Archive for category Activator Methods Chiropractic Technique: General Articles

Abstract

Objective:

The purpose of this study was to conduct a systematic review of the literature investigating clinical outcomes involving the use of the Activator Adjusting Instrument (AAI) or Activator Methods Chiropractic Technique (AMCT).

Methods:

A literature synthesis was performed on the available research and electronic databases, along with hand-searching of journals and reference tracking for any studies that investigated the AAI in terms of clinical effectiveness. Studies that met the inclusion criteria were evaluated using an instrument that assessed their methodological quality.

Results:

Eight articles met the inclusion criteria.  Overall, the AAI provided comparable clinically meaningful benefits to patients when compared to high-velocity, low-amplitude (HVLA) manual manipulation or trigger point therapy for patients with acute and chronic spinal pain, temporomandibular joint (TMJ) dysfunction and trigger points of the trapezius muscles.

Conclusion:

This systematic review of 8 clinical trials involving the use of the AAI found reported benefits to patients with a spinal pain and trigger points, although the clinical trials reviewed suffered from many methodological limitations, including small sample size, relatively brief follow-up period and lack of control or sham treatment groups.


J Can Chiropr Assoc. 2012 Mar; 56(1): 49–57. [PMCID: PMC3280118]

Author information: Tiffany Huggins, BA(Hons), BEd, DC, Ana Luburic Boras, BA, DC, Brian J. Gleberzon, DC, MHSc, Mara Popescu, BA, DC, Lianna A. Bahry, BKin, DC. Department of Chiropractic Therapeutics, CMCC, 6100 Leslie St. Toronto, Ontario, M2H 3J1.


Free PMC Article

Read More

Abstract

Objective:

To describe the results from chiropractic care of a patient presenting with a breech pregnancy using the Webster Technique analysis with Activator Adjusting Instrument thrust.

Clinical Features:

A 30 year old woman in her 34th week of pregnancy with her second child presented for a regular chiropractic visit after having an ultrasound that determined the baby was in a breech position. She had a previous cesarean section and was continuing chiropractic care with hopes of avoiding another cesarean section.

Intervention and Outcome:

Webster Technique was used to analyze the patient and a light force adjusting instrument (Activator Adjusting Instrument) was used to administer an adjustment. Trigger point therapy was also performed according to Webster protocol. After three adjustments, the fetus moved from a breech position to a normal vertex or head down position.

Conclusion:

Webster Technique protocol while using the Activator Adjusting Instrument along with trigger point therapy was successful in decreasing sacral subluxation and the fetus assumed a normal vertex position according to a follow-up ultrasound.


Journal of Pediatric, Maternal & Family Health – Chiropractic ~ Volume 2012 ~ Issue 3 ~ Pages 66-68.

Author information: Miranda Abbott, DC. Private practice, Appleton, Wisconsin, USA.

Read More

Abstract

BACKGROUND:

With continued popularity of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) therapies for children, their safety and effectiveness are of high concern for both CAM and conventional therapy providers. Chiropractic is the most popular form of practitioner-based CAM therapies for children.

OBJECTIVE:

The objective of this study was to describe the practice of pediatric chiropractic, including its safety and effectiveness.

DESIGN:

This study used a cross-sectional survey.

SETTING:

A practice-based research network was used for this study.

PATIENTS/PARTICIPANTS:

Participants were chiropractors and parents of pediatric patients (aged < or =18 years) attending chiropractic visits ranging from one to 12 visits.

INTERVENTION:

This is a survey study. No interventions were rendered in the completion of this study.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES:

Demographics, clinical presentations, treatment-associated aggravations, complications and improvements.

RESULTS:

The indicated primary reason for chiropractic care of children was “wellness care.” With respect to condition-based presentations, musculoskeletal conditions were the most common, in addition to nonmusculoskeletal conditions of childhood. The most common techniques used were diversified technique, Gonstead technique, Thompson technique, and activator methods. Treatment-associated complications were not indicated by the chiropractic and parent responders. Chiropractor responders indicated three adverse events per 5,438 office visits from the treatment of 577 children. The parent responders indicated two adverse events from 1,735 office visits involving the care of 239 children. Both sets of responders indicated a high rate of improvement with respect to the children’s presenting complaints, in addition to salutary effects unrelated to the children’s initial clinical presentations.


Explore (NY). 2009 Sep-Oct;5(5):290-5. [PMID:19733815]

Author information: Alcantara 1, Ohm J, Kunz D. International Chiropractic Pediatric Association, Media, PA, USA.

Read More

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to survey 200 randomly selected post-1980 graduates of the Canadian Memorial Chiropractic College practicing in five Canadian provinces to determine which, if any, technique systems they sought out instruction in and/or are utilizing either primarily or secondarily for patient care. Using a systematic sampling approach, 83 eligible data sets were received. Respondents reported to have sought out instruction in a total of 187 technique systems other than Diversified technique. In addition, although 86% of respondents stated they primarily used Diversified technique in practice, they reportedly used 134 different technique systems secondarily for patient care. This calculates to an average of 2.27 different techniques used per respondent. Future studies should survey a larger percentage of practitioners to better assess the validity of these findings.


J Can Chiropr Assoc. 2009 Mar; 53(1): 32–39. [PMCID: PMC2652629]

Author information: Chad Mykietiuk, DC, Megan Wambolt, BSc(Hon), DC, Travis Pillipow, BSc, DC, Christa Mallay, BA, DC, and Brian J. Gleberzon, BA, DC. Applied Chiropractic & Clinical Sciences Departments, Canadian Memorial Chiropractic College, 6100 Leslie St, Toronto, ON M2H 3J1.


Free PMC Article

 

Read More

Summary

This paper provides an account of a survey of chiropractors registered with the British Chiropractic Association that was designed to examine use of the Activator as a therapeutic instrument, and opinions related to its use. The survey was mailed to a sample population of 300 chiropractors and achieved a response rate of 82%. Of the chiropractors who responded to the survey and were included in data analysis, 82% reported that they used an Activator adjusting instrument, but only 2% of these stated that they typically used it as their primary method of treatment. The survey suggested that Activator I was the most frequently used form of the instrument. Cervical pain was the most frequently identified condition for whIch the activator was used. The vast majority of responders believed that the Activator was a useful therapeutic instrument in chiropractic practice (81%), and that it offered a safe treatment option (84%). Viewed in the context of other surveys of activator usage, this work adds to a body of literature which suggests an increase In Activator usage among chiropractors practicing in the United Kingdom since the early 1990’s. This being the case, it is appropriate that issues of effectiveness and safety in relation to Activator therapy are given due consideration in future research.


 

Clinical Chiropractic Volume 9, Issue 2, June 2006, Pages 70–75.
Author information: Dicken T. Reada, Francis J.H. Wilsonb, Hugh A. Gemmell. Anglo-European College of Chiropractic, 13-15 Parkwood Road, Bournemouth, Dorset, BH5 2DF, UK.

 

Read More

 

Abstract

OBJECTIVE:

To provide an historical overview, description, synthesis, and critique of the Activator Adjusting Instrument (AAI) and Activator Methods Chiropractic Technique of clinical assessment.

METHODS:

Online resources were searched including Index to Chiropractic Literature, EBSCO Online, MANTIS, CHIROLARS, CINAHL, eJournals, Ovid, MDConsult, Lane Catalog, SU Catalog, and Pubmed. Relevant peer-reviewed studies, commentaries, and reviews were selected. Studies fell into 2 major content areas: instrument adjusting and the analysis system for therapy application. Studies were categorized by research content type: biomechanical, neurophysiological, and clinical. Each study was reviewed in terms of contribution to knowledge and critiqued with regard to quality.

DISCUSSION:

More than 100 studies related to the AAI and the technique were found, including studies on the instrument’s mechanical effects, and a few studies on clinical efficacy. With regard to the analysis, there is evidence for good reliability on prone leg-length assessment, but to date, there is only 1 study evaluating the Activator Methods Chiropractic Technique analysis.

CONCLUSION:

A body of basic science and clinical research has been generated on the AAI since its first peer-reviewed publication in 1986. The Activator analysis may be a clinically useful tool, but its ultimate scientific validation requires testing using sophisticated research models in the areas of neurophysiology, biomechanics, and statistical analysis.

J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 2005 Feb;28(2):e1-e20. [PMID:15800504]

Author information: Fuhr AW, Menke JM. Activator Methods International, Ltd, Phoenix, AZ, USA.


Download the Full paper here(PDF)

Read More

Abstract:

Over the past decade, mechanical adjusting devices (MADs) were a major source of debate within the Chiropractors’ Association of Saskatchewan (CAS). Since Saskatchewan was the only jurisdiction in North America to prohibit the use of MADs, the CAS established a committee in 2001 to review the literature on MADs. The committee evaluated the efficacy, of literature on safety, and uses of moving stylus instruments within chiropractic practice, and the educational requirements for chiropractic practice. Following the rating criteria for the evaluation of evidence, as outlined in the Clinical Guidelines for Chiropractic Practice in Canada (1994), the committee reviewed 55 articles – all of which pertained to the Activator. Of the 55 articles, 13 were eliminated from the final study. Of the 42 remaining articles, 6 were rated as class 1 evidence; 11 were rated as class 2 evidence and 25 were rated as class 3 evidence.

In this article – the second in a series of two – we review the results of uses and usage, safety and educational requirements. Of the 30 articles designated under the category of usage, 3 were rated as Class 1 evidence; 9 studies were classified as Class 2 evidence and 18 were rated as Class 3 evidence. Overall the committee reached consensus that in clinical practice, there is broad application of these procedures. A minority report was written arguing that the reviewer was unable to reach a conclusion about the use of the Activator Instrument other than it is used as a clinical and research tool.

Of the 16 studies that dealt either explicitly or implicitly with safety, 4 were Class 1 evidence; 3 were Class 2 evidence and 9 were Class 3 evidence. Overall the committee reached consensus that the evidence supports that the Activator instrument is safe and has no more relative risk than do manual HVLA procedures. A minority report was written arguing that there is no evidence either to support or refute the view that MAD is safe. Of the 5 studies that dealt with educational requirements, all were Class 3 evidence. Overall the committee reached consensus that there was no evidence in the literature with respect to educational requirements to form any conclusions. A minority report was written offering opinion that there is evidence with respect to educational requirements.


J Can Chiropr Assoc. 2004 Jun; 48(2): 152–161. [PMC1840040]

Author information: Shane H Taylor, DC, Chairman, Nicole D Arnold, BSc, DC, Lesley Biggs, PhD, Christopher J Colloca, BS, DC, Dale R Mierau, DC, FCCS, MSc, Bruce P Symons, BSc, MSc, DC, and John J Triano, DC, PhD, FCCS.

Read More

Abstract:

Over the past decade, mechanical adjusting devices (MAD’s) were a major source of debate within the Chiropractors’ Association of Saskatchewan (CAS). Since Saskatchewan was the only jurisdiction in North America to prohibit the use of MAD’s the CAS established a committee in 2001 to review the literature on MAD. The committee evaluated the literature on the efficacy, safety, and uses of moving stylus instruments within chiropractic practice, and the educational requirements for chiropractic practice. Following the rating criteria for the evaluation of evidence, as outlined in the Clinical Guidelines for Chiropractic Practice in Canada (1994), the committee reviewed 55 articles – all of which pertained to the Activator: Of the 55 articles, 13 were eliminated from the final study. Of the 42 remaining articles, 6 were rated as class 1 evidence; 11 were rated as class 2 evidence and 25 were rated as class 3 evidence. In this article – the first in a series of two -the background and the methods utilized by the MAD committee’s activities are described, as well as the results for the review of the literature on efficacy. Of the 21 articles related to efficacy, five were identified as Class 1 evidence; 4 were identified as Class 2 evidence; and 12 were identified as Class 3. Overall, the committee reached consensus that the MAD procedures using the Activator were as effective as manual (HVLA) procedures in producing clinical benefit and biological change. A minority report was also written, arguing that there was not enough evidence to support or refute the efficacy of MAD’s.


J Can Chiropr Assoc. 2004 Mar;48(1):74-108. [PMID:17549220]

Author information: Taylor SH, Arnold ND, Biggs L, Colloca CJ, Mierau DR, Symons BP, Triano JJ.


Free PMC Article

Read More

Abstract

In a previous article, the author reported on the recommendations gathered from student projects between 1996 and 1999 investigating their preferences for including certain chiropractic Name technique systems into the curriculum at the Canadian Memorial Chiropractic College (CMCC). These results were found to be congruent with the professional treatment technique used by Canadian chiropractors. This article reports on the data obtained during the 2000 and 2001 academic years, comparing these results to those previously gathered. In addition, because of the implementation of a new curriculum during this time period, there was unique opportunity to observe whether or not student perceptions differed between those students in the `old’ curricular program, and those students in the `new’ curricular program. The results gathered indicate that students in both curricular programs show an interest in learning Thompson Terminal Point, Activator Methods, Gonstead, and Active Release Therapy techniques in the core curriculum, as an elective, or during continuing educational programs provided by the college. Students continue to show less interest in learning CranioSacral Therapy, SacroOccipital Technique, Logan Basic, Applied Kinesiology and Chiropractic BioPhysics. Over time, student interest has moved away from Palmer HIO and other upper cervical techniques, and students show a declining interest in being offered instruction in either Network Spinal Analysis or Torque Release Techniques. Since these findings reflect the practice activities of Canadian chiropractors they may have implications not only towards pedagogical decision-making processes at CMCC, but they may also influence professional standards of care.


J Can Chiropr Assoc. 2002 Dec; 46(4): 241–256. [PMC2505021]

Author information:Brain J Gleberzon. Canadian Memorial Chiropractic College, 1900 Bayview Avenue, Toronto, Ontario, Canada M4G 3E6.


Free PMC Article

Read More

Abstract

Purpose:

A review of the Activator Methods chiropractic technique (AMCT) and Activator adjusting instrument (AAI) is presented. History and development of the technique and its evidence basis and safety issues are discussed.

Method:

Activator history and associated body of research literature on both the technique and the instrument are critically reviewed. Included are basic science research in biomechanics, neurophysiology, and clinical research in AMCT analysis reliability, case studies, prospective cohorts, randomized group clinical outcomes, and comparisons to hands-only treatments.

Summary:

AMCT and the AAI represent a system and mode of delivery based on rational and empirical evidence that continues to be informed by an active and growing body of clinical research. In comparison to other techniques, AMCT appears equivalent to various hands-on approaches, but with less physical demand on the doctor of chiropractic. As with all spinal manipulative and other therapies, risks of adverse effects exist, but appear to be minimized due to force and velocity characteristics of the AAI. Needs for future research directions are also discussed.


Top Clin Chiropr 2002; 9(3): 30–43.

Author information: Fuhr AW, Menke MM. Activator Methods International, Phoenix, AZ, USA.


 

Download the Full paper here(PDF)

Read More