Scribd
Upload
28 views

Reflection 2

This document discusses two studies on the effectiveness of using augmented and quantitative feedback systems when training students to perform spinal adjustments. The first study found that an instrumented manikin provided precise feedback and helped measure student progress while eliminating risks, but could not replace hands-on practice. The second study also found students improved with quantitative feedback but noted it only provided feedback on the aspects measured. Overall, the document concludes that while quantitative feedback systems effectively teach safe adjustment techniques, they should be used alongside, not instead of, standard hands-on training methods.

Uploaded by

api-479716004
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
28 views

Reflection 2

This document discusses two studies on the effectiveness of using augmented and quantitative feedback systems when training students to perform spinal adjustments. The first study found that an instrumented manikin provided precise feedback and helped measure student progress while eliminating risks, but could not replace hands-on practice. The second study also found students improved with quantitative feedback but noted it only provided feedback on the aspects measured. Overall, the document concludes that while quantitative feedback systems effectively teach safe adjustment techniques, they should be used alongside, not instead of, standard hands-on training methods.

Uploaded by

api-479716004
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 2

Effectiveness of using augmented and quantitative

feedback in training for adjustments

Now I am beginning to practice cervical adjustments on fellow students, the risks associated
with doing so has become prevalent to me. While I now understand that the chances of
causing serious harm are low if I take the necessary steps and follow the correct procedures.
Learning how much force to use when performing these adjustments is still foreign to me.
While I can’t apply thrusts in my adjustments now, I am worried about how I will learn what
is the right amount in the future. We were introduced to force plates recently in a lesson,
but I am curious if the use of this type of learning and feedback is more, less or just as
effective as doing the real thing.

While I found it helpful in the class and it did give me a visual representation of how much
force I am applying and if that was too much or too little. I am concerned that it is too
dissimilar to the real thing and will give me a false or incorrect idea of what I should be
doing when I perform the real thing. While I can talk to my lectures about their
effectiveness, my best option is to look for peer-reviewed studies that have tested these
systems and see how effective they found them.

A study by Descarreaux, M. et al., 2006 found overall positive results with students using an
instrumented manikin of other instrumented training aids. Saying the devices help give
more precise feedback on the parameters of the adjustment when the students are
learning. It went on further to explain that it is an effective tool to measure the progress of
student while simultaneously eliminating the risks associated with students performing
repetitive spinal manipulations on one and other. The study did, however, go onto say that
this type of learning cannot replace hands-on practice but should rather be used in together
with hands-on training. A second study from the Journal of Manipulative and Physiological
Therapeutics by Triano, J, J et al (2002) compared quantitative feedback to standard training
of cervical and thoracic manipulations. It also found that students improved using a
quantitative feedback system but did however say “Feedback assists the process but can
limit skill development only to the aspects on which feedback is provided” (Triano, J, J.
2002).

This demonstrates that while a quantitative feedback system is an effective tool in teaching
students how to safely adjust patients and one and other. It should not be depended on as
the sole way of learning. But rather be used in conjuncture with standard training
techniques as a way to build the confidence and skills required to perform adjustments
correctly and safely.
References:

Descarreaux, M., Dugas, C., Lalanne, K., Vincelette, M., Normand, M, C. (2006). Learning
spinal manipulation: the importance of augmented feedback relating to various
kinetic parameters. The Spine Journal, 6(2), 138-145.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spinee.2005.07.001

Triano, J, J., Rodgers, C, M., Combs, S., Potts, D., Sorrels, K. (2002). Quantitative feedback
versus standard training for cervical and thoracic manipulation. Journal of
Manipulative and Physiological Therapeutics, 26(3), 131-138.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0161-4754(02)54105-1

You might also like