Mechanical Percussion Devices: A Survey of Practice Patterns Among Healthcare Professionals

# Background Mechanical percussion devices have become popular among sports medicine professionals. These devices provide a similar effect as manual percussion or tapotement used in therapeutic massage. To date, there are few published studies or evidence-based guidelines for these devices. There...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales:	Scott W Cheatham, Russell T Baker, David G Behm, Kyle Stull, Morey J Kolber
Formato:	article
Lenguaje:	EN
Publicado:	North American Sports Medicine Institute 2021
Materias:	Sports medicine RC1200-1245
Acceso en línea:	https://doaj.org/article/e02a47e16de54c8f85a6f22cc28baf8c
Etiquetas:	Agregar Etiqueta Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!

id	oai:doaj.org-article:e02a47e16de54c8f85a6f22cc28baf8c
record_format	dspace
spelling	oai:doaj.org-article:e02a47e16de54c8f85a6f22cc28baf8c2021-12-02T17:11:30ZMechanical Percussion Devices: A Survey of Practice Patterns Among Healthcare Professionals10.26603/001c.235302159-2896https://doaj.org/article/e02a47e16de54c8f85a6f22cc28baf8c2021-06-01T00:00:00Zhttps://ijspt.scholasticahq.com/article/23530-mechanical-percussion-devices-a-survey-of-practice-patterns-among-healthcare-professionals.pdfhttps://doaj.org/toc/2159-2896# Background Mechanical percussion devices have become popular among sports medicine professionals. These devices provide a similar effect as manual percussion or tapotement used in therapeutic massage. To date, there are few published studies or evidence-based guidelines for these devices. There is a need to understand what professionals believe about this technology and how they use these devices in clinical practice. # Purpose To survey and document the knowledge, clinical application methods, and use of mechanical percussion devices among healthcare professionals in the United States. # Design Cross-sectional survey study. # Methods A 25 question online survey was emailed to members of the National Athletic Trainers Association, Academy of Orthopedic Physical Therapy, and American Academy of Sports Physical Therapy. # Results Four hundred twenty-five professionals completed the survey. Most professionals (92%, n=391) used devices from two manufacturers: Hyperice® and Theragun®. Seventy-seven percent directed clients to manufacturer and generic websites (n=329) to purchase devices. Most respondents used a medium and low device speed setting for pre- and post-exercise (62%, n=185), pain modulation (59%, n=253), and myofascial mobility (52%, n=222). A large proportion of respondents preferred a total treatment time between 30 seconds and three minutes (36-48%, n=153-204) or three to five minutes (18-22%, n=76-93). Most respondents (54-69%, n=229-293) believed that mechanical percussion increases local blood flow, modulates pain, enhances myofascial mobility, and reduces myofascial restrictions. Most respondents (72%, n=305) were influenced by other colleagues to use these devices. Sixty-six percent used patient reported outcomes (n=280) to document treatment efficacy. Live instruction was the most common mode of education (79%, n=334). # Conclusion These results are a starting point for future research and provide insight into how professionals use mechanical percussion devices. This survey also highlights the existing gap between research and practice. Future research should examine the efficacy of this technology and determine consensus-based guidelines. # Level of Evidence 3Scott W CheathamRussell T BakerDavid G BehmKyle StullMorey J KolberNorth American Sports Medicine InstitutearticleSports medicineRC1200-1245ENInternational Journal of Sports Physical Therapy, Vol 16, Iss 3 (2021)
institution	DOAJ
collection	DOAJ
language	EN
topic	Sports medicine RC1200-1245
spellingShingle	Sports medicine RC1200-1245 Scott W Cheatham Russell T Baker David G Behm Kyle Stull Morey J Kolber Mechanical Percussion Devices: A Survey of Practice Patterns Among Healthcare Professionals
description	# Background Mechanical percussion devices have become popular among sports medicine professionals. These devices provide a similar effect as manual percussion or tapotement used in therapeutic massage. To date, there are few published studies or evidence-based guidelines for these devices. There is a need to understand what professionals believe about this technology and how they use these devices in clinical practice. # Purpose To survey and document the knowledge, clinical application methods, and use of mechanical percussion devices among healthcare professionals in the United States. # Design Cross-sectional survey study. # Methods A 25 question online survey was emailed to members of the National Athletic Trainers Association, Academy of Orthopedic Physical Therapy, and American Academy of Sports Physical Therapy. # Results Four hundred twenty-five professionals completed the survey. Most professionals (92%, n=391) used devices from two manufacturers: Hyperice® and Theragun®. Seventy-seven percent directed clients to manufacturer and generic websites (n=329) to purchase devices. Most respondents used a medium and low device speed setting for pre- and post-exercise (62%, n=185), pain modulation (59%, n=253), and myofascial mobility (52%, n=222). A large proportion of respondents preferred a total treatment time between 30 seconds and three minutes (36-48%, n=153-204) or three to five minutes (18-22%, n=76-93). Most respondents (54-69%, n=229-293) believed that mechanical percussion increases local blood flow, modulates pain, enhances myofascial mobility, and reduces myofascial restrictions. Most respondents (72%, n=305) were influenced by other colleagues to use these devices. Sixty-six percent used patient reported outcomes (n=280) to document treatment efficacy. Live instruction was the most common mode of education (79%, n=334). # Conclusion These results are a starting point for future research and provide insight into how professionals use mechanical percussion devices. This survey also highlights the existing gap between research and practice. Future research should examine the efficacy of this technology and determine consensus-based guidelines. # Level of Evidence 3
format	article
author	Scott W Cheatham Russell T Baker David G Behm Kyle Stull Morey J Kolber
author_facet	Scott W Cheatham Russell T Baker David G Behm Kyle Stull Morey J Kolber
author_sort	Scott W Cheatham
title	Mechanical Percussion Devices: A Survey of Practice Patterns Among Healthcare Professionals
title_short	Mechanical Percussion Devices: A Survey of Practice Patterns Among Healthcare Professionals
title_full	Mechanical Percussion Devices: A Survey of Practice Patterns Among Healthcare Professionals
title_fullStr	Mechanical Percussion Devices: A Survey of Practice Patterns Among Healthcare Professionals
title_full_unstemmed	Mechanical Percussion Devices: A Survey of Practice Patterns Among Healthcare Professionals
title_sort	mechanical percussion devices: a survey of practice patterns among healthcare professionals
publisher	North American Sports Medicine Institute
publishDate	2021
url	https://doaj.org/article/e02a47e16de54c8f85a6f22cc28baf8c
work_keys_str_mv	AT scottwcheatham mechanicalpercussiondevicesasurveyofpracticepatternsamonghealthcareprofessionals AT russelltbaker mechanicalpercussiondevicesasurveyofpracticepatternsamonghealthcareprofessionals AT davidgbehm mechanicalpercussiondevicesasurveyofpracticepatternsamonghealthcareprofessionals AT kylestull mechanicalpercussiondevicesasurveyofpracticepatternsamonghealthcareprofessionals AT moreyjkolber mechanicalpercussiondevicesasurveyofpracticepatternsamonghealthcareprofessionals
_version_	1718381528787976192

Mechanical Percussion Devices: A Survey of Practice Patterns Among Healthcare Professionals

Ejemplares similares