Immediate changes in pressure pain sensitivity after thoracic spinal manipulative therapy in patients with subacromial impingement syndrome: A randomized controlled study

Spinal manipulation does not improve short-term pain and function in persons with painful shoulder: a systematic review with meta-analysis

PURPOSE

To investigate the benefit of spinal high-velocity low-amplitude thrust (HVLAT) in improving pain and disability in persons with painful shoulder as primary outcomes. Function, quality of life, persons (and clinicians) satisfaction, adverse events rate, and time for recovery were secondary outcomes.

METHODS

A systematic review with meta-analysis was conducted and MEDLINE, CENTRAL, Embase, and PEDro until 20 September 2023 were investigated. Two thousand eight hundred and ninety-nine records were retrieved and nine studies were included. Risk of bias of included studies was assessed through the Revised Cochrane risk-of-bias tool. The certainty of evidence of the pooled results was graded with GRADE approach.

RESULTS

The analysis included nine studies (441 persons). The pooled results showed non-significant differences between HVLAT versus sham in pain at pre-post follow-up (MD -0.13, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.60; 0.35; p = 0.61, I2 = 0%), and at <4 days follow-up (SMD 0.16, 95%CI -0.16; 0.48; p = 0.34, I2 = 23%); in function at <4 days follow-up (SMD -0.29, 95%CI -0.69; 0.11; p = 0.16, I2 = 50%). The certainty of evidence ranged from low to very low.

CONCLUSIONS

HVLAT was not more effective than sham in improving pain and function at pre-post and at <4 days follow-up. When used as an "add-on technique", HVLAT did not improve pain nor disability.

Does manual therapy meaningfully change quantitative sensory testing and patient reported outcome measures in patients with musculoskeletal impairments related to the spine?: A 'trustworthy' systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

To perform a 'trustworthy' systematic review (SR) with meta-analysis on the potential mechanisms of manual therapy used to treat spinal impairments.

DESIGN

SR with meta-analysis.

LITERATURE SEARCH

Articles published between January 2010 and October 2022 from CENTRAL, CINAHL, MEDLINE, PubMed, ProQuest, and PEDro.

METHODS

This SR included English-language randomized clinical trials (RCTs) involving manual therapy to treat spinal impairments in adults. The primary outcome was pressure pain thresholds (PPTs). To synthesize RCTs with high confidence in estimated effects using the GRADE, RCTs with questionable prospective, external, and internal validity, and high risk of bias (RoB) were excluded.

RESULTS

Following title and abstract screening, 89 full-text RCTs were reviewed. Twenty-two studies included the criteria of interest. Sixteen were not prospectively registered, two contained discussion/conclusions judged to be inconsistent with the registry, and one was rated as having a high RoB. Three studies met the inclusion criteria; heterogeneous interventions and locations for PPT testing prevented synthesis into practice recommendations. The two studies with high confidence in estimated effects had small effect sizes, and one study had confidence intervals that crossed zero for the outcome measures of interest.

DISCUSSION

Standardized PPT testing, as a potential measure of centrally mediated pain, could provide clues regarding the mechanisms of manual therapy or help identify/refine research questions.

CONCLUSION

High-quality RCTs could not be synthesized into strong conclusions secondary to the dissimilarity in research designs. Future research regarding quantitative sensory testing should develop RCTs with high confidence in estimated effects that can be translated into strong recommendations.

Is there 'trustworthy' evidence for using manual therapy to treat patients with shoulder dysfunction?: A systematic review

The primary objective of this review was to create a 'trustworthy,' living systematic review and meta-analysis for the application of manual therapy interventions in treating patients with shoulder dysfunction. Included studies were English-language randomized controlled trials published between 1/1/2010 and 8/3/2023, with searches performed in: PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), CINHAL, ProQuest Nursing & Allied Health, EBSCO Medline, and PEDro. The population of focus included adults 18 years and older with musculoskeletal impairments related to shoulder dysfunction. Our primary outcomes included pain and region-specific outcome measures. We excluded trials, including participants having shoulder dysfunction resulting from surgery, radicular pain, instability/dislocation, fracture, lymphedema, and radiation. Our screening methodology was based upon a previously published 'trustworthy' systematic review protocol. This included the application of our PICOTS criteria in addition to screening for prospective clinical trial registration and following of prospective intent, as well as assessment of PEDro scores, risk-of-bias ratings, GRADE scoring, and examination of confidence in estimated effects. Twenty-six randomized controlled trials met our PICOTS criteria; however, only 15 of these were registered. Only three were registered prospectively. Two of these did not have discussions and conclusions that aligned with their primary outcome. The remaining single study was found to have a high risk-of-bias, meaning the remainder of the protocol could not be employed and that no randomized controlled trials could undergo further assessment or meta-analysis. The results of this systematic review indicate there are no 'trustworthy' randomized controlled trials examining the effectiveness of manual therapy interventions for the treatment of patients with shoulder dysfunction, as defined by the prospectively established methodology. Therefore, these findings signal that creating a 'trustworthy,' living systematic review on this clinically relevant topic is not yet possible due to a lack of 'trustworthy' randomized controlled trials.

A systematic review of the measurement properties of the Pennsylvania Shoulder Score

BACKGROUND

Pennsylvania Shoulder Score (PSS) is a patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) that is gaining use when examining shoulder-specific outcomes. To date, a systematic review of the PSS measurement properties has not been published.

PURPOSE

To systematically locate, appraise, and synthesize the evidence concerning the measurement properties of the PSS.

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic literature review.

METHODS

A pair of raters conducted a literature search using pre-defined keywords from 5 databases (PubMed, CINAHL, SPORTdiscus, PsychINFO, Scopus) during the week of October 23, 2022. Critical appraisal of study design for psychometric articles was used to assess methodological quality and risk of bias. Measurement property data were synthesized with pooled estimates for the indices of test-retest reliability (ICC), standard error of measurement (SEM), minimal detectable change (MDC), Cronbach α (CA), effect size (ES), and standardized response means (SRM) calculated from applicable studies.

RESULTS

A total of 13 articles met the inclusion criteria for this review. Methodological quality was agreed upon between the 2 raters with a weighted kappa of 0.77, and 9/13 of the articles were rated above 70%. Test-retest reliability of the PSS total score ranged between 0.90 and 0.94, and construct validity was high when compared to other shoulder-specific PROMs (0.75 < r > 0.96). Responsiveness of the PSS was large across all studies with few PSS subscales dropping to moderate. Pooled MDC90 of the total PSS was 12.13 points, and the pooled ES of the total PSS was 0.85.

CONCLUSIONS

The scope of this review demonstrates positive measurement properties of the PSS as a reliable, valid, and responsive measurement of shoulder-specific PROM. However, there are few studies examining the measurement properties of the PSS and more research is needed to assess cross-cultural appropriateness and factor analysis of the questions contained in the PSS.

Manual Therapy Effect in Placebo-Controlled Trials: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

PURPOSE

Background: Evaluate whether the design of placebo control groups could produce different interpretations of the efficacy of manual therapy techniques.

METHODS

Nine databases were searched (EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, MEDLINE, PubMed, SCOPUS, WEB of SCIENCE, COCHRANE, and PEDro). Randomized placebo-controlled clinical trials that used manual therapy as a sham treatment on subjects suffering from pain were included. Data were summarized qualitatively, and meta-analyses were conducted with R.

RESULTS

53 articles were included in the qualitative analysis and 48 were included in the quantitative analyses. Manipulation techniques did not show higher effectiveness when compared with all types of sham groups that were analyzed (SMD 0.28; 95%CI [-0.24; 0.80]) (SMD 0.28; 95%CI [-0.08; 0.64]) (SMD 0.42; 95%CI [0.16; 0.67]) (SMD 0.82; 95%CI [-0.57; 2.21]), raising doubts on their therapeutic effect. Factors such as expectations of treatment were not consistently evaluated, and analysis could help clarify the effect of different sham groups. As for soft tissue techniques, the results are stronger in favor of these techniques when compared to sham control groups (SMD 0.40; 95%CI [0.19, 0.61]). Regarding mobilization techniques and neural gliding techniques, not enough studies were found for conclusions to be made.

CONCLUSIONS

The literature presents a lack of a unified placebo control group design for each technique and an absence of assessment of expectations. These two issues might account for the unclear results obtained in the analysis.

Thoracic manual therapy improves pain and disability in individuals with shoulder impingement syndrome compared to placebo: a randomised controlled trial with one year follow-up

OBJECTIVE

To investigate if muscle energy technique (MET) to the thoracic spine decreases the pain and disability associated with shoulder impingement syndrome (SIS).

DESIGN

Single centre, three-arm, randomised controlled trial, single-blind, placebo control with concealed allocation and a 12-month follow-up.

SETTING

Private osteopathic practice.

INTERVENTIONS

Participants were randomly allocated to: MET to the thoracic spine (MET-only), MET plus soft tissue massage (MET&STM) or placebo.

PARTICIPANTS

3 groups of 25 (n=75) participants ≥ 40 years with SIS received allocated intervention once a week for 15 minutes, 4 consecutive weeks.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Primary outcome measure: Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) questionnaire.

SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES

Shoulder Pain and Disability Index (SPADI) questionnaire, visual analogue scale (VAS-mm/100) -current, 7-day average, 4-week average, patient specific functional scale (PSFS) and global rating of change (GROC). Measures recorded at baseline, discharge, 4-weeks follow-up, 6-months and 12-months. Also baseline and discharge thoracic posture and range of motion (ROM) measured using an inclinometer.

STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

Mixed effects linear regression model for DASH, SPADI, VAS, PSFS, GROC and thoracic posture and ROM.

RESULTS

MET-only group demonstrated significantly greater improvement in pain and disability (DASH, SPADI, VAS 7-day average) compared to placebo at discharge (mean difference DASH=-8.4; 95% CI -14.0,-2.8; SPADI=-14.7;-23.0,-6.3; VAS=-15.5;-24.5,-6.5), 6 -months (-11.1;-18.6,-3.7; -14.9;-26.3,-3.5; -14.1;-26.0,-2.2) and 12 -months (-13.4;-23.9,-2.9; -19.0;-32.4,-5.7; -17.3;-30.9,-3.8). MET&STM group also demonstrated greater improvement in disability, but not pain compared to placebo at discharge (DASH=-8.2;-14.0,-2.3; SPADI= -13.5;-22.3,-4.8) and 6 months (-9.0;-16.9,-1.2; -12.4;-24.3,-0.5). For the PSFS, MET-only improved compared to placebo at discharge (1.3;0.1,2.5) and 12 months (1.8;0.5,3.2); MET&STM at 12 months (1.7;0.3,3.0). GROC: MET-only improved compared to placebo at discharge (1.5;0.9,2.2) and 4 weeks (1.0;0.1,1.9); MET&STM at discharge (1.2;0.5,1.9) and 6 months (1.2;0.1,1.3). There were no differences between MET-only and MET&STM, and no between-group differences in thoracic posture or ROM.

CONCLUSION

MET of the thoracic spine with or without STM improved the pain and disability in individuals over 40 with SIS and may be recommended as a treatment approach for SIS.

Effectiveness of cervicothoracic and thoracic manual physical therapy in managing upper quarter disorders - a systematic review

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic review.

BACKGROUND

Physical therapists often use cervicothoracic and thoracic manual techniques to treat musculoskeletal disorders of the upper quarter ,however, the overall effectiveness of this approach remains to be elucidated.

OBJECTIVE

This systematic review explored studies that examined the short- and long-term effectiveness of manual physical therapy directed at the cervicothoracic and thoracic region in the management of upper quarter musculoskeletal conditions.

METHODS

The electronic databases MEDLINE, AMED, CINAHL, and Embase were searched from their inception through 30 October 2020. Eligible clinical trials included those where human subjects treated with cervicothoracic and/or thoracic manual procedures were compared with a control group or other interventions. The methodological quality of individual studies was assessed using the PEDro scale.

RESULTS

The initial search returned 950 individual articles. After the screening of titles and abstracts, full texts were reviewed by two authors, with 14 articles determined to be eligible for inclusion. PEDro scores ranged from 66 to 10 (out of a maximum score of 10). In the immediate to 52-week follow-up period, studies provided limited evidence that cervicothoracic and thoracic manual physical therapy may reduce pain and improve function when compared to control/sham or other treatments.

CONCLUSIONS

Evidence provides some support for the short-termeffectiveness of cervicothoracic and thoracic manual physical therapy in reducing pain and improving function in people experiencing upper quarter musculoskeletal disorders. Evidence is lacking for long-term effectiveness as only two studies explored outcomes beyond 26 weeks and this was for patient-perceived improvement.

PROSPERO ID

CRD42020219456.

Evidence for increased neuromuscular drive following spinal manipulation in individuals with subacromial pain syndrome

BACKGROUND

Thoracic spinal manipulation can improve pain and function in individuals with shoulder pain; however, the mechanisms underlying these benefits remain unclear. Here, we evaluated the effects of thoracic spinal manipulation on muscle activity, as alteration in muscle activity is a key impairment for those with shoulder pain. We also evaluated the relationship between changes in muscle activity and clinical outcomes, to characterize the meaningful context of a change in neuromuscular drive.

METHODS

Participants with shoulder pain related to subacromial pain syndrome (n = 28) received thoracic manipulation of low amplitude high velocity thrusts to the lower, middle and upper thoracic spine. Electromyographic muscle activity (trapezius-upper, middle, lower; serratus anterior; deltoid; infraspinatus) and shoulder pain (11-point scale) was collected pre and post-manipulation during arm elevation, and normalized to a reference contraction. Clinical benefits were assessed using the Pennsylvania Shoulder Score (Penn) at baseline and 2-3 days post-intervention.

FINDINGS

A significant increase in muscle activity was observed during arm ascent (p = 0.002). Using backward stepwise regression analysis, a specific increase in the serratus anterior muscle activity during arm elevation explained improved Penn scores following post-manipulation (p < 0.05).

INTERPRETATION

Thoracic spinal manipulation immediately increases neuromuscular drive. In addition, increased serratus anterior muscle activity, a key muscle for scapular motion, is associated with short-term improvements in shoulder clinical outcomes.

The Modulatory Effect of QST in Shoulder Pain: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

The underlying mechanisms for shoulder pain (SP) are still widely unknown. Previous reviews report signs of altered pain processing in SP measured using quantitative sensory testing (QST). Evidence suggests that QST might hold predictive value for SP after intervention, yet it is not known whether QST profiles can be modulated in response to different treatments. Therefore, this systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to assess if QST-parameters can be modified by interventions for patients with SP.

METHODS

Three databases were searched to identify eligible studies. Eligible studies had a prospective design, with at least one QST variable as an outcome in conjunction with an intervention measured before and after intervention. Studies that involved SP caused by spinal or brain injury and studies looking at combined chronic neck/shoulder pain were excluded.

RESULTS

19 studies investigating SP were eligible for inclusion for this review. Pressure pain threshold (PPT) was the most frequently used QST-parameter investigating local and widespread hyperalgesia. A meta-analysis was performed with data from 10 studies with a total of 16 interventions. Results demonstrated an overall acute effect (<24 hours after intervention) of interventions in favour of local decreased pain sensitivity and of remote decreased pain sensitivity comparing PPTs before and after interventions.

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrates that interventions such as exercise and manual therapy can modulate PPTs acutely both locally and remotely in patients with shoulder pain. Further research investigating the acute and long-term modulatory ability of these interventions on other QST-parameters is needed in patients with shoulder pain.

Changes in pressure pain threshold and temporal summation in rapid responders and non-rapid responders after lumbar spinal manipulation and sham: A secondary analysis in adults with low back pain

BACKGROUND

People with LBP who experience rapid improvement in symptoms after spinal manipulative therapy (SMT) are more likely to experience better longer-term outcomes compared to those who don't improve rapidly. It is unknown if short-term hypoalgesia after SMT could be a relevant finding in rapid responders.

OBJECTIVES

We aimed to explore whether rapid responders had different short-term pressure pain threshold (PPT) and temporal summation (TS) outcomes after SMT and sham compared to non-rapid responders.

METHODS

This was a planned secondary analysis of a randomised controlled trial that recruited 80 adults with LBP (42 females, mean age 37 yrs). PPT at the calf, lumbar spine, and shoulder and TS at the hands and feet were measured before and three times over 30 min after a lumbar SMT or sham manipulation. Participants were classified as rapid responders or non-rapid responders based on self-reported change in LBP over the following 24 h.

RESULTS

Shoulder PPT transiently increased more in the rapid responders than non-rapid responders immediately post-intervention only (between-group difference in change from baseline = 0.29 kg/cm², 95% CI 0.02-0.56, p = .0497). There were no differences in calf PPT, lumbar PPT, hand TS, or foot TS based on responder status.

CONCLUSIONS

Hypoalgesia in shoulder PPT occurred transiently in the rapid responders compared to the non-rapid responders. This may or may not contribute to symptomatic improvement after SMT or sham in adults with LBP, and may be a spurious finding. Short-term changes in TS do not appear to be related to changes in LBP.

The effect of manual therapy to the thoracic spine on pain-free grip and sympathetic activity in patients with lateral epicondylalgia humeri. A randomized, sample sized planned, placebo-controlled, patient-blinded monocentric trial

Background

The treatment of first choice for lateral epicondylalgia humeri is conservative therapy. Recent findings indicate that spinal manual therapy is effective in the treatment of lateral epicondylalgia. We hypothesized that thoracic spinal mobilization in patients with epicondylalgia would have a positive short–term effect on pain and sympathetic activity.

Methods

Thirty patients (all analyzed) with clinically diagnosed (physical examination) lateral epicondylalgia were enrolled in this randomized, sample size planned, placebo-controlled, patient-blinded, monocentric trial. Pain-free grip, skin conductance and peripheral skin temperature were measured before and after the intervention. The treatment group (15 patients) received a one-time 2-min T5 costovertebral mobilization (2 Hz), and the placebo group (15 patients) received a 2-min one-time sham ultrasound therapy.

Results

Mobilization at the thoracic spine resulted in significantly increased strength of pain-free grip + 4.6 kg ± 6.10 (p = 0.008) and skin conductance + 0.76 μS ± 0.73 (p = 0.000004) as well as a decrease in peripheral skin temperature by − 0.80 °C ± 0.35 (p < 0.0000001) within the treatment group.

Conclusion

A thoracic costovertebral T5 mobilization at a frequency of 2 Hz shows an immediate positive effect on pain-free grip and sympathetic activity in patients with lateral epicondylalgia.

Clinical trial registration

German clinical trial register DRKS00013964, retrospectively registered on 2.2.2018.

Screening of the cervical spine in subacromial shoulder pain: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Subacromial shoulder pain is a common clinical presentation with much diagnostic uncertainty. Some of this uncertainty relates to the involvement of the cervical spine as a source or contribution to subacromial shoulder pain. Currently, there is no accepted method of screening of the cervical spine in the presence of subacromial shoulder pain, which risks patients receiving misguided and/or ineffective interventions.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate approaches used to screen the cervical spine in patients with subacromial shoulder pain.

DESIGN

Systematic review of randomized controlled trials.

METHODS

Electronic searches of PEDro and MEDLINE to December 2016 were conducted. Randomized controlled trials evaluating the effectiveness of interventions within the current scope of physiotherapy comprising of adult patients complaining of subacromial shoulder pain were included. Data relating to the method of cervical spine screening were extracted and synthesized categorically.

RESULTS

One hundred and two studies were included. Twenty-six (25.5%) were categorized as "No method of screening undertaken or reported," 49 (48.0%) were categorized as "Localized cervical spine symptoms and/or radiculopathy/radicular pain," nine (8.8%) were categorized as "Cervical examination," two (2.0%) were categorized as "Manual testing," two (2.0%) were categorized as "History of cervical surgery," and 14 (13.7%) were categorized as using "Combined approaches."

CONCLUSION

Examination of the cervical spine in patients with subacromial shoulder pain is variable in randomized controlled trials. In many instances, no or minimal attempts to screen were undertaken or reported. This has potential research and management implications and further research is indicated to facilitate development of this aspect of examination.

A cluster randomised, double-blind pilot and feasibility trial of an active behavioural physiotherapy intervention for acute whiplash-associated disorder (WAD)II

Whiplash-associated disorder (WAD) causes substantial social and economic burden, with ≥70% patients classified as WADII (neck complaint and musculoskeletal sign(s)). Effective management in the acute stage is required to prevent development of chronicity; an issue for 60% of patients. An Active Behavioural Physiotherapy Intervention (ABPI) was developed to address both physical and psychological components of WAD. The ABPI is a novel complex intervention designed through a rigorous sequential multiphase project to prevent transition of acute WAD to chronicity. An external pilot and feasibility cluster randomised double-blind (assessor, participants) parallel two-arm clinical trial was conducted in the UK private sector. The trial compared ABPI versus standard physiotherapy to evaluate trial procedures and feasibility of the ABPI for managing acute WADII in preparation for a future definitive trial. Six private physiotherapy clinics were recruited and cluster randomised using a computer-generated randomisation sequence. Twenty-eight (20 ABPI, 8 standard physiotherapy) participants [median age 38.00 (IQR = 21.50) years] were recruited. Data were analysed descriptively with a priori establishment of success criteria. Ninety-five percent of participants in the ABPI arm fully recovered (Neck Disability Index ≤4, compared to 17% in the standard physiotherapy arm); required fewer treatment sessions; and demonstrated greater improvement in all outcome measures (pain intensity, Cervical Range of Motion, Pressure Pain Threshold, EuroQol-5 Dimensions) except for the Impact of Events Scale and Fear Avoidance Beliefs Questionnaire. The findings support the potential value of the ABPI, and that an adequately powered definitive trial to evaluate effectiveness (clinical, cost) is feasible with minor modifications to procedures.

Effect of spinal manipulative therapy on mechanical pain sensitivity in patients with chronic nonspecific low back pain: a pilot randomized, controlled trial

Objectives: The long-term goal of our study is to improve the understanding of the biological mechanisms associated with spinal manipulative therapy (SMT) in low back pain.Methods: This project involved a pilot randomized, blinded clinical trial (ClinicalTrials.gov registration number NCT03078114) of 3-week SMT in chronic nonspecific low back pain (CNSLBP) patients. We recruited 29 participants and randomly assigned them into either a SMT (n = 14) or sham SMT (n = 15) group. Pre- and postintervention, we quantified the effect of SMT on clinical outcomes (Numeric Pain Rating Scale and Oswestry Disability Index) and pressure pain threshold (PPT) at local (lumbar spine), regional (lower extremity), and remote (upper extremity) anatomical sites.Results: We observed a significant main effect for time signifying reduced hypersensitivity (increased PPT) at local (p = .015) and regional (p = .014) locations at 3 weeks. Furthermore, we found significant main effects of time indicating improvements in pain (p < .001) and disability (p = .02) from baseline among all participants regardless of intervention. However, no between-group differences were observed in PPT, clinical pain, or disability between the SMT and sham SMT groups over 3 weeks.Conclusions: After 3 weeks of SMT or sham SMT in CNSLBP patients, we found hypoalgesia at local and remote sites along with improved pain and low back-related disability.Level of Evidence: 1b.

Immediate Effects of Spinal Manipulation on Shoulder Motion Range and Pain in Individuals With Shoulder Pain: A Randomized Trial

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to investigate the influence of thoracic spinal manipulation (SM) on shoulder pain and ranges of motion in individuals with shoulder pain.

METHODS

The sample was composed of 60 individuals, randomly allocated into the manipulation group (n = 30), who received the SM, and the placebo group (n = 30) who received a placebo manipulation. Pain evaluation was performed using the visual analog scale, and evaluation of shoulder flexion and abduction ranges of motion was assessed using a goniometer pre- and post-intervention. The intervention was performed by either upper thoracic SM or a placebo manipulation.

RESULTS

The manipulation group demonstrated increased flexion and abduction of the painful shoulder (P < .01) and increased abduction of the nonpainful shoulder (P = .03), but only the abduction of the painful shoulder reached the minimal detectable change. The placebo group showed a post-intervention increase in the flexion (P = .03) and abduction (P < .01) movement of the painful shoulder. Both groups presented a statistically significant reduction in post-intervention pain (P < .01), but not clinically significant.

CONCLUSION

Although the SM demonstrated a statistically significant difference for shoulder pain, this was not over the clinically meaningful change. Only the abduction of the painful shoulder reached the minimal detectable change.

Manipulation-induced hypoalgesia in musculoskeletal pain populations: a systematic critical review and meta-analysis

Background

Manipulation-induced hypoalgesia (MIH) represents reduced pain sensitivity following joint manipulation, and has been documented in various populations. It is unknown, however, whether MIH following high-velocity low-amplitude spinal manipulative therapy is a specific and clinically relevant treatment effect.

Methods

This systematic critical review with meta-analysis investigated changes in quantitative sensory testing measures following high-velocity low-amplitude spinal manipulative therapy in musculoskeletal pain populations, in randomised controlled trials. Our objectives were to compare changes in quantitative sensory testing outcomes after spinal manipulative therapy vs. sham, control and active interventions, to estimate the magnitude of change over time, and to determine whether changes are systemic or not.

Results

Fifteen studies were included. Thirteen measured pressure pain threshold, and four of these were sham-controlled. Change in pressure pain threshold after spinal manipulative therapy compared to sham revealed no significant difference. Pressure pain threshold increased significantly over time after spinal manipulative therapy (0.32 kg/cm², CI 0.22–0.42), which occurred systemically. There were too few studies comparing to other interventions or for other types of quantitative sensory testing to make robust conclusions about these.

Conclusions

We found that systemic MIH (for pressure pain threshold) does occur in musculoskeletal pain populations, though there was low quality evidence of no significant difference compared to sham manipulation. Future research should focus on the clinical relevance of MIH, and different types of quantitative sensory tests.

Trial registration

Prospectively registered with PROSPERO (registration CRD42016041963).

Immediate Effects of Thoracic Spine Manipulation Upon Shoulder Functionality in Patients With Sutured Rotator Cuff Repair: A Prospective Study

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the immediate effect of thoracic spine manipulation upon active flexion and abduction mobility of the shoulder, spine temperature, and the size of the subacromial space as measured by ultrasound in 3 positions (internal, neutral, and external rotation) of the glenohumeral joint in patients who have undergone surgery because of subacromial impingement.

METHODS

Quasi-experimental, prospective, short-term effect study with consecutively sampled participants. Thirty-two patients had undergone subacromial decompression together with supraspinatus tendon suture. The following variables were studied: age, sex, dominant shoulder, presurgery evolution time, working status, surface temperature of dorsal segment with limited mobility, premanipulation functional assessment using the Spanish version of the Upper Limb Functional Index Scale, goniometric range of motion measurement at glenohumeral joint before and after manipulation, and ultrasound measurement of subacromial space before and after manipulation.

RESULTS

Significant differences and small effect size were found in measurements for flexion and abduction movements after thoracic spine manipulation (P > .001; ES > 0.2) and subacromial space measurements in neutral rotation and external rotation (P > .001), but without clinical relevance effect size (<0.2).

CONCLUSIONS

Active shoulder flexion and abduction mobility increase after manipulation of thoracic spine in patients who have undergone surgery for rotator cuff suture. Subacromial space increases significantly with shoulder in neutral and external rotation position after manipulation. No differences were found regarding surface temperature of manipulated area.

Thoracic manual therapy is not more effective than placebo thoracic manual therapy in patients with shoulder dysfunctions: A systematic review with meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Manual treatments targeting different regions (shoulder, cervical spine, thoracic spine, ribs) have been studied to deal with patients complaining of shoulder pain. Thoracic manual treatments seem able to produce beneficial effects on this group of patients. However, it is not clear whether the patient improvement is a consequence of thoracic manual therapy or a placebo effect.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the efficacy of thoracic manual therapy and placebo thoracic manual treatment for patients with shoulder dysfunction.

METHODS

Electronic databases (MEDLINE, CENTRAL, PEDro, CINAHL, WoS, EMBASE, ERIC) were searched through November 2016. Randomized Controlled Trials assessing pain, mobility and function were selected. The Cochrane bias estimation tool was applied. Outcome results were either extracted or computed from raw data. Meta-analysis was performed for outcomes with low heterogeneity.

RESULTS

Four studies were included in the review. The methodology of the included studies was generally good except for one study that was rated as high risk of bias. Meta-analysis showed no significant effect for "pain at present" (SMD -0.02; 95% CI: -0.35, 0.32) and "pain during movement" (SMD -0.12; 95% CI: -0.45, 0.21).

CONCLUSION

There is very low to low quality of evidence that a single session of thoracic manual therapy is not more effective than a single session of placebo thoracic manual therapy in patients with shoulder dysfunction at immediate post-treatment.

Immediate effects of cervical unilateral anterior-posterior mobilisation on shoulder pain and impairment in post-operative arthroscopy patients

BACKGROUND

Lateral gliding cervical spine mobilisation is shown to improve shoulder pain, disability and function. However, despite common clinical-use, no study reports the effect of unilateral anterior-posterior (A-P) cervical mobilisation on shoulder pain and function, and particularly in patients after arthroscopic shoulder surgery.

OBJECTIVE

Examine the immediate effect of single-level Grade III cervical unilateral A-P mobilisation on shoulder pain, flexion and abduction range of motion (ROM) and external rotator strength compared to placebo cervical unilateral A-P light touch pressure.

METHODS

Single session intervention with a crossover design in 32 (15 women) postoperative arthroscopic shoulder patients.

RESULTS

Immediate and superior treatment effects were shown for A-P cervical mobilisation in improving flexion ROM, isometric strength of external rotation, and pain intensity during flexion (all p< 0.05) when compared to the placebo. However, effects may not be considered clinically meaningful.

CONCLUSION

Unilateral A-P mobilisation applied to the cervical spine shows a tendency toward positively influencing post-arthroscopy shoulder pain and function. Further study examining cervical mobilisations directed in different planes to influence shoulder motion appear warranted.

A systematic review of thrust manipulation for non-surgical shoulder conditions

Purpose

Although many conservative management options are available for patients with non-surgical shoulder conditions, there is little evidence of their effectiveness. This review investigated one manual therapy approach, thrust manipulation, as a treatment option.

Methods

A systematic search was conducted of the electronic databases from inception to March 2016: PubMed, PEDro, ICL, CINAHL, and AMED. Two independent reviewers conducted the screening process to determine article eligibility. Inclusion criteria were manuscripts published in peer-reviewed journals with human participants of any age. The intervention included was thrust, or high-velocity low-amplitude, manipulative therapy directed to the shoulder and/or the regions of the cervical or thoracic spine. Studies investigating secondary shoulder pain or lacking diagnostic confirmation procedures were excluded. Methodological quality was assessed using the PEDro scale and the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool.

Results

The initial search rendered 5041 articles. After screening titles and abstracts, 36 articles remained for full-text review. Six articles studying subacromial impingement syndrome met inclusion criteria. Four studies were randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and 2 were uncontrolled clinical studies. Five studies included 1 application of a thoracic spine thrust manipulation and 1 applied 8 treatments incorporating a shoulder joint thrust manipulation. Statistically significant improvements in pain scores were reported in all studies. Three of 4 RCTs compared a thrust manipulation to a sham, and statistical significance in pain reduction was found within the groups but not between them. Clinically meaningful changes in pain were inconsistent; 3 studies reported that scores met minimum clinically important difference, 1 reported scores did not, and 2 were unclear. Four studies found statistically significant improvements in disability; however, 2 were RCTs and did not find statistical significance between the active and sham groups.

Conclusions

No clinical trials of thrust manipulation for non-surgical shoulder conditions other than subacromial impingement syndrome were found. There is limited evidence to support or refute thrust manipulation as a solitary treatment for this condition. Studies consistently reported pain reduction, but active treatments were comparable to shams. High-quality studies of thrust manipulation with safety data, longer treatment periods and follow-up outcomes are needed.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12998-016-0133-8) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Pressure and cold pain threshold reference values in a large, young adult, pain-free population

Background and aims

Currently there is a lack of large population studies that have investigated pain sensitivity distributions in healthy pain free people. The aims of this study were: (1) to provide sex-specific reference values of pressure and cold pain thresholds in young pain-free adults; (2) to examine the association of potential correlates of pain sensitivity with pain threshold values.

Methods

This study investigated sex specific pressure and cold pain threshold estimates for young pain free adults aged 21–24 years. A cross-sectional design was utilised using participants (n =617) from the Western Australian Pregnancy Cohort (Raine) Study at the 22-year follow-up. The association of site, sex, height, weight, smoking, health related quality oflife, psychological measures and activity with pain threshold values was examined. Pressure pain threshold (lumbar spine, tibialis anterior, neck and dorsal wrist) and cold pain threshold (dorsal wrist) were assessed using standardised quantitative sensory testing protocols.

Results

Reference values for pressure pain threshold (four body sites) stratified by sex and site, and cold pain threshold (dorsal wrist) stratified by sex are provided. Statistically significant, independent correlates of increased pressure pain sensitivity measures were site (neck, dorsal wrist), sex (female), higher waist-hip ratio and poorer mental health. Statistically significant, independent correlates of increased cold pain sensitivity measures were, sex (female), poorer mental health and smoking.

Conclusions

These data provide the most comprehensive and robust sex specific reference values for pressure pain threshold specific to four body sites and cold pain threshold at the dorsal wrist for young adults aged 21–24 years. Establishing normative values in this young age group is important given that the transition from adolescence to adulthood is a critical temporal period during which trajectories for persistent pain can be established.

Implications

These data will provide an important research resource to enable more accurate profiling and interpretation of pain sensitivity in clinical pain disorders in young adults. The robust and comprehensive data can assist interpretation of future clinical pain studies and provide further insight into the complex associations of pain sensitivity that can be used in future research.

Acute Whiplash Injury Study (AWIS): a protocol for a cluster randomised pilot and feasibility trial of an Active Behavioural Physiotherapy Intervention in an insurance private setting

INTRODUCTION

Whiplash-associated disorder (WAD) causes substantial social and economic burden internationally. Up to 60% of patients with WAD progress to chronicity. Research therefore needs to focus on effective management in the acute stage to prevent the development of chronicity. Approximately 93% of patients are classified as WADII (neck complaint and musculoskeletal sign(s)), and in the UK, most are managed in the private sector. In our recent systematic review, a combination of active and behavioural physiotherapy was identified as potentially effective in the acute stage. An Active Behavioural Physiotherapy Intervention (ABPI) was developed through combining empirical (modified Delphi study) and theoretical (social cognitive theory focusing on self-efficacy) evidence. This pilot and feasibility trial has been designed to inform the design of an adequately powered definitive randomised controlled trial.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

Two parallel phases. (1) An external pilot and feasibility cluster randomised double-blind (assessor and participants), parallel two-arm (ABPI vs standard physiotherapy) clinical trial to evaluate procedures and feasibility. Six UK private physiotherapy clinics will be recruited and cluster randomised by a computer-generated randomisation sequence. Sixty participants (30 each arm) will be assessed at recruitment (baseline) and at 3 months postbaseline. The planned primary outcome measure is the neck disability index. (2) An embedded exploratory qualitative study using semistructured indepth interviews (n=3-4 physiotherapists) and a focus group (n=6-8 patients) and entailing the recruitment of purposive samples will explore perceptions of the ABPI. Quantitative data will be analysed descriptively. Qualitative data will be coded and analysed deductively (identify themes) and inductively (identify additional themes).

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This trial is approved by the University of Birmingham Ethics Committee (ERN_15-0542).

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ISRCTN84528320.

Manual therapy and exercise for rotator cuff disease

BACKGROUND

Management of rotator cuff disease often includes manual therapy and exercise, usually delivered together as components of a physical therapy intervention. This review is one of a series of reviews that form an update of the Cochrane review, 'Physiotherapy interventions for shoulder pain'.

OBJECTIVES

To synthesise available evidence regarding the benefits and harms of manual therapy and exercise, alone or in combination, for the treatment of people with rotator cuff disease.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2015, Issue 3), Ovid MEDLINE (January 1966 to March 2015), Ovid EMBASE (January 1980 to March 2015), CINAHL Plus (EBSCO, January 1937 to March 2015), ClinicalTrials.gov and the WHO ICTRP clinical trials registries up to March 2015, unrestricted by language, and reviewed the reference lists of review articles and retrieved trials, to identify potentially relevant trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised and quasi-randomised trials, including adults with rotator cuff disease, and comparing any manual therapy or exercise intervention with placebo, no intervention, a different type of manual therapy or exercise or any other intervention (e.g. glucocorticoid injection). Interventions included mobilisation, manipulation and supervised or home exercises. Trials investigating the primary or add-on effect of manual therapy and exercise were the main comparisons of interest. Main outcomes of interest were overall pain, function, pain on motion, patient-reported global assessment of treatment success, quality of life and the number of participants experiencing adverse events.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently selected trials for inclusion, extracted the data, performed a risk of bias assessment and assessed the quality of the body of evidence for the main outcomes using the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 60 trials (3620 participants), although only 10 addressed the main comparisons of interest. Overall risk of bias was low in three, unclear in 14 and high in 43 trials. We were unable to perform any meta-analyses because of clinical heterogeneity or incomplete outcome reporting. One trial compared manual therapy and exercise with placebo (inactive ultrasound therapy) in 120 participants with chronic rotator cuff disease (high quality evidence). At 22 weeks, the mean change in overall pain with placebo was 17.3 points on a 100-point scale, and 24.8 points with manual therapy and exercise (adjusted mean difference (MD) 6.8 points, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.70 to 14.30 points; absolute risk difference 7%, 1% fewer to 14% more). Mean change in function with placebo was 15.6 points on a 100-point scale, and 22.4 points with manual therapy and exercise (adjusted MD 7.1 points, 95% CI 0.30 to 13.90 points; absolute risk difference 7%, 1% to 14% more). Fifty-seven per cent (31/54) of participants reported treatment success with manual therapy and exercise compared with 41% (24/58) of participants receiving placebo (risk ratio (RR) 1.39, 95% CI 0.94 to 2.03; absolute risk difference 16% (2% fewer to 34% more). Thirty-one per cent (17/55) of participants reported adverse events with manual therapy and exercise compared with 8% (5/61) of participants receiving placebo (RR 3.77, 95% CI 1.49 to 9.54; absolute risk difference 23% (9% to 37% more). However adverse events were mild (short-term pain following treatment).Five trials (low quality evidence) found no important differences between manual therapy and exercise compared with glucocorticoid injection with respect to overall pain, function, active shoulder abduction and quality of life from four weeks up to 12 months. However, global treatment success was more common up to 11 weeks in people receiving glucocorticoid injection (low quality evidence). One trial (low quality evidence) showed no important differences between manual therapy and exercise and arthroscopic subacromial decompression with respect to overall pain, function, active range of motion and strength at six and 12 months, or global treatment success at four to eight years. One trial (low quality evidence) found that manual therapy and exercise may not be as effective as acupuncture plus dietary counselling and Phlogenzym supplement with respect to overall pain, function, active shoulder abduction and quality life at 12 weeks. We are uncertain whether manual therapy and exercise improves function more than oral non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAID), or whether combining manual therapy and exercise with glucocorticoid injection provides additional benefit in function over glucocorticoid injection alone, because of the very low quality evidence in these two trials.Fifty-two trials investigated effects of manual therapy alone or exercise alone, and the evidence was mostly very low quality. There was little or no difference in patient-important outcomes between manual therapy alone and placebo, no treatment, therapeutic ultrasound and kinesiotaping, although manual therapy alone was less effective than glucocorticoid injection. Exercise alone led to less improvement in overall pain, but not function, when compared with surgical repair for rotator cuff tear. There was little or no difference in patient-important outcomes between exercise alone and placebo, radial extracorporeal shockwave treatment, glucocorticoid injection, arthroscopic subacromial decompression and functional brace. Further, manual therapy or exercise provided few or no additional benefits when combined with other physical therapy interventions, and one type of manual therapy or exercise was rarely more effective than another.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Despite identifying 60 eligible trials, only one trial compared a combination of manual therapy and exercise reflective of common current practice to placebo. We judged it to be of high quality and found no clinically important differences between groups in any outcome. Effects of manual therapy and exercise may be similar to those of glucocorticoid injection and arthroscopic subacromial decompression, but this is based on low quality evidence. Adverse events associated with manual therapy and exercise are relatively more frequent than placebo but mild in nature. Novel combinations of manual therapy and exercise should be compared with a realistic placebo in future trials. Further trials of manual therapy alone or exercise alone for rotator cuff disease should be based upon a strong rationale and consideration of whether or not they would alter the conclusions of this review.

Reliability of pressure pain threshold testing in healthy pain free young adults

Background and aims Investigation of the multidimensional correlates of pressure pain threshold (PPT) requires the study of large cohorts, and thus the use of multiple raters, for sufficient statistical power. Although PPT testing has previously been shown to be reliable, the reliability of multiple raters and investigation for systematic bias between raters has not been reported. The aim of this study was to evaluate the intrarater and interrater reliability of PPT measurement by handheld algometer at the wrist, leg, cervical spine and lumbar spine. Additionally the study aimed to calculate sample sizes required for parallel and cross-over studies for various effect sizes accounting for measurement error. Methods Five research assistants (RAs) each tested 20 pain free subjects at the wrist, leg, cervical and lumbar spine. Intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), standard error of measurement (SEM) and systematic bias were calculated. Results Both intrarater reliability (ICC = 0.81-0.99) and interrater reliability (ICC = 0.92-0.95) were excellent and intrarater SEM ranged from 79 to 100 kPa. There was systematic bias detected at three sites with no single rater tending to consistently rate higher or lower than others across all sites. Conclusion The excellent ICCs observed in this study support the utility of using multiple RAs in large cohort studies using standardised protocols, with the caveat that an absence of any confounding of study estimates by rater is checked, due to systematic rater bias identified in this study. Implications Thorough training of raters using PPT results in excellent interrater reliability. Clinical trials using PPT as an outcome measure should utilise a priori sample size calculations.