MedDataX Logo

Inertial Sensors Used to Learn Manipulation

NCT ID: NCT01911338

Last Updated: 2014-12-04

Study Results

Results pending

The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.

Basic Information

Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.

Recruitment Status

COMPLETED

Clinical Phase

NA

Total Enrollment

64 participants

Study Classification

INTERVENTIONAL

Study Start Date

2012-02-29

Study Completion Date

2012-09-30

Brief Summary

Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.

* Background Context: no studies have been identified to analyse the effect of real time feedback (using inertial sensors) on physiotherapy students learning the art of posterior-anterior thoracic manipulation (PATM).
* Purpose: to study the effect caused by real-time feedback on the learning process for PATM, comparing two undergraduate physiotherapy student groups. Hypothesis: significant differences will exist in the execution parameters of manipulation among students receiving real-time feedback versus those who do not.
* Study Design/Setting: longitudinal, pre-post intervention.
* Patient Sample: Sixty-one undergraduate physiotherapy students were divided randomly into two groups, G1 (n = 31) (group without feedback in real time) and G2 (n = 30) (group with real-time feedback).
* Outcome Measures: time, displacement and velocity and improvement (only between groups) to reach maximum peak, to reach minimum peak from maximum peak, total manipulation time.
* Methods: two groups of physiotherapy students learned PATM, one using a traditional method and the other using real-time feedback (inertial sensor). Measures were obtained pre- and post-intervention. Intragroup pre- and post-intervention and intergroup post-intervention scores were calculated. An analysis of the measures' stability was developed through an ICC (1,2).
* Results: the values of ICC ranged from 0.881 to 0.997. Statistically significant differences were found in all variables analysed (intra- and inter-group) in favour of G2.
* Conclusions: the learning process for posterior-anterior thoracic manipulation is facilitated when the student receives real-time feedback.

Detailed Description

Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.

Conditions

See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.

Medical Education

Study Design

Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.

Allocation Method

RANDOMIZED

Intervention Model

CROSSOVER

Blinding Strategy

DOUBLE

Investigators Outcome Assessors

Study Groups

Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.

Real Time Feedback

Before beginning practice, one of the teachers performed the manipulation and explained the graph parameters as real-time feedback to consider when interpreting the graph, leaving the graphic as the benchmark execution

Group Type EXPERIMENTAL

Real Time Feedback

Intervention Type DEVICE

Before beginning practice, one of the teachers performed the manipulation and explained the graph parameters as real-time feedback to consider when interpreting the graph, leaving the graphic as the benchmark execution

Tradicional Learning Method

Two expert teachers in manual therapy provided indications and corrections to the group with a teacher - student ratio of 1:8

Group Type ACTIVE_COMPARATOR

Traditional Learning Method

Intervention Type DEVICE

Two expert teachers in manual therapy provided indications and corrections to the group with a teacher - student ratio of 1:8.

Interventions

Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.

Real Time Feedback

Before beginning practice, one of the teachers performed the manipulation and explained the graph parameters as real-time feedback to consider when interpreting the graph, leaving the graphic as the benchmark execution

Intervention Type DEVICE

Traditional Learning Method

Two expert teachers in manual therapy provided indications and corrections to the group with a teacher - student ratio of 1:8.

Intervention Type DEVICE

Eligibility Criteria

Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.

Inclusion Criteria

* Participants did not have any training in manual therapy techniques, especially those involving a high velocity, low amplitude execution.

Exclusion Criteria

* Refusal to participate in the study
Minimum Eligible Age

18 Years

Maximum Eligible Age

65 Years

Eligible Sex

ALL

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

Yes

Sponsors

Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.

University of Malaga

OTHER

Sponsor Role lead

Responsible Party

Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.

Dr. Antonio I Cuesta-Vargas

PhD

Responsibility Role PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR

Principal Investigators

Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.

Manuel González-Sánchez, PT, PhD

Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR

University of Malaga

Yves Lenfant, PT

Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR

University of Malaga

Other Identifiers

Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.

ACuesta07072013

Identifier Type: -

Identifier Source: org_study_id