Logo of nihpaAbout Author manuscriptsSubmit a manuscriptHHS Public Access; Author Manuscript; Accepted for publication in peer reviewed journal;
PMC full text:
Man Ther. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2016 Dec 1.
Published in final edited form as:
Man Ther. 2015 Dec; 20(6): 797–804.
Published online 2015 Mar 27. doi:  10.1016/j.math.2015.03.008

Table 2

Comparison between contact sites for their ability to change muscle spindle responsiveness to a change in vertebral position following an HVLA-SM (ΔMIFΔposition).

Contact SiteMean difference in ΔMIFposition (imp/s)Lower 95% Confidence LimitUpper 95% Confidence Limitp-value
L6 spinous process vs L7 spinous process−2.6−5.0−0.30.03
L6 lamina vs L7 spinous process−2.4−4.80.00.05
L6 IAP/MP vs L7 spinous process−4.4−6.8−2.0<0.001
L6 lamina vs L6 IAP/MP2.0−0.44.40.10
L6 lamina vs L6 spinous process0.2−2.12.60.85
L6 spinous process vs L6 IAP/MP1.8−0.64.10.15
MIF = mean instantaneous frequency
imp/s = impulses per second
IAP = inferior articular process
MP = mammillary process.