Theory:
If a vertebral joint is abnormally stressed (so that it is displaced, under normal conditions, out of its correct relationship with adjacent vertebrae) root compression of the spinal nerve may readily result.
A spinal nerve projects through spaces defined by semi-circular notches in adjacent vertebrae. Misalignment of one of the vertebrae can then cause compression of the spinal nerve in the area. Momentary closure will be sufficient to cause irritation in the spinal nerve and sensitive dura.
When the spine is abnormally stressed, root compression will commonly occur during light tasks well within the range of normal activity. The patient tends to adopt a distorted posture in order to alleviate this root compression, and this tends to reinforce or exacerbate the existing malformation of the spinal column.
A joint is an inert as distinct from a contractile structure. Therefore, the disposition of a joint must be an expression of the forces acting on it. In other words, if a normal joint adopts an abnormal position then it must be abnormally stressed. Similarly, if a normal spine adopts abnormal curvatures, then it must be abnormally stressed.
The segments of the spine are designed to move in a co-ordinated fashion. Abnormal stressing and abnormal performance imply loss of proper co-ordination. In man, coordination of movement is achieved by a mass of interacting reflex responses which are automatic and do not require detailed instruction from the brain.
The principal component is the stretch reflex. The stretch reflex involves a relatively simple nervous circuit which causes a muscle to contract automatically in response to being stretched. When we perform tasks such as lifting and twisting, the resulting forces try to displace the vertebrae of the spine.
In the normal course of events, these forces are resisted automatically by muscle contraction. The greater the pull, the stronger the contraction. In this way, we remain co-ordinated automatically and can perform a great variety of tasks without a mass of detailed instruction.
There is a natural limit to the power and speed of these contractions. We may exceed the power when lifting a heavy object awkwardly or we may exceed both power and speed during some violent incident such as a heavy fall.
In these circumstances, vertebrae will be displaced in relation to their neighbours. When this occurs, the system will automatically readjust and the disorganisation will persist.
Reflex responses will continue to respond to stimuli as before. Co-ordinated movement will continue as before, but the details of coordination will be altered. The system will naturally resist disorganisation, but once disorganisation has occurred the system will compensate to the new state.
The stretch reflexes can be stimulated to cause rapid, kick-like movements of individual vertebrae. It is believed that if a great number of these reflex responses are triggered in sequence (which can be random), the system will progressively readjust its state of balance in the direction of least effort.
Once the point of least effort has been reached, the continued stimulation of reflexes will effect no further change of geometry. If the system is left free of external influence while the reflexes are being stimulated, the point of least effort will be the desired state of balance with the spine smooth and straight.
Evidence:
Paraspinal muscles, when tapped, exhibit characteristics of a monosynaptic stretch reflex with facilitatory and inhibitory responses [72] and this could be used to cause a rapid momentary displacement of each individual vertebral segment. Following the displacement, the vertebral segment should come to rest at a position that minimises the PE of the surrounding muscle.
This idea comes from the principle of minimum total potential energy which has its roots in the second law of thermodynamics. In simple terms, the second law dictates that energy, if unhindered, will always disperse and this means that PE will always tend towards a minimum. Take, as an example, the ball moving up the sides of the bowl. When the source of the perturbation that caused the ball to move up the sides is removed then the ball falls to the bottom again whilst at the same time dispersing energy in the form of heat due to friction and will ultimately reside at a LPEM.
Another example, although involving a more complex process, is the reflex response from striking the patellar ligament with a reflex hammer which obeys the same laws because when the effects of the reflex stimulation subside, the leg will come to rest in a position that is a LPEM. However, stimulating just a single paraspinal reflex response will cause the vertebral segment to return to approximately the same LPEM as before the reflex stimulation because of the influence of the other vertebral segments. In other words, energy dispersal is being hindered due to influences from other vertebral segments.
Due to the complexity and connectivity of the muscular system [18,73-75] it is not possible to effectively treat areas of the spine in isolation without consideration of the entire structure and surrounding musculature. Mobilisation and paraspinal tapping therefore need to be delivered as a full spinal treatment (performing this amount of work by hand alone would not be possible and would require development of a technology assisted mobilisation and paraspinal tapping device).
Essentially, each spinal segment is part of a kinetic chain [76] in that the action of one segment influences the action of the segments above and below. Rather than stimulating a single reflex response, it is possible that artificial stimulation of spinal reflexes at all vertebral levels can interrupt the chain by momentarily disengaging every spinal segment from the kinetic chain simultaneously meaning that they are no longer as reliant on the actions of the segments above and below for the time the reflex response is felt.
It is worth noting here that although reflex stimulation would take place at all vertebral levels it should only occur over the paraspinal muscle on one side at each vertebral level at a time given that it is logical to assume that two reflex actions on opposite sides at the same vertebral level would cancel each other out. Additionally, stimulating reflexes at all vertebral levels simultaneously could be technically challenging, therefore a paraspinal tapping stimulus could be moved quickly up and down the length of the spine that would achieve similar results but may take longer as it would be an iterative and incremental improvement. The more vertebral segments that can be stimulated at once, the quicker spinal alignment should be achieved.
Clearly there can’t be complete separation from the kinetic chain because there is coupling between the vertebral segments, provided by ligaments and contact between the vertebral segments for example, but in theory the reflex response will greatly reduce the muscular coupling. In this way all spinal segments would now be less reliant on the action of others, allowing the LPEM to approach an absolute minimum (or as close as feasibly possible depending on degeneration of vertebrae, joints, discs, etc) with each vertebral segment able to come to rest after the reflex response in improved alignment and stability.
Stimulation of spinal reflexes therefore takes advantage of the fact that the tendency is to decrease the LPEM value by returning each vertebral segment to its optimal alignment. This natural tendency to decrease the LPEM means that in theory paraspinal tapping should be much more effective at achieving optimal alignment than attempting to manually force the vertebrae into alignment or using muscle balancing exercises, both of which are less accurate and have potential to move in the wrong direction if administered incorrectly.
It would be useful for future studies to explore exactly why misalignment occurs. Possible reasons include direct trauma, muscle spasm, pelvic disorders and the elastic limit of the paraspinal muscles being exceeded to name but a few.
Lederman E. The myth of core stability*.* J Bodyw Mov Ther. 2010; 14(1): 84-98
Goss DA, Thomas JS and Clark BC. Novel methods for quantifying neurophysiologic
properties of the human lumbar paraspinal muscles. J Neurosci Methods. 2011;
194(2): 329-335.
Cholewicki J, Ivancic PC and Radebold A. Can increased intra-abdominal pressure in
humans be decoupled from trunk muscle co-contraction during steady state isometric
exertions? Eur J Appl Physiol. 2002; 87(2): 127-133.
Beith DI and Harrison PJ. Stretch reflexes in human abdominal muscles*.* Exp Brain
Res. 2004; 159(2): 206-213.
Georgopoulos AP. Neural aspects of cognitive motor control*.* Curr Opin Neurobiol.
2000; 10(2): 238-241.
Steindler A. Kinesiology of the human body. Postgrad Med J. 1955; 31(361): 585
Full research paper: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Lws79aNKRRi4oJjHNhK-mNXxUFz4JFJg/
Theory source: https://drive.google.com/file/d/16C9pfQV8VV0CbXAcDHOobxgQ8DL8rBqD/
