Manipulation or Mobilisation for Neck Pain

Gross, Anita; Miller, Jordan; D’Sylva, Jonathan; Burnie, Stephen J; Goldsmith, Charles H.; Graham, Nadine; Haines, Ted; Brønfort, Gert; Hoving, Jan L.

doi:10.1002/14651858.cd004249.pub3

Cited by 109 publications

(93 citation statements)

References 109 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…5,22,33,40,42,56,57 When directly comparing cervical spine nonthrust manipulation to cervical spine thrust manipulation, similar clinical outcomes have been reported in the literature. 33,42 But cervical spine thrust manipulation techniques have been shown to result in more side effects when compared to cervical spine nonthrust manipulation, 21,36 which leaves the perceived safety of these techniques open to debate. 6,21 Consequently, because current literature has identified potential adverse reactions to cervical spine thrust manipulation and because these techniques yield clinical outcomes similar to those of nonthrust manipulation, clinicians often choose to target the thoracic spine with thrust manipulation in patients with neck pain.…”

Section: T T Conclusion: Individuals With Neck Painmentioning

confidence: 68%

Short-Term Combined Effects of Thoracic Spine Thrust Manipulation and Cervical Spine Nonthrust Manipulation in Individuals With Mechanical Neck Pain: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Masaracchio

Cleland²,

Hellman³

et al. 2013

Journal of Orthopaedic & Sports Physical Therapy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Study Design Randomized clinical trial. Objective To investigate the short-term effects of thoracic spine thrust manipulation combined with cervical spine nonthrust manipulation (experimental group) versus cervical spine nonthrust manipulation alone (comparison group) in individuals with mechanical neck pain. Background Research has demonstrated improved outcomes with both nonthrust manipulation directed at the cervical spine and thrust manipulation directed at the thoracic spine in patients with neck pain. Previous studies have not determined if thoracic spine thrust manipulation may increase benefits beyond those provided by cervical nonthrust manipulation alone. Methods Sixty-four participants with mechanical neck pain were randomized into 1 of 2 groups, an experimental or comparison group. Both groups received 2 treatment sessions of cervical spine nonthrust manipulation and a home exercise program consisting of active range-of-motion exercises, and the experimental group received additional thoracic spine thrust manipulations. Outcome measures were collected at baseline and at a 1-week follow-up, and included the numeric pain rating scale, the Neck Disability Index, and the global rating of change. Results Participants in the experimental group demonstrated significantly greater improvements (P<.001) on both the numeric pain rating scale and Neck Disability Index at the 1-week follow-up compared to those in the comparison group. In addition, 31 of 33 (94%) participants in the experimental group, compared to 11 of 31 participants (35%) in the comparison group, indicated a global rating of change score of +4 or higher at the 1-week follow-up, with an associated number needed to treat of 2. Conclusion Individuals with neck pain who received a combination of thoracic spine thrust manipulation and cervical spine nonthrust manipulation plus exercise demonstrated better overall short-term outcomes on the numeric pain rating scale, the Neck Disability Index, and the global rating of change. Level of Evidence Therapy, level 1b. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2013;43(3):118–127. Epub 7 December 2012. doi:10.2519/jospt.2013.4221

show abstract

Section: T T Conclusion: Individuals With Neck Painmentioning

confidence: 68%

Short-Term Combined Effects of Thoracic Spine Thrust Manipulation and Cervical Spine Nonthrust Manipulation in Individuals With Mechanical Neck Pain: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Masaracchio

Cleland²,

Hellman³

et al. 2013

Journal of Orthopaedic & Sports Physical Therapy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Manipulation/mobilization (Gross et al, 2015b) Electrotherapy (Kroeling et al, 2013) Physical modalities (Graham et al, 2013) Massage (Patel et al, 2012) Therapeutic exercise (Cheng et al, 2015b, Gross et al, 2015a Patient education Dry needling Kinesio taping (Parreira Pdo et al, 2014) Cognitive behavioral treatment (Monticone et al, 2015b) Current guidelines and evidence recommend the inclusion of active exercise, consisting of strengthening exercises, in the management of chronic neck pain (O'Riordan et al, 2014). …”

Section: Little To Moderate Effectmentioning

confidence: 99%

Neck motion, motor control, pain and disability: A longitudinal study of associations in neck pain patients in physiotherapy treatment

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…8,10,11 Further, we are challenged by the fact that screening studies investigating the use of Doppler ultrasound in evaluating vertebral artery blood flow have been unable to consistently demonstrate adequate reliability; [12][13][14] however, recent evidence suggests that rotational movements may have the greatest influence upon blood flow. [15][16][17][18] Despite these unknowns, there is a growing body of evidence for the effectiveness of cervical manipulation within a multimodal approach [19][20][21] and for particular subgroups of patients. 22,23 Thus when considering the risks and benefits of using cervical manipulation as a treatment, practitioners are faced with less certainty regarding the occurrence of adverse events compared to the moderate evidence for its effectiveness.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Manipulative practice in the cervical spine: a survey of IFOMPT member countries

Carlesso¹,

Rivett²

2011

Journal of Manual & Manipulative Therapy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The International Federation of Orthopaedic Manipulative Physical Therapists (IFOMPT) aims to achieve worldwide promotion of excellence and unity in clinical and academic standards for manual and musculoskeletal physical therapists. To this end, IFOMPT has sponsored several conference panel sessions and a survey of Member Organizations (MOs) and Registered Interest Groups (RIGs) regarding current cervical spine manipulation and pre-manipulative screening practice in each country. The purpose of this study was to determine common elements of cervical spine manipulative practice and premanipulative screening between countries. In late 2007, a questionnaire investigating recommended premanipulative screening protocol/guideline use, informed consent regarding risks, screening procedures, and treatment/manipulation technique was sent to all twenty MOs and five RIGs. The response rate was 88%. The main findings of the survey included: 77% of respondent organizations use pre-manipulative guidelines, with Australian guidelines the most frequently adopted internationally (36%); recommendations concerning the provision of information about the possibility of serious adverse events is not standard practice in all countries (50%); positional tests for vertebrobasilar insufficiency are used by all respondent organizations; craniovertebral ligament testing is sometimes taught as a pre-manipulative screening tool (36%); the use of upper cervical spine manipulation has declined in some countries (41%); and of the respondent organizations that continue to teach upper cervical manipulation, most (70%) minimize the rotation component. The findings of this research will inform an IFOMPT international standard for screening the cervical region prior to orthopaedic manual therapy intervention. The development of an IFOMPT endorsed document will be of assistance to manual therapy clinicians worldwide in safely managing disorders of the cervical spine.

show abstract

Manipulation or Mobilisation for Neck Pain

Cited by 109 publications

References 109 publications

Short-Term Combined Effects of Thoracic Spine Thrust Manipulation and Cervical Spine Nonthrust Manipulation in Individuals With Mechanical Neck Pain: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Short-Term Combined Effects of Thoracic Spine Thrust Manipulation and Cervical Spine Nonthrust Manipulation in Individuals With Mechanical Neck Pain: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Neck motion, motor control, pain and disability: A longitudinal study of associations in neck pain patients in physiotherapy treatment

Manipulative practice in the cervical spine: a survey of IFOMPT member countries

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About