Sheri, the effectiveness of CM , is usually long term. That is, were an uninjured person with spinal pain and limited movements ( the majority), who has no underlying hyperirritable state caused by disease ( such as lupus, RA, etc ), will in most cases undergo a series of one to three treatments of 30 minutes duration ( the standard at my practice ) , where CM is applied to relevant joints that display protective behaviour ( see below ), then I would expect a resolution to that behaviour incrementaly over the treatment period. I would normally expect and see that the restoration of normal facet movement behaviour is associated with returns to active ROM and function also, seen immediately during and post Rx.
The more exciting prospect however lies not so much with the routine normalising of spinal movements and comfort, but in the effect this method has on irritated nerves , associated and intimate to Wikipedia reference-linkfacet joints. As a physio , you will no doubt be aware of standard protocols regarding testing for the presence of neuralgic events, somatic referred pain.
Over my twenty five years of using CM , I have come to rely on it's effect in providing a means to reveal these events, by eliminating symptoms that can be said to have been caused by nerve irritation. A common one where this is seen is in cases of so called 'Wikipedia reference-linkfrozen shoulder', otherwise known as 'Wikipedia reference-linkadhesive capsulitis '. My approach is first to establish beyond any doubt, wether nerves related to the shoulder joint are , or are not involved as cause. Invariably , by using CM to the central cervical and upper thoracic facet joints , by turning off protective behaviour there, resolution of the shoulder pain occurs. This effect is permanent, provided that it is possible to achieve resolution at the spine.
As a result of this and similar experiences with CM to other spinal segments , my first approach to any non traumatic pain and dysfunction problem, is to establish normal facet behaviour. I find this a much more reliable way off asserting cause, than any of the protocols that reamain as standard ( and are still taught to physios )
Re protective behaviour , I gather you have read my piece on the physiology of spinal pain, where this concept is detailed, however , briefly. spinal protective behaviour is the incremental powerful series of events , actuated by threat to the central spine, that incurs increases in paraspinal muscle tone, such that a nociceptive reflex nerve actuated feedback provides the means to continuously upgrade that protective behaviour. This is then reinforced by inflammatory events focal to facet joint soft issues and mediated by nerves which may incur further increases in tone , pain and dysfunction.
These events are best seen as normal non pathological intrinsic behaviours, with the capacity to prevent further forceful loading of spinal anatomy by a continuous alert mechanism . Turning off these events is the central thrust of attempts to relieve spinal pain and dysfunction, CM being an effective safe one.