Dissertation submitted in partial compliance with the requirements for the Master's Degree in Technology: Chiropractic, Durban University of Technology, 2008. / To compare trunk flexion and lateral flexion range of motion (ROM) pre-post intervention. To compare the bowling speed of Action Cricket fast bowlers pre-post intervention. To determine the correlation between change in bowling speed immediately post-intervention to change in trunk flexion and lateral flexion ROM immediately post-intervention. To determine the association between change in bowling speed immediately post-intervention and the subjects’ perception of change in bowling speed. Methods: Forty asymptomatic Action Cricket fast bowlers were divided into four groups of ten each. Group 1 received lumbar spine manipulation, Group 2 received thoracic spine manipulation, Group 3 received combined thoracic and lumbar spine manipulation and Group 4 received the sham laser intervention (placebo). Pre- and post-intervention trunk flexion and lateral flexion ROM and bowling speed were measured using a digital inclinometer and a SpeedTracTM Speed Sport Radar. The subjects’ perception of a change in bowling speed post-intervention was also recorded. SPSS version 15.0 was used to analyse the data. Two-tailed tests were used in all cases. Results: Trunk flexion and lateral flexion increased significantly (p < 0.05) post-spinal manipulation. There was a significant increase in bowling speed post-thoracic (p = 0.042) and post-combined manipulation (p < 0.000). A significant yet weak positive correlation (p = 0.003; r = 0.451) was seen in change in bowling speed and change in thoracic flexion and lateral flexion. There was no significant difference in the percentage subjective change by intervention group (p = 0.217). Conclusions: Spinal manipulation is a valid intervention for short-term increase in bowling speed. / National Research Fund

Dissertation submitted in partial compliance with the requirements for a Master's Degree in Technology: Chiropractic, at Technikon Natal, 1999. / The purpose of this investigation was to compare the relative effect of spinal manipulation as opposed to acupuncture treatment in order to determine a more effective approach in the treatment of chronic sinusitis. It was hypothesized that chiropractic treatment and acupuncture treatment would both be effective in the treatment of chronic sinusitis. However, it was proposed that the chiropractic treatment would be more effective than acupuncture treatment / M

M.Tech. / Purpose: To compare the efficacy of diversified side posture adjustments and segmental drop piece adjustments in the treatment of sacroiliac joint dysfunction. Method: Thirty-two participants were randomly divided in two equal groups. Group A (n = 16) received diversified side posture adjustments and Group B (n = 16) received segmental drop piece adjustments. The trial consisted of seven sessions over a period of three weeks, of which the first six were treatment sessions, with the final seventh session serving the purpose of obtaining final post-treatment data. Data was obtained only at the first, third, fifth and seventh sessions. Objective data consisted of measuring lumbar spine range of motion using a digital inclinometer and pain pressure tolerance over the middle of the sacroiliac joint line by using a pressure algometer. Subjective data was obtained by having each participant complete a numerical pain rating scale and the Oswestry back pain and disability questionnaire.

M.Tech. / Purpose: This study aims to compare the effects of a manual high velocity, low amplitude spinal manipulation and a mechanical force, manually assisted spinal manipulation in the treatment of sub acute lumbar facet syndrome with regards to pain, disability, lumbar spine range of motion and pressure pain threshold. These effects were based on two questionnaires, the McGill Pain Questionnaire and the Oswestry Low Back Pain and Disability Questionnaire, lumbar spine range of motion readings using a digital inclinometer and pressure pain threshold readings taken with an algometer. Method: Thirty participants who met the inclusion criteria were randomly allocated to one of two groups. One group received a manual lumbar spine manipulation using the Diversified Technique. The second group received lumbar spine manipulative therapy with the use of the Activator Adjusting Instrument. Treatment occurred over a three week period, with participants receiving treatment six times out of a total of seven consultations. Procedure: Subjective data was collected using both the McGill Pain Questionnaire and the Oswestry Low Back Pain and Disability Questionnaire. Objective data was collected using a digital inclinometer to measure lumbar spine range of motion, and an algometer to measure pressure pain threshold. The questionnaires and all readings were recorded prior to treatment on the first, fourth and seventh visits. The data was then analysed by a statistician. Results: Clinical improvements in both groups were noted over the duration of the study with regards to pain, disability, left rotation and left and right lateral flexion. The group receiving a spinal manipulation with the Activator Adjusting Instrument also showed clinical improvement for flexion and right rotation and only the manual manipulation group improved in algometer measurements. Both groups displayed a decrease in lumbar extension readings over time. Statistical significance was observed for subjective measurements only. Conclusion: The results show that both spinal manipulative therapies are effective in the treatment of sub acute lumbar facet syndrome, however neither proved to be preferential over the other for subjective and objective measurements.

M.Tech. (Chiropractic) / Mechanical neck pain is the general term that refers to any type of pain within the cervical spine caused by placing abnormal stress and strain on muscles of the vertebral column. This is a very common musculo-skeletal disorder within the population, with 45% to 54% reporting neck pain at any given time of their lives (Martinez-Segura, Fernandez-de-las-Penas, Ruiz-Saez, Lopez-Jimenez and Rodriguez-Blanco, 2006). A vast majority of individuals do not experience a complete resolution of symptoms and as such often becomes a chronic pain (Cote, Cassidy, Carol and Kristman, 2004). Chronic pain by definition is one which is present for a period longer than six weeks (Segen, 2002). Accompanying the neck pain is often a limited or reduced range of motion within the cervical spine. Some studies suggest that hyper-tonicity and strain of the supporting muscles within this region due to an altered biomechanics also contributes to the pain and dysfunction (Armstrong, McNair and Williams, 2005 and Dall’Alba et al. 2001). One of the major muscle groups involved in this is the posterior cervical musculature. This is a general term used to describe the muscles located on the posterior aspect of the neck and includes longissimus capitis, semispinalis capitis, semispinalis cervicis, rotatores and multifidus (Dalley and Moore, 2006). Chiropractic adjustment therapy has been shown to have many effects of the body and especially the cervical spine including a decrease in pain perception and muscle hypertonicity (Kirkaldy-Willis and Cassidy, 1985), an increase in cervical range of motion (Bergmann, Peterson and Lawrence, 1993) as well as an increased skin pain tolerance level (Terrett and Vernon, 1984). Dry needling therapy has also been proven to have similar effects, including, a reduction in pain perception, an increase in range in motion of the specific linked biomechanical section, and most importantly a reduction of muscle tension (Travell and Simons, 1993). The purpose of this study was to see if a synergistic effect of the two above mentioned treatments would occur when combined under one treatment protocol. The aim of this study was to determine how effectively cervical adjustment therapy, dry needling of the posterior cervical muscles and a combination of the two treatments was in treating chronic mechanical neck pain with regards to pain, disability and cervical spine range of motion over a three week period. Participants were recruited from the University of Johannesburg Chiropractic Day Clinic. They were eligible to participate in the study once they met the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Participants were recruited by means of word of mouth as well as with the use of advertisements that were placed around the respective campuses of the University of Johannesburg. Thirty participants who presented with chronic mechanical neck pain, volunteered for this comparative study. This trial is a randomised controlled clinical trial which used convenience sampling. Group A received a combination treatment of dry needling and cervical manipulation. Group B received cervical adjustment only while group C received dry needling of the posterior cervical musculature alone. participants were treated for a total of 6 visits. Subjective and objective measurements were done at visits 1, 4 and a final visit 7 during which only measurements were taken. These effects are based on Vernon-Mior Pain and Disability Index, Numerical Pain Scale Rating, Pressure Algometer as well as Cervical Spine Range of Motion measuring instrument (CROM). The results of this trial indicated that all three treatments were effective in treating chronic mechanic neck pain. While one treatment was not statistically more effective than the other the dry needling and cervical manipulation alone produced a superior result. While combining these treatments was effective the synergistic effect one would expect was not as evident.

Dissertation submitted in partial compliance with the requirements for the Master's Diploma in Technology: Chiropractic at Technikon Natal, 1995. / The efficacy of chiropractic spinal manipulation on its own versus chiropractic spinal manipulation combined with other treatment modalities used in a chiropractic practice was evaluated in a single blind, randomised, controlled trial using a patient population of thirty nurses who were experiencing mechanical low back pain / M

"A dissertation submitted in partial compliance with the requirements for the Master's Diploma in Technology: Chiropractic, Technikon Natal, 1995. / Mechanical lower back pain is a common clinical entity which encompasses a spectrum of disorders. studies show that spinal manipulative therapy is of value in the treatment of mechanical lower back pain, while some chiropractors are of the opinion that McManis traction offers an effective adjunct to spinal manipulative therapy in the treatment of such conditions / M

Submitted in compliance with the requirements for the Master’s Degree in Technology: Chiropractic, Durban University of Technology, 2017. / Background Performance of the golf swing is mainly influenced by the strength and power of the torso i.e. the low back and abdominal muscles (Gluck, Bendo and Spivak 2008). As rotary velocities increase, muscle force is absorbed by deforming connective tissue, allowing for increased rotation (Gluck et al. 2008). Therefore any decrease in range of motion of the spine in the golfer, could affect performance (Nordin and Frankel 2001). The cause of poor range of motion is often a result of a physical restriction or mechanical dysfunction within the joints (Blanchard 2004). Spinal manipulative therapy (SMT) has been found to bring about biomechanical effects such as an increase in range of motion (ROM) (Millan et al. 2012) by releasing trapped meniscoids and connective tissue adhesions (Pickar 2002). A lack of core muscle strength is also thought to result in an inefficient technique, which predisposes individuals to poor performance (Asplund and Ross 2010). According to Kibler (2006) core muscle strengthening (CMS) is essential for efficient biomechanical function, to maximise force generation and minimise joint loads in all types of activities. The effects of SMT on golfing performance are well documented (Jermyn 2004; Delgado 2006) however, the effects of CMS on golfing performance are unknown. By improving physiological and biomechanical function through CMS, performance indicators maybe maximised (Pickar 2002; Kibler 2006). Aim Therefore, the purpose of this study was to determine the effectiveness ofSMT compared to CMS on performance indicators club head velocity (CHV) and ball carry (BC) in asymptomatic amateur male golfers. Methods Fifty-two asymptomatic amateur male golfers were recruited for this study, but seven withdrew leaving a final sample size of forty-five. Participants were randomly allocated to either the Core Muscle Strengthening (CMS, n=20) or the spinal manipulative group (SMT, n=25). The SMT (n=25) group received a single session of SMT while CMS (n=20) underwent a four week CMS exercise program. Core muscle strength and indicators of performance were taken before and after the intervention using the Bio-pressure feedback unit (BPU) and GC2 Foresight (swing analyser) respectively. Statistical analysis included paired t-tests to assess change in duration of contraction in the CMS group, Pearsons correlation analysis was used to assess the correlation between changes in CHV and BC intra-group and profile plots were used to show direction and trend of the effect by means of the latest version of SPSS software. Results The main findings show that CMS will improve following a four week CMS program (p= <0,001).When compared over time both SMT and CMS have the same effect on CHV (p= 0.127), whereas CMS has a more profound effect over time compared to SMT on BC (p=<0.001). Conclusion Core muscle strengthening appears to have a positive influence on CHV and BC in asymptomatic amateur male golfers, however it is still uncertain which intervention is more effective. Therefore future studies of this nature should look to increasing the duration of the study or the sample size. / M

M.Tech. (Chiropractic) / This unblinded, controlled pilot study was conducted in order to compare the effectiveness of chiropractic manipulative therapy with that of a combined therapy involving chiropractic manipulative therapy and myofascial trigger point therapy (dry needling technique and passive stretching), in the treatment of chronic mechanical posterior cervical spine pain. In executing the comparison, it was hypothesised that both treatment protocols would be effective, but that the combined therapy would be the most effective for the treatment of chronic mechanical posterior cervical spine pain, as this treatment protocol has equal emphasis on both the osseous and soft tissue structures. It was hoped that this combined therapy would be more effective in terms of a more speedy recovery and long term effect. This would not only benefit the patient from the point of view of health and quality of life, but financially as well, as less consultation fees would have to be paid. Patients wererecruited into the study by the use of advertisements in newspapers and posters, or from patients entering the Technikon Witwatersrand Chiropractic Day Clinic complaining of posterior cervical spine pain. Only those thirty patients who conformed to the specified delimitations and diagnostic criteria were accepted. These patients were randomly placed into two groups of fifteen patients each. One group received chiropractic manipulative therapy and the other group received the combined therapy. Each patient received twelve treatments over a one month period, ie. three treatments per week. After the treatment period there was a month break from treatment and a follow-up consultation at the end ofthis month. This follow-up period was used to determine the lasting effects of the treatment protocol. The subjective data was collected with the use of two questionnaires, the Neck Pain and Disability Index (Vemon Mior) and the McGill Pain Questionnaire. Further subjective data was collected, in the form of the number of fixations found in the cervical spine by the use of motion palpation and active myofascial trigger points found in the specified areas of the Trapezius and Levator Scapulae muscles. The objective data was obtained from the...

M.Tech. / Background: Chiropractic spinal adjustment therapy has been shown to be an effective treatment for pain as well as many somatic, visceral and systematic complaints. Its use in the treatment of stress, however, remains speculative. Stress is a normal and healthy human response, but it is detrimental to health in excessive amounts. Salivary cortisol is an effective, accurate indicator of the stress response system. Objective: To determine whether thoracic spine Chiropractic adjustment therapy has any direct effect on salivary cortisol levels and subjective stress tests in subjects who rated themselves as having high levels of stress. Methods: Thirty-one participants, who reported having subjective high stress levels, comprising of male and female adults completed the trial, which was designed as a cross-over study. They were divided into two groups. Groups 1 and 2 delivered saliva samples and completed subjective stress questionnaires. Group 1 was then treated with thoracic spinal adjustment therapy for three weeks whilst Group 2 received no intervention. Both groups repeated the tests at the three-week interval. Thereafter, Group 2 received three weeks of the same spinal adjustment therapy, whilst Group 1 received no intervention. Again, both groups repeated the tests at the end of this second three-week interval. All tests were completed at the same time of day for each participant. Salivary cortisol was measured by enzyme-linked immunoassay (ELIZA). The stress questionnaire was recoded and analysed with descriptive statistics. vii Results: Chiropractic spinal adjustment therapy resulted in a statistically significant decrease in subjective stress levels. It did not, however, significantly change salivary cortisol levels. Conclusion: This study has shown that Chiropractic spinal adjustment therapy does not significantly change salivary cortisol levels, but is successful in lowering subjective stress levels over time. It is concluded that Chiropractic plays a role in the reduction of the subjective experience of stress.