Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

LIVE: Thursday 27th June 2024, 18:00-19:30 (CEST)
Join our expert panel to discover why you need to understand the drivers of non-adherence in your patients, and how you can optimize medication adherence in your clinics to drastically improve patient outcomes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Chiropractic & Manual Therapies
Published in: Chiropractic & Manual Therapies 1/2015

Open Access 01-12-2015 | Research

A non-randomised experimental feasibility study into the immediate effect of three different spinal manipulative protocols on kicking speed performance in soccer players

Authors: Kyle Colin Deutschmann, Andrew Douglas Jones, Charmaine Maria Korporaal

Published in: Chiropractic & Manual Therapies | Issue 1/2015

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

The most utilized soccer kicking method is the instep kicking technique. Decreased motion in spinal joint segments results in adverse biomechanical changes within in the kinematic chain. These changes may be linked to a negative impact on soccer performance. This study tested the immediate effect of lumbar spine and sacroiliac manipulation alone and in combination on the kicking speed of uninjured soccer players.

Methods

This 2010 prospective, pre-post experimental, single-blinded (subject) required forty asymptomatic soccer players, from regional premier league teams, who were purposively allocated to one of four groups (based on the evaluation of the players by two blinded motion palpators). Segment dysfunction was either localized to the lumbar spine (Group 1), sacroiliac joint (Group 2), the lumbar spine and sacroiliac joint (Group 3) or not present in the sham laser group (Group 4). All players underwent a standardized warm-up before the pre-measurements. Manipulative intervention followed after which post-measurements were completed. Measurement outcomes included range of motion changes (digital inclinometer); kicking speed (Speed Trac™ Speed Sport Radar) and the subjects’ perception of a change in kicking speed. SPSS version 15.0 was used to analyse the data, with repeated measures ANOVA and a p-value <0.05 (CI 95%).

Results

Lumbar spine manipulation resulted in significant range of motion increases in left and right rotation. Sacroiliac manipulation resulted in no significant changes in the lumbar range of motion. Combination manipulative interventions resulted in significant range of motion increases in lumbar extension, right rotation and right SI joint flexion. There was a significant increase in kicking speed post intervention for all three manipulative intervention groups (when compared to sham). A significant correlation was seen between Likert based-scale subjects’ perception of change in kicking speed post intervention and the objective results obtained.

Conclusions

This pilot study showed that lumbar spine manipulation combined with SI joint manipulation, resulted in an effective intervention for short-term increases in kicking speed/performance. However, the lack of an a priori analysis, a larger sample size and an unblinded outcome measures assessor requires that this study be repeated, addressing these concerns and for these outcomes to be validated.
Literature
1.
2.
Kellis E, Katis A. Biomechanical characteristics and determinants of instep soccer kick. J Sports Sci Med. 2007;6:154–65.PubMedCentralPubMed
3.
Nunome H, Georgakis A, Shinkai H, Suito H, Tsujimoto N and Ikegami Y. Impact phase kinematics of side-foot and instep soccer kick. J Biomech 2007;40(S2).
4.
Lees A. Biomechanics applied to soccer skills. In: Reilly T, editor. Science and soccer. London: E and FN Spon; 1996.
5.
6.
Dørge H, Bull Andeersen T, Sørensen H, Simonsen T. Biomechanical differences in soccer kicking with the preferred and the non-preferred leg. J Sports Sci. 2002;20:293–9.PubMedCrossRef
7.
Luhtanen P. Kinematics and kinetics of maximal instep kicking in junior soccer players. In: Reilly T, Lees A, Davids K, Murphy W, editors. Science and football. London: E and FN Spon; 1998.
8.
Gilchrist R, Frey M, Nadler S. Muscular control of the lumbar spine. Pain Physician. 2003;6:361–8.PubMed
9.
Barfield W, Kirkendall D, Yu B. Kinematic instep kicking differences between elite female and male soccer players. J Sports Sci Med. 2002;1:72–9.PubMedCentralPubMed
10.
Ishmail A, Mansor M, Ali M, Jaafar S, Johar M. Biomechanics analysis for right leg instep kick. J Appl Sci. 2010;10(13):1286–92.CrossRef
11.
Cohan S. Sacroiliac joint pain: a comprehensive review of anatomy, diagnosis, and treatment. Anaesth Analg. 2005;101:1440–53.CrossRef
12.
Sterzing T, Henning E. The influence of friction properties of shoe upper materials on kicking velocity in soccer. J Biomech. 2007;40(2):195.CrossRef
13.
Bir C, Cassatta J, Janda D. An analysis and comparison of soccer shin guards. Clin J Sports Med. 1995;5(2):95–9.CrossRef
14.
Young W, Clothier P, Otago L, Bruce L, Liddell D. Acute effects of static stretching on hip flexor and quadriceps flexibility, range of motion and foot speed in kicking a football. J Sci Med Sport. 2004;7(1):23–31.PubMedCrossRef
15.
Cramer GD, Tuck NR, Knudsen JT, Fonda SD, Schliesser JS, Fournier JT, et al. Effects of side posture positioning and side posture adjusting on the lumbar zygopophyseal joints as evaluated by magnetic resonance imaging: a before and after study with randomisation. J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 2000;23:380–94.PubMedCrossRef
16.
Cramer CG, Gregerson DM, Knudsen JT, Hubbard BB, Ustas JA, Cantu JA. The effects of side posture positioning and spinal adjusting on the lumbar Z joints: a randomised controlled trial with sixty four subjects. Spine. 2002;27(22):2459–66.PubMedCrossRef
17.
Mooney V, Robertson J. The facet syndrome. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1976;115:149–56.PubMed
18.
Paris S. Anatomy as related to function and pain. symposium on evaluation and care of lumbar spine problems. Orthop Clin North Am. 1983;14:476–89.
19.
Jortikka MO, Inkinen RI, Tammi MI, Parkkinen JJ, Haapala J, Kiviranta I, et al. Immobilisation causes longlasting matrix changes both in the immobilised and contralateral joint cartilage. Ann Rheum Dis Suppl. 1997;56(4):255–61.CrossRef
20.
21.
Redwood D. Spinal adjustment for low back pain. Semin Integr Med. 2003;1(1):42–52.CrossRef
22.
Bergmann TF, Peterson DH. Chiropractic technique: 3rd ed. St. Louis, Missouri, United States of America: Elsevier Health Science; 2010.
23.
Herzog W. The mechanical, neuromuscular and physiologic effects produced by the spinal manipulation. In: Herzog W, editor. Clinical biomechanics of spinal manipulation. New York: Churchill Livingstone; 2000.
24.
Gatterman MI, Cooperstein R, Lantz C, Perle SM, Schneider MJ. Rating specific chiropractic technique procedures for common low back conditions. J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 2001;24(7):449–56.PubMedCrossRef
25.
Ianuzzi A, Khalsa PS. Comparison of human lumbar facet joint capsule strains during simulated high velocity, low amplitude spinal manipulation versus physiological motions. Spine J. 2005;5:277–90.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
26.
Pickar J. Neurophysiological effects of spinal manipulation. Spinal J. 2002;2(5):357–71.
27.
Murphy BA, Dawson NJ, Slack JR. Sacroiliac joint manipulation decreases the h-reflex. Electroencephalogr Clin Neuro Physiol. 1995;35:87–94.
28.
Herzog W, Scheele D, Conway PJ. Electromyographic responses of back and limb muscles associated with spinal manipulative therapy. Spine. 1999;24:146–53.PubMedCrossRef
29.
Symons BP, Herzog W, Leonard T, Nguyen H. Reflex responses associated with activator treatment. J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 2000;23:155–9.PubMedCrossRef
30.
Suter E, McMorland G, Herzog W, Bray R. Conservative lower back treatment reduces inhibition in knee-extensor muscles: a randomized controlled trial. J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 2000;25(2):76–80.CrossRef
31.
Fox M. Effect on hamstring flexibility of hamstring stretching compared to hamstring stretching and sacroiliac joint manipulation. Clin Chiropractic. 2006;9:21–32.CrossRef
32.
Mouton J. Understanding social research. 3rd ed. Pretoria: Van Shaik Publishers; 1996.
33.
Schafer R, Faye J. Motion palpation and chiropractic technique. 2nd ed. Huntington Beach, California, United States of America: The Motion Palpation Institute; 1990.
34.
Bergmann T, Peterson D, Lawrence D. Chiropractic Technique. New York, New York, United States of America: Churchill Livingstone Inc; 1993.
35.
Marcotte J, Normand MC, Black P. Kinematics of motion palpation and its effect on the reliability for cervical spine rotation. J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 2002;25(7):E7.PubMedCrossRef
36.
Travell JG, Simons DG. Myofascial pain and dysfunction: the trigger point manual. Baltimore: Williams and Wilkins; 1983.
37.
Szaraz ZT. Compendium of chiropractic technique. 2nd ed. Toronto: Vivian L.R. Associates Ltd. Technical Publications; 1990.
38.
Saunders H. Saunders digital inclinometer users guide. 4250 Norex Dr, Chaska, Minnesota, 55318-3047: The Saunders Group, Inc; 1998.
39.
Mayer TG, Kondraske G, Beals SB, Gatchel RJ. Spinal range of motion. Accuracy and sources of error with inclinometric measurement. Spine. 1997;22(17):1976–84.PubMedCrossRef
40.
Arab A, Abdollahi I, Joghataei M, 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;14:213–21.PubMedCrossRef
41.
Esterhuizen T. (Private communications), 16 August 2010, 14:06 PM.
42.
McCarney R, Warner J, Iliffe S, Van Haselen R, Griffin M, Fisher P. The hawthorne effect: a randomised, controlled trial. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2007;7:30.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
43.
Sood K. The immediate effect of lumbar spine manipulation, thoracic spine manipulation, combination lumbar and thoracic spine manipulation and sham laser on bowling speed in action cricket fast bowlers. Durban: Master’s Degree in Chiropractic, Durban University of Technology; 2008.
44.
Le Roux S. The immediate and short term effect of spinal manipulative therapy (SMT) on asymptomatic amateur golfers in terms of performance indicators. Durban: Master’s Degree in Chiropractic, Durban University of Technology; 2008.
45.
Gowan ID, Jobe FW, Tibone JE, Perry J, Moynes DR. A comparative electromyographic analysis of the shoulder during pitching: professional versus amateur pitchers. Am J Sports Med. 1987;15(6):586–90.PubMedCrossRef
46.
Shrier I, MacDonald D, Uchacz G. A pilot study on the effects of pre-event manipulation on jump height and running velocity. Br J Sports Med. 2006;40:947–9.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
47.
Lauro A, Mouch B. Chiropractic effects on athletic ability. J Chiropractic Res Invest. 1991;6(4):84–7.
48.
Costa SMV, Chibana YET, Giavarotti L, Compagnoni DS, Shiono AH, Satie J, et al. Effect of spinal manipulative therapy with stretching compared with stretching alone on full-swing performance of golf players: a randomised pilot trial. J Chiropractic Med. 2009;8:165–70.CrossRef
49.
Greenstein JS. Chiropractic enhancement of sports performance. Adv Chiropractic. 1997;4:295–320.
50.
Leach R. The chiropractic theories: a textbook of scientific research. 4th ed. Philadelphia, Pennsylvania: Lippincott Williams and Wilkins. ISBN 978-0683307474
51.
Bicalho E, Setti J, Macagnan J, Cano J, Manffra E. Immediate effects of a high-velocity spine manipulation in paraspinal muscles activity of nonspecific chronic low-back pain subjects. Man Ther. 2010;15:469–75.PubMedCrossRef
52.
Botelho MB, Andrade BB. Effect of cervical spine manipulative therapy on judo athletes’ grip strength. J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 2012;35(1):38–44.PubMedCrossRef
53.
Cramer G, Brudgell B, Henderson C, Khalsa P, Pickar J. Basic science research related to chiropractic spinal adjusting: the state of the art and recommendations revisited. J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 2006;29(9):726–60.PubMedCrossRef
Metadata
Title
A non-randomised experimental feasibility study into the immediate effect of three different spinal manipulative protocols on kicking speed performance in soccer players
Authors
Kyle Colin Deutschmann
Andrew Douglas Jones
Charmaine Maria Korporaal
Publication date
01-12-2015
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
Chiropractic & Manual Therapies / Issue 1/2015
Electronic ISSN: 2045-709X
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12998-014-0046-3

Other articles of this Issue 1/2015

Chiropractic & Manual Therapies 1/2015 Go to the issue

Research

A biopsychosocial approach to primary hypothyroidism: treatment and harms data from a randomized controlled trial

Research

Reliability of diagnostic ultrasound in measuring the multifidus muscle

Study protocol

Does an online psychological intervention improve self-efficacy and disability in people also receiving Multimodal Manual Therapy for chronic low back pain compared to Multimodal Manual Therapy alone? Design of a randomized controlled trial

Research

Does cervical lordosis change after spinal manipulation for non-specific neck pain? A prospective cohort study

Research

Foam pads properties and their effects on posturography in participants of different weight

Research

US chiropractors’ attitudes, skills and use of evidence-based practice: A cross-sectional national survey