Kinesiologia Test Muscular.pdf ##VERIFIED##

Kinesiologia Test Muscular.pdf ##VERIFIED##

Download File ->->->-> https://bytlly.com/2t86Lz

/g, '') %>Más deSaludInyecciones de testosterona en un hombre trans¿Qué es el efecto secundario 'cara Ozempic'? Publicidad - Sigue leyendo debajoDetección de enfermedades con trajes de cineCómo librarte del TOC con estos cuatro pasosSumar un poco de yoga recuperará tus músculosCómo sobrellevar la picazón de la psoriasisLa AECC presenta la campaña Todos contra el cáncer¿Cuál es la mejor técnica para reducir el estrés?¿Cuáles son los síntomas de la adicción a comer?12 causas por las que siempre estás cansado Publicidad - Sigue leyendo debajo Publicidad - Sigue leyendo debajo Publicidad - Sigue leyendo debajo Publicidad - Sigue leyendo debajo Publicidad - Sigue leyendo debajo Publicidad - Sigue leyendo debajo Publicidad - Sigue leyendo debajo Publicidad - Sigue leyendo debajo Publicidad - Sigue leyendo debajoMás deCreado paraCreado por paraOfrecido porCreado por+ lowSlideCount) { %>of

Muscle testing is also known as applied kinesiology (AK) or manual muscle testing (MMT). It is an alternative medicine practice that claims to effectively diagnose structural, muscular, chemical, and mental ailments.

Following this thought process, you should be able to perform a muscle test to diagnose any underlying medical condition. Muscle testing conducted in applied kinesiology differs from standard orthopedic muscle testing.

Applied kinesiology (AK) is a pseudoscience-based technique[1] in alternative medicine claimed to be able to diagnose illness or choose treatment by testing muscles for strength and weakness.[2]

According to their guidelines on allergy diagnostic testing, the American College of Allergy, Asthma and Immunology stated there is "no evidence of diagnostic validity" of applied kinesiology.[3] "Another study indicated that the use of applied kinesiology to evaluate nutrient status is no more useful than random guessing,"[4] and the American Cancer Society has said that "scientific evidence does not support the claim that applied kinesiology can diagnose or treat cancer or other illness".[5]

Applied kinesiology is presented as a system that evaluates structural, chemical, and mental aspects of health by using a method referred to as muscle response testing or manual muscle testing (MMT) alongside conventional diagnostic methods. The essential premise of applied kinesiology, which is not shared by mainstream medical theory, is that every organ dysfunction is accompanied by a weakness in a specific corresponding muscle in what is termed the "viscerosomatic relationship."[5][12] Treatment modalities relied upon by AK practitioners include joint manipulation and mobilization, myofascial, cranial and meridian therapies, clinical nutrition, and dietary counseling.[13]

A manual muscle test in AK is conducted by having the patient use the target muscle or muscle group to resist while the practitioner applies a force. A smooth response is sometimes referred to as a "strong muscle" and a response that was not appropriate is sometimes called a "weak response". This is not a raw test of strength, but rather a subjective evaluation of tension in the muscle and smoothness of response, taken to be indicative of a difference in spindle cell response during contraction. These differences in muscle response are claimed to be indicative of various stresses and imbalances in the body.[14] A weak muscle test is equated to dysfunction and chemical or structural imbalance or mental stress, indicative of suboptimal functioning.[15] It may be suboptimal functioning of the tested target muscle, or a normally optimally functioning muscle can be used as an indicator muscle for other physiological testing. A commonly known and very basic test is the arm-pull-down test, or "Delta test," where the patient resists as the practitioner exerts a downward force on an extended arm.[16] Proper positioning is paramount to ensure that the muscle in question is isolated or positioned as the prime mover, minimizing interference from adjacent muscle groups.[12]

Nutrient testing is used to examine the response of various patient's muscles to assorted chemicals. Gustatory and olfactory stimulation are said to alter the outcome of a manual muscle test, with previously weak muscles being strengthened by application of the correct nutritional supplement, and previously strong muscles being weakened by exposure to harmful or imbalancing substances or allergens.[12][14][17] Though its use is deprecated by the ICAK,[18] stimulation to test muscle response to a certain chemical is also done by contact or proximity (for instance, testing while the patient holds a bottle of pills).

Therapy localization is another diagnostic technique using manual muscle testing which is unique to applied kinesiology. The patient places a hand which is not being tested on the skin over an area suspected to be in need of therapeutic attention. This fingertip contact may lead to a change in muscle response from strong to weak or vice versa when therapeutic intervention is indicated. If the area touched is not associated with a need for such intervention, the muscle response is unaffected.[15]

A review of several scientific studies of AK-specific procedures and diagnostic tests concluded: "When AK is disentangled from standard orthopedic muscle testing, the few studies evaluating unique AK procedures either refute or cannot support the validity of AK procedures as diagnostic tests. The evidence to date does not support the use of manual muscle testing for the diagnosis of organic disease or pre/subclinical conditions."[20] Another concluded that "There is little or no scientific rationale for these methods. Results are not reproducible when subject to rigorous testing and do not correlate with clinical evidence of allergy."[21] A double-blind study was conducted by the ALTA Foundation for Sports Medicine Research in Santa Monica, California, and published in the June 1988 Journal of the American Dietetic Association. The study used three experienced AK practitioners and concluded that, "The results of this study indicated that the use of applied kinesiology to evaluate nutrient status is no more useful than random guessing."[4]

Nearly all AK tests are subjective, relying solely on practitioner assessment of muscle response. Specifically, some studies have shown test-retest reliability, inter-tester reliability, and accuracy to have no better than chance correlations.[5][23][24] Some skeptics have argued that there is no scientific understanding of the proposed underlying theory of a viscerosomatic relationship, and the efficacy of the modality is unestablished in some cases and doubtful in others.[5][17] Skeptics have also dismissed AK as "quackery", "magical thinking", and a misinterpretation of the ideomotor effect.[25][26] It has also been criticized on theoretical and empirical grounds,[25] and characterized as pseudoscience.[27] With only anecdotal accounts claiming to provide positive evidence for the efficacy of the practice, a review of peer-reviewed studies concluded that the "evidence to date does not support the use of [AK] for the diagnosis of organic disease or pre/subclinical conditions."[20]

In the US, the American Academy of Allergy, Asthma and Immunology[28] and the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases[29] have both advised that applied kinesiology should not be used in the diagnosis of allergies. The European Academy of Allergology and Clinical Immunology,[30] the National Institute for Clinical Excellence[31][32] of the UK, the Australasian Society of Clinical Immunology and Allergy[33] and the Allergy Society of South Africa[34] has also advised similarly. The World Allergy Organization does not have a formal position on applied kinesiology, but in educational materials from its Global Resources In Allergy program it lists applied kinesiology as an unproven test and describes it as useless.[35] In 1998, a small pilot study published in the International Journal of Neuroscience showed a correlation between applied kinesiology muscle testings and serum immunoglobulin levels for food allergies. 19 of 21 (90.5%) suspected food allergies diagnosed by applied kinesiology were confirmed by serum immunoglobulin tests.[36] A follow up review published in 2005 in the Current Opinion of Allergy and Clinical Immunology concluded applied kinesiology had no proven basis for diagnosis.[37]

This is an approach to chiropractic treatment in which several specific procedures may be combined. Diversified/manipulative adjusting techniques may be used with nutritional interventions, together with light massage of various points referred to as neurolymphatic and neurovascular points. Clinical decision-making is often based on testing and evaluating muscle strength.[7]

It should also be noted that despite its relatively widespread use being simple and quick clinical measure, it lacks normative data from a large cohort of healthy individuals[20][10] and conflicting opinion on the reliability of the measure.[10] As with any clinical test, the results should interpreted with caution and informed clinical decisions should be made in light of the error associated with each technique.[2] The NDT is only one component of an overall lower extremity evaluation and should be used in conjunction with other techniques.[8]

The intricacies with navicular tuberosity and sub-talar joint palpation and percent weight bearing through the lower extremity are some factors for inconsistent reliabilty. So to addresses some of these issues other versions of the test exist, such as one involving a single leg stance relaxed position, the sit-to-stand navicular drop test (SSNDT) and Dynamic navicular drop ( DND).[10]

Few studies in the hip muscles have used the CV to determine absolute reliability. In the present study, the CVs were low (SlP: 9.8%, StP: 6.6%, and SupP: 5.64%). These values are in line with that reported by Stokes et al. [49], especially for the SupP. In contrast, Widler et al.[36] reported the lowest CV values for the SlP and StP (3.67% and 4.22%, respectively) and the highest for the SupP (6.11%). Using a similar system, and evaluating only the SlP, Nadler [57] obtained a CV of 4.7%. In relation to SEM values, these were generally low, with the SupP being the best in this regard (11.73 SEM). The SDD allows the clinician to determine the value from which, after a second measurement, it can be considered as a real difference 95% of the time and not a difference attributable to the measurement error. These values are not described in the literature for the 3 positions and forms of normalization with the FED HHe. The SDD depends on the SEM for its calculation, therefore it behaved following a similar pattern. Since the present research is a reliability study, it is expected that the differences among the values obtained between the test and the retest will be lower than the SDD value, which is true for all the positions and ways of delivering the results. 2b1af7f3a8