HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text (PDF) Submit a response Alert me when this article is cited Alert me when Rapid Responses are posted Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Lee, M. Articles by Refshauge, K. Search for Related Content PubMed Articles by Lee, M. Articles by Refshauge, K. Related Collections Related Articles Social Bookmarking                      What's this?

Author Response

This excerpt was created in the absence of an abstract.

We would like to thank Stanley Paris for his comments. We appreciate the opportunity to clarify some issues and to discuss possible directions for future research in this area.

Paris has suggested that there may be some confusion between the resistance concepts of Maitland and those of Kaltenborn. The point "R1," as defined by Maitland¹ and Magarey² and used in our experiment, seems to be very closely related to Kaltenborn's "first stop," as defined by Paris. In a "physiological movement," one that the patient can perform voluntarily, there is usually a substantial amount of movement that is relatively free of resistance, followed by a region where resistance increases rapidly (for example, see Engin's article on biomechanics of the shoulder complex³ for the pattern of resistance in the glenohumeral joint)....

CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    What's this?

Related Articles

Commentary

Stanley V Paris
Physical Therapy 1990 70: 103. [Abstract] [PDF]