper cross syndromes. This research will compare scapula stabilization training and SMT to SMT in isolation, as a treatment for chronic mechanical neck pain. Objectives: The purpose of this study was to determine the effect that scapula stabilization had on chronic mechanical neck pain. Pilates exercises were used to strengthen and stabilize the scapula muscles (this included stretching out the hypertonic musculature of the upper cross syndrome). The aim was to improve posture as well as to decrease the mechanical stress on the neck. SMT was also concomitantly used to correct any cervical restrictions that were present. These results were then compared to the results of a group that only received spinal manipulative therapy. The null hypothesis was that the intervention group would not respond differently to the treatment protocol in terms of the subjective and objectives measurements. iv Method: This clinical trial was conducted on a sample population of 30 patients with chronic mechanical neck pain. Each patient was assigned to one of two groups (n=15) according to convenience sampling. Both groups received SMT to the cervical spine, while group B (intervention group) also received pilates classes twice weekly for four weeks, which retrained the scapula stabilization muscles to function optimally. The patients each underwent six spinal manipulative treatments over four weeks and a seventh consultation in the fifth week for data collection. Both groups were evaluated in terms of subjective and objective clinical findings. Subjectively the assessment included 2 questionnaires (Numerical Pain Rating Scale and Canadian Memorial Chiropractic College [CMCC] neck disability index). Objective assessment included cervical motion palpation, Cervical Range Of Motion goniometer (CROM) measurements, scapula stabilization tests and a postural analysis with the use of digital photography. The statistics were completed under the guidance of a biostatistician, from the College of Health Science, University of KwaZulu – Natal, (Esterhuizen, 2008) who analyzed the captured data with the use of SPSS version 15. All outcome measures were quantitative. Repeated measures ANOVA testing was used to assess the presence of a different effect for each outcome measure over time between the two treatment groups. A statistically significant time by group effect would indicate a significant treatment effect. The minimum significance level was 0.05. The trends and direction of the effect were assessed via profile plots. Result: According to the statistical analysis, both groups showed improvements - subjectively and objectively - with regards to chronic mechanical neck pain, which is in keeping with the literature. In terms of the inter-group comparison the SMT group (Group A) showed a more constant improvement in range of motion, pain and disability indexes with the SMT only group while the SMT and pilates group (Group B) showed a greater effect in stabilizing the scapula and increasing the functionality of the surrounding musculature. Conclusions and Recommendations: The intervention treatment (Group B) did not have a greater effect on the short-term treatment of chronic mechanical neck pain than the reference group (Group A). It was also evident that the intervention group (Group B) often continued to improve when the SMT (Group A) only group often regressed at the follow up sessions. This improvement was either not significant enough or v the follow up session did not allow for enough time for a true reflection to be noted. It is recommended that more research be carried out to gain conclusive results indicating whether there is a more beneficial long term result to this treatment protocol.

M.Tech. (Chiropractic) / Brain hibernation or cerebral dysfunction theory is the diminishing of brain function due to poor blood flow as a result of compression of the vertebral, basilar, internal carotid and subclavian arteries (Buchanan, 2004). Compression is usually due to skeletal malalignment, ligamentous or muscular in origin and correction of this by cervical spine manipulation suggests that the above difficulties may be improved with manipulative and manual techniques (Buchanan, 2005). Thomas and Wood (1992), suggest that there is a correlation between upper cervical adjustments and improved mental function. This has been shown by Shambaugh, Pearlman and Hauck (1991), who showed that after an adjustment, there was an improved brain stem evoked response which indicated that neural messages were travelling through the brain stem quicker or with less delay. Terrett (1993), has proposed that cervical manipulative therapy results in augmented cerebral blood flow, which culminates in hibernating areas of the brain becoming functional again. The higher cognitive skills tend to be affected by the decrease in blood flow. Cognitive skills are vital to the process of learning, spelling and reading. Edublox is a company that has special training programmes to develop these skills to maximise a childs potential. The aim of this study is to determine the effects of cervical manipulations combined with Edublox training versus Edublox training alone on visual spatial memory. The focus of the study would be to determine whether chiropractic cervical manipulation has a significant effect on mental function and visual memory when combined with Edublox training. The study will include a total of 34 participants split into two groups, one receiving Edublox training and the other receiving Edublox training combined with cervical spine manipulations. Participants approximately between the ages of ten and thirteen years of age will be included in this study. The manipulation group will receive spinal manipulative therapy followed by both groups receiving the same Edublox training session to limit variation. The participants shall receive an intense program of Edublox training, every day for the duration of five days and the combined group will receive adjustment every other day. The research will be conducted at the premises of Confidence College. Subjective and objective measurements will be taken at the beginning and at the end of the five days. The subjective measurement will include an Observer Memory Questionnaire – Parent Form that will be completed by the parent of the child based on their view of their child’s memory. The objective measurement will include two sub-tests from the Visual Perceptual Skills Test 3, namely the visual memory (VM) and visual sequential memory (VSM) components.

M.Tech. (Chiropractic) / Purpose: The aim of this study was to look at the effectiveness of massage with MYO₂ gel in conjunction with Spinal Manipulative Therapy (SMT) for the treatment of patients with posterior mechanical neck pain, with regards to pain, disability and cervical spine range of motion. The effect of these treatments was evaluated using a questionnaire consisting of Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) and a Vernon-Mior Neck Pain and Disability Index Questionnaire, and by measuring cervical spine range of motion using a cervical range of motion (CROM) measuring device. Method: 30 participants with posterior mechanical neck pain were randomly divided into two groups based on the order they start the study in. Group A – control group, received SMT to the cervical spine, followed by massage with ultrasound gel over the upper trapezius muscle and the area of the posterior neck musculature. Group B – experimental group, received SMT of the cervical spine, followed by massage with MYO₂ gel over the upper trapezius muscle and the area of the posterior neck musculature. Participants were treated six times out of a total of seven sessions, over a maximum three week period. Procedure: Subjective data was collected at the beginning of the first and fourth and seventh consultations. This was done by means of a Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) and a Vernon- Mior Neck Pain and Disability Index Questionnaire in order to assess pain and disability levels. Objective data was collected at the beginning of the first, fourth session, and seventh consultation by means of measuring cervical spine range of motion using a cervical range of motion (CROM) measuring device. Analysis of collected data was performed by a statistician from STATKON; a department of the University of Johannesburg. Results: When comparing the VAS of the initial with the final consultation it showed a statistically significant difference in both groups. This indicated that both interventions were effective in decreasing the perceived level of neck pain (VAS score). When comparing the Neck Pain and Disability Index of the initial with the final consultation it showed a statistically significant difference in both groups. This indicated that both interventions were effective in decreasing neck pain and disability of the cervical spine. When comparing the Cervical Range of Motion (CROM) of the initial consultation with the final consultation it showed a statistically significant improvement in both groups in all directions of motion. Both groups resulted in an increase in range of motion over time. Group B had a greater average CROM percentage increase of 28.60% average compared to Group A which had an average percentage increase of 22.25%.

Dissertation submitted in partial compliance with the requirements for the Masters Degree in Technology: Chiropractic, Durban University of Technology, 2010. / The 1 year overall prevalence of Episodic Tension-Type Headache (ETTH) is 38.3%; with lifetime prevalence at 46% for TTH. Little literature exists to support the effectiveness of spinal manipulation in the treatment of ETTH. Therefore aim of this study was to determine the relative effectiveness of cervical spine manipulation and a Nonsteroidal Anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) (Ibuprofen®) in the treatment of ETTH. Method: This study was a prospective randomised clinical trial with two intervention groups (N=32, n1=16 and n2=16). The allocation of participants to the two groups was completed by means of simple randomization. Group one were treated using cervical spine manipulation. Group two were treated using Ibuprofen. Subjective measurements included the Numerical Rating Scale 101 Questionnaire (NRS-101), Short Form McGill Pain Questionnaire (SF-MPQ), CMCC Neck Disability Index (CMCC) and Headache Diary. A p value <0.05 was considered as statistically significant. Results: The subjective measurements of the NRS-101, SF-MPQ and CMCC showed a significant time effect in both treatment groups. Several of the subjective Headaches Diary outcomes followed this trend with significant time effect in both groups. There was a significant treatment effect for the NRS-101. Several subject outcomes from the Headache Diary showed a significant treatment effect in favour of manipulation, namely frequency and duration of headaches. Conclusion: The findings in this study have shown that cervical spine manipulation is more effective than Ibuprofen® for the treatment of ETTH in terms of several subjective outcomes namely: pain intensity (NRS-101), and the frequency and the duration of headache per day.

Dissertation submitted in partial compliance with the requirements for a Masters Degree in Technology: Chiropractic, Durban University of Technology, 2011. / The relationship between TMD and dysfunction in the cervical spine has been reported in the literature and there are many case studies which have shown favourable results when treatment was aimed at the TMJ, cervical spine relationship. However, the numerous TMD treatment protocols described in the literature concerning this relationship, and the effectiveness of these treatments have not been well established. In spite of this many chiropractors treat TMD. TMD is a multifactoral condition and conservative treatment options need to be further investigated in order to determine if manual interventions directed at the cercival spine in the treatment of TMD are beneficial. Objectives: The purpose of this study was to compare myofascial trigger point therapy and manipulative therapy of either the TMJ, cervical spine or a combination of the two in order to determine their effectiveness for the TMD. Method: Thirty participants with TMD were randomly assigned to one of three treatment groups. Participants in each group received two treatments per week for two weeks with a follow up consultation in the third week. Data were collected before the commencement of the first, second, and fourth treatments and at the follow up consultation. Outcome measures included algometer readings, CROM, Mouth opening readings, NRS and a disability questionnaire. SPSS version 15.0 was used for analysis of the data. A p value <0.05 was considered as statistically significant. Multivariate testing was used for intra- and inter-group comparisons. Profile plots were generated to assess the direction and trend of the effect and to visually compare the trends in the different treatment groups. Results: Inter-group comparisons did not reveal any statistically significant different improvements between the three treatment groups. Conclusion: All groups responded favourably to treatment and showed trends towards improvement. However, statistically analysis revealed that no one treatment protocol was superior to the other. Although no definitive inferences may be drawn regarding the effectiveness of each treatment approach, within group trends indicated that the combination of the two treatment approaches may be preferred.