ClinicalTrials.Veeva

Menu

Inertial Sensors Used to Learn Manipulation

U

University of Malaga

Status

Completed

Conditions

Medical Education

Treatments

Device: Traditional Learning Method
Device: Real Time Feedback

Study type

Interventional

Funder types

Other

Identifiers

NCT01911338
ACuesta07072013

Details and patient eligibility

About

  • 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.

Enrollment

64 patients

Sex

All

Ages

18 to 65 years old

Volunteers

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

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

Trial design

64 participants in 2 patient groups

Real Time Feedback
Experimental group
Description:
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
Treatment:
Device: Real Time Feedback
Tradicional Learning Method
Active Comparator group
Description:
Two expert teachers in manual therapy provided indications and corrections to the group with a teacher - student ratio of 1:8
Treatment:
Device: Traditional Learning Method

Trial contacts and locations

0

Loading...

Data sourced from clinicaltrials.gov

Clinical trials

Find clinical trialsTrials by location
© Copyright 2025 Veeva Systems