KINESIOLOGICAL PREFERENCES FOR PAIRS OF LISTING-DEPENDENT MANIPULATIVE SETUPS AMONG MANUAL THERAPY STUDENTS

Main Article Content

Robert Cooperstein
Javier Munoz Laguna

Keywords

Training, Palpation

Abstract

Introduction: Although there is abundant literature that individuals express kinesiological preferences (KP) related to their handedness and other inborn and acquired factors, apparently this has not been considered in the training or practice of manual therapists. There is no evidence that spinopelvic manipulative procedures primarily based on typical static listings result in enhanced educational or clinical outcomes.


Methods: Participants were asked to perform 8 pairs of equivalent manipulative setups, differing in side of stance and/or tasks assigned to the left and right hands. They expressed which setup they preferred, as well as their degree of preference. Each pair of setups was analyzed descriptively by reporting percentage KP, and inferentially by calculating whether the KP lay outside the 95% confidence interval wherein it could not be distinguished from chance at the p=0.05 level.


Results: In a study where the COVID-19 pandemic limited enrollment and delayed research, a convenience sample of 35 subjects was recruited. Five of 8 KPs were statistically significant; 2 KPs showed an obvious inclination but were statistically insignificant. Only 1 of 8 setups clearly demonstrated no KP. Degree of preference did not impact the results.


Conclusion: Given the obvious role handedness plays in sports, art, and other manual skills, ignoring KPs may impact the learning of and eventual delivery of manual therapy skills, with possible negative impact on patient safety and outcomes. Given evidence in both medical and dental settings that requiring left-handed individuals to use equipment designed for right-handed individuals has negative consequences, chiropractic colleges and clinicians might best calculate the risk/benefit profile of ignoring KPs, whether related to handedness or not, in relation to educational and/or clinical outcomes. Manual therapy institutions might be well-advised to refrain from insisting on the performance of adjustive skills in purely traditional opinion-based ways when more effective alternative strategies may exist.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.
Abstract 55 | KINESIOLOGICAL PREFERENCES Downloads 17

References

1. Cooperstein R. Adjustive technique scheme: A fresh look. J Am Chiropr Assoc 2007;44(2):15-19
2. Bereznick DE, Ross JK, McGill SM. The frictional properties at the thoracic skin-fascia interface: implications in spine manipulation. Clinical biomechanics 2002;17(4):297-303.
3. Kawchuk GN, Perle SM. The relation between the application angle of spinal manipulative therapy (SMT) and resultant vertebral accelerations in an in situ porcine model. Man Ther 2009;14(5):480-3 doi: 10.1016/j.math.2008.11.001(published Online First: Epub Date)|.
4. Perle SM, Kawchuk GN. Pressures generated during spinal manipulation and their association with hand anatomy. J Manipulative Physiol Ther 2005;28(4):e1-7
5. Ross JK, Bereznick DE, McGill SM. Atlas-axis facet asymmetry. Implications in manual palpation. Spine 1999;24(12):1203-9
6. Ross JK, Bereznick DE, McGill SM. Determining cavitation location during lumbar and thoracic spinal manipulation: is spinal manipulation accurate and specific? Spine 2004;29(13):1452-7
7. Ross K, Bereznick DE, McGill SM. The accuracy and specificity of lumbar and thoracic spinal manipulation. J Chirop Educ 2004;18(1):26
8. Hessel BW, Herzog W, Conway PJW, al e. Experimental measurement of the force exerted during spinal manipulation using the Thompson technique. J Manipulative Physiol Ther 1990;13(8):448-53
9. Al Lawati I, Al Maskari H, Ma S. "I am a lefty in a right-handed world": Qualitative analysis of clinical learning experience of left-handed undergraduate dental students. Eur J Dent Educ 2019;23(3):316-22 doi: 10.1111/eje.12432(published Online First: Epub Date)|.
10. Callahan D, de Virgilio C, Tillou A, DeUgarte DA. Medical student hand preference, perceived dexterity, and impact of handedness on training. J Surg Res 2016;204(1):114-7 doi: 10.1016/j.jss.2016.04.046(published Online First: Epub Date)|.
11. Oldfield RC. The assessment and analysis of handedness: the Edinburgh inventory. Neuropsychologia 1971;9(1):97-113 doi: 10.1016/0028-3932(71)90067-4(published Online First: Epub Date)|.
12. Rosenthal J. Computing margins of error in opinion polls. Secondary Computing margins of error in opinion polls. http://probability.ca/jeff/writing/margerror.html.
13. Bagesteiro LB, Sainburg RL. Handedness: dominant arm advantages in control of limb dynamics. J Neurophysiol 2002;88(5):2408-21 doi: 10.1152/jn.00901.2001(published Online First: Epub Date)|.
14. Cohen E, Triano JJ, McGregor M, Papakyriakou M. Biomechanical performance of spinal manipulation therapy by newly trained vs. practicing providers: does experience transfer to unfamiliar procedures? J Manipulative Physiol Ther 1995;18(6):347-52
15. Stainsby BE, Clarke MC, Egonia JR. Learning spinal manipulation: A best-evidence synthesis of teaching methods. J Chiropr Educ 2016;30(2):138-51 doi: 10.7899/JCE-15-8(published Online First: Epub Date)|.
16. O’Donnell M, Smith J, Abzug A, Kulig K. How should we teach lumbar manipulation? A consensus study. Manual Therapy 2016;25(1):1-37
17. Gleberzon BJ, cooperstein R, Good C, Roecker C, Blum C. Qualitative analysis of participants' opinions from 4 intercollegiate conference workshop. J Chiro Ed 2021 doi: https://doi.org/10.7899/JCE-20-2(published Online First: Epub Date)|.
18. Cannon W. The Wisdom of the Body. Rev. and Enl. Ed edition (April 17, 1963) ed. New York, New York: W. W. Norton & Company, 1963.
19. Stockel T, Vater C. Hand preference patterns in expert basketball players: interrelations between basketball-specific and everyday life behavior. Hum Mov Sci 2014;38:143-51 doi: 10.1016/j.humov.2014.09.002(published Online First: Epub Date)|.
20. Triano JJ, Scaringe J, Bougie J, Rogers C. Effects of visual feedback on manipulation performance and patient ratings. J Manipulative Physiol Ther 2006;29(5):378-85 doi: 10.1016/j.jmpt.2006.04.014(published Online First: Epub Date)|.
21. Klöppel S, Mangin J, Vongerichten A, Frackowiak R, Siebner H. Nurture versus Nature: Long-term impact of forced right-handedness on structure of pericentral cortex and basal ganglia. The Journal of Neuroscience;30(9):3271-75
22. Lacey M. The Binomial Distribution. Secondary The Binomial Distribution. http://www.stat.yale.edu/Courses/1997-98/101/binom.htm.
23. Masud Y, Ajmal M. Left-handed people in a right-handed world: A phenomenological study. Pakistan Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology 2012;10(1):49-60