A new paradigm in manual therapy: abandoning segmental motion palpation looks at the current evidence around PIVMs and their shortcomings
Have you ever wondered why you struggle to feel hypermobility at L4-L5 in 3D flexion direction, while your MT teacher and
colleagues seemed be able to palpate all of those segmental restrictions easily?
I guess this sounds pretty familiar to a lot of us and to author Dr. Bahram Jam as well.
In his article “A new Paradigm in Manual Therapy: Abandoning Segmental Motion Palpation” he explains his personal struggles with
motion palpation during his MT education and shines a light on current evidence regarding manual therapy.
Before I advise you to download his article by a click on the following link,
take his TRUE or FALSE quiz about the best available MT evidence up to date – the solution can be found in his article:
1. Spinal manipulations applied to the cervical, thoracic and lumbar spine affect a local single segment.
2. A cavitation/an audible click is necessary for an effective patient outcome.
3. MT techniques are effective only if they are specifically applied to the level requiring treatment and this is based on clinical
evaluation; one cannot simply randomly apply MT to any level and expect a positive patient outcome.
4. In order to be effective, MT must be applied over specific painful spinal levels.
5. In order to be effective, MT techniques must be based on biomechanics and concave-convex rules.
6. Specific MT based on motion palpation skills is superior to independently performed exercises.
7. The human body is so delicate that a single stiff/hypomobile segment in the spine can affect the body in a detrimental way that it
must be found and treated with MT.
8. The ideal functioning and pain-free human body must have “normal” segmental joint mobility.
9. The primary benefit of MT is its effectiveness in the “breaking down” of adhesions and the reversing of subluxations.
Hundreds of OMT techniques in your pocket…
