Intensive training, physiotherapy, or manipulation for patients with chronic neck pain. A prospective, single-blinded, randomized clinical trial

The majority of clinical trials assessing mobilization and manipulation for neck pain lack a pragmatic approach: a systematic review of 174 trials

BACKGROUND

Disorders of the cervical spine are some of the costliest musculoskeletal conditions to manage globally. Joint mobilization and manipulation have been shown to be an effective treatment for neck pain. However, the generalizability and clinical translation depends on the nature of the trial designs that inform its use. The extent to which randomized control trials (RCTs) assessing manual therapy treatments for cervical spine disorders fall on the efficacy (explanatory) -effectiveness (pragmatic) spectrum often informs how the findings are translated into clinical practice.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this systematic review was to determine where RCTs of manual therapy for neck disorders fall on the efficacy-effectiveness spectrum.

METHODS

A search of three electronic databases including PubMed, CINAHL, and CENTRAL were completed for trials published from inception to May 2023. RCTs in which joint mobilization or manipulation were used to treat cervical spine disorders were assessed on the effectiveness-efficacy spectrum using the Rating of Included Trials on the Efficacy-Effectiveness Spectrum (RITES) tool and risk of bias using the Revised Cochrane Risk of Bias tool.

RESULTS

A total of 174 trials met eligibility. RITES domain two trial setting (71.3% vs 16.1%), domain three flexibility of intervention(s) (62.1% vs 23%), and domain four clinical relevance of experimental and comparison intervention(s) (51.7% vs 29.3%) all favored efficacy over effectiveness. Domain one participant characteristic(s) had a slightly greater emphasis on effectiveness compared to efficacy (36.8% vs 44.8%). Most studies (96%) had at least some risk of bias.

CONCLUSION

Over half of the RCTs assessing the treatment effect of joint mobilization and manipulation for neck pain favor efficacy (explanatory) over effectiveness (pragmatic) designs. Future RCTs on this topic should consider a greater emphasis on pragmatic trial design components in order to better reflect real-world translation to clinical practice.

Massage for neck pain

BACKGROUND

Massage is widely used for neck pain, but its effectiveness remains unclear.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the benefits and harms of massage compared to placebo or sham, no treatment or exercise as an adjuvant to the same co-intervention for acute to chronic persisting neck pain in adults with or without radiculopathy, including whiplash-associated disorders and cervicogenic headache.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched multiple databases (CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, Index to Chiropractic Literature, trial registries) to 1 October 2023.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing any type of massage with sham or placebo, no treatment or wait-list, or massage as an adjuvant treatment, in adults with acute, subacute or chronic neck pain.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used the standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. We transformed outcomes to standardise the direction of the effect (a smaller score is better). We used a partially contextualised approach relative to identified thresholds to report the effect size as slight-small, moderate or large-substantive.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 33 studies (1994 participants analysed). Selection (82%) and detection bias (94%) were common; multiple trials had unclear allocation concealment, utilised a placebo that may not be credible and did not test whether blinding to the placebo was effective. Massage was compared with placebo (n = 10) or no treatment (n = 8), or assessed as an adjuvant to the same co-treatment (n = 15). The trials studied adults aged 18 to 70 years, 70% female, with mean pain severity of 51.8 (standard deviation (SD) 14.1) on a visual analogue scale (0 to 100). Neck pain was subacute-chronic and classified as non-specific neck pain (85%, including n = 1 whiplash), radiculopathy (6%) or cervicogenic headache (9%). Trials were conducted in outpatient settings in Asia (n = 11), America (n = 5), Africa (n = 1), Europe (n = 12) and the Middle East (n = 4). Trials received research funding (15%) from research institutes. We report the main results for the comparison of massage versus placebo. Low-certainty evidence indicates that massage probably results in little to no difference in pain, function-disability and health-related quality of life when compared against a placebo for subacute-chronic neck pain at up to 12 weeks follow-up. It may slightly improve participant-reported treatment success. Subgroup analysis by dose showed a clinically important difference favouring a high dose (≥ 8 sessions over four weeks for ≥ 30 minutes duration). There is very low-certainty evidence for total adverse events. Data on patient satisfaction and serious adverse events were not available. Pain was a mean of 20.55 points with placebo and improved by 3.43 points with massage (95% confidence interval (CI) 8.16 better to 1.29 worse) on a 0 to 100 scale, where a lower score indicates less pain (8 studies, 403 participants; I2 = 39%). We downgraded the evidence to low-certainty due to indirectness; most trials in the placebo comparison used suboptimal massage doses (only single sessions). Selection, performance and detection bias were evident as multiple trials had unclear allocation concealment, utilised a placebo that may not be credible and did not test whether blinding was effective, respectively. Function-disability was a mean of 30.90 points with placebo and improved by 9.69 points with massage (95% CI 17.57 better to 1.81 better) on the Neck Disability Index 0 to 100, where a lower score indicates better function (2 studies, 68 participants; I2 = 0%). We downgraded the evidence to low-certainty due to imprecision (the wide CI represents slight to moderate benefit that does not rule in or rule out a clinically important change) and risk of selection, performance and detection biases. Participant-reported treatment success was a mean of 3.1 points with placebo and improved by 0.80 points with massage (95% CI 1.39 better to 0.21 better) on a Global Improvement 1 to 7 scale, where a lower score indicates very much improved (1 study, 54 participants). We downgraded the evidence to low-certainty due to imprecision (single study with a wide CI that does not rule in or rule out a clinically important change) and risk of performance as well as detection bias. Health-related quality of life was a mean of 43.2 points with placebo and improved by 5.30 points with massage (95% CI 8.24 better to 2.36 better) on the SF-12 (physical) 0 to 100 scale, where 0 indicates the lowest level of health (1 study, 54 participants). We downgraded the evidence once for imprecision (a single small study) and risk of performance and detection bias. We are uncertain whether massage results in increased total adverse events, such as treatment soreness, sweating or low blood pressure (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.08 to 11.55; 2 studies, 175 participants; I2 = 77%). We downgraded the evidence to very low-certainty due to unexplained inconsistency, risk of performance and detection bias, and imprecision (the CI was extremely wide and the total number of events was very small, i.e < 200 events).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The contribution of massage to the management of neck pain remains uncertain given the predominance of low-certainty evidence in this field. For subacute and chronic neck pain (closest to 12 weeks follow-up), massage may result in a little or no difference in improving pain, function-disability, health-related quality of life and participant-reported treatment success when compared to a placebo. Inadequate reporting on adverse events precluded analysis. Focused planning for larger, adequately dosed, well-designed trials is needed.

Exercise therapy including the cervical extensor muscles in individuals with neck pain: A systematic review

OBJECTIVE

To review the use (dosage parameters and combination with other therapeutic interventions) of cervical extensor muscle exercises and their effect on pain, disability (primary outcomes), range of motion, endurance and strength (secondary outcomes) in people with neck pain.

DATA SOURCES

An extensive literature search was conducted through MEDLINE (Ovid), Scopus (Elsevier) and Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro) up to May 2023. The reference lists of all included studies and relevant reviews were screened for additional studies.

REVIEW METHODS

Randomised controlled trials reporting the use of cervical extensor muscle exercises (alone or combined) applied to adults with idiopathic or traumatic neck pain were included. Study selection, data extraction and critical appraisal (PEDro assessment scale) were performed by two blinded reviewers. Data extraction included dosage parameters, other modalities combined with these exercises and outcomes.

RESULTS

Thirty-five randomised controlled trails (eight of which were complementary analyses) with 2409 participants fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Twenty-six were of moderate to high quality. In most studies, cervical extensor muscle exercises were combined with various other therapeutic modalities and applied at different dosages. Only two studies (one high and one low quality) specifically assessed their effectiveness. The high-quality study showed significant improvements in neck pain and disability, pressure point threshold and neck mobility after both low load and high load training for 6 weeks.

CONCLUSION

The results suggest cervical extensor muscle exercises may reduce neck pain and disability; however firm conclusions cannot be drawn because of the few studies that addressed this question and the heterogeneity of the dosage parameters.

Resistance, Motor Control, and Mindfulness-Based Exercises Are Effective for Treating Chronic Nonspecific Neck Pain: A Systematic Review With Meta-Analysis and Dose-Response Meta-Regression

OBJECTIVE: We aimed to analyze the effects and dose-response relationship of the most effective exercises for improving pain and disability in people with chronic nonspecific neck pain. DESIGN: Intervention systematic review with meta-analysis. LITERATURE SEARCH: We searched the PubMed, PEDro, and CENTRAL databases from their inception to September 30, 2022. STUDY SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomized controlled trials that involved people with chronic neck pain adopting a longitudinal exercise intervention and assessed one pain and/or disability outcome. DATA SYNTHESIS: Restricted maximum-likelihood random-effects meta-analyses were modeled separately for resistance, mindfulness-based, and motor control exercises; standardized mean differences (Hedge's g, standardized mean difference [SMD]) were effect estimators. Meta-regressions (dependent variable: effect sizes of the interventions; independent variables: training dose and control group effects) were conducted to explore the dose-response relationship for therapy success of any exercise type. RESULTS: We included 68 trials. Compared to true control, effects on pain and disability were significantly larger for resistance exercise (pain: SMD, -1.27; 95% confidence interval [CI]: -2.26, -0.28; |2 = 96%; disability: SMD, -1.76; 95% CI: -3.16, -0.37; |2 = 98%), motor control exercise (pain: SMD, -2.29; 95% CI: -3.82, -0.75; |2 = 98%; disability: SMD, -2.42; 95% CI: -3.38, -1.47; |2 = 94%), and Yoga/Pilates/Tai Chi/Qui Gong exercise (pain: SMD, 1.91; 95% CI:-3.28, -0.55; |2 = 96%; disability: SMD, -0.62; 95% CI: -0.85, -0.38; |2 = 0%). Yoga/Pilates/Tai Chi/Qui Gong exercise was more effective than other exercises (SMD, -0.84; 95% CI: -1.553, -0.13; |2 = 86%) for reducing pain. For disability, motor control exercise was superior to other exercises (SMD, -0.70; 95% CI: -1.23, -0.17; |2 = 98%). There was no dose-response relationship for resistance exercise (R2 = 0.32). Higher frequencies (estimate = -0.10) and longer durations (estimate = -0.11) of motor control exercise had larger effects on pain (R2 = 0.72). Longer sessions (estimate = -0.13) of motor control exercise had larger effects on disability (R2 = 0.61). CONCLUSION: Resistance, mindfulness-based, and motor control exercises were effective for reducing neck pain (very low- to moderate-certainty evidence). Higher frequencies and longer duration of sessions had a significant effect on pain for motor control exercise. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2023;53(8):1-41. Epub: 20 June 2023. doi:10.2519/jospt.2023.11820.

Cervical Motor and Nociceptive Dysfunction After an Acute Whiplash Injury and the Association With Long-Term Non-Recovery: Revisiting a One-Year Prospective Cohort With Ankle Injured Controls

Aims

To explore the development of cervical motor and nociceptive dysfunction in patients with whiplash (WPs) and non-recovery based on injury-related work disability 1-year after injury when compared with ankle-injured controls (ACs).

Methods

A 1-year observational prospective study examining consecutive WPs and age- and sex-matched ACs at 1 week,3 months, 6 months, and 1 year post-injury using semi-structured interviews; global pain rating (VAS0-10) and the pain rating index (PRI-T) and number-of-words-chosen (NWC) from the McGill Pain Questionnaire; examining nociceptive functioning using the cold pressor test (CPT), pressure algometry, and methodic palpation, and central pain processing using counter-stimulation; and examining motor functioning by active cervical range-of-motion (CROM), and neck strength [maximal voluntary contraction flexion/extension (MVC)]. One-year work disability/non-recovery was determined using a semi-structured interview.

Results

A total of 141 WPs and 40 ACs were included. Total pain rating index (PRI-T) NWC were higher in ACs after 1 week but higher in WPs after 3 months, 6 months, and 1 year. Ongoing global pain was higher in WPs after 1 week and after 3 and 6 months but not after 1 year. Pressure pain thresholds were reduced, and palpation was higher in the neck and jaw in WPs after 1 week but was not consistently different afterward from ACs. Cervical mobility was reduced in WPs after 1 week, 3 months, and 6 months but not after 1 year, and MVC was significantly reduced in WPs when compared with ACs after 1 week and 1 year but not after 3 and 6 months. One-year non-recovery was only encountered in 11 WPs and not in the AC group. Non-recovered WPs (N-WPs) had consistently significantly higher VAS₀₋₁₀, PRI-T, NWC, reduced pressure pain thresholds, raised muscle-tenderness, reduced active cervical range-of-motion, reduced active-neck-flexion/extension, and reported higher neck disability scores than recovered WPs. Of special interest, there was increasing tenderness in trigeminal-derived muscles based on palpation scores, and marked reduction of PPDT was most pronounced in N-WPs when compared with recovered WPs and ACs.

Conclusion

Cervical motor dysfunction and segmental nociceptive sensitization were present from early after injury in WPs and prolonged in N-WPs. Differences in trigeminal and cervical motor and sensory function in N-WPs could be of interest for future treatment studies.

Efficacy of Manual Therapy and Transcutaneous Electrical Nerve Stimulation in Cervical Mobility and Endurance in Subacute and Chronic Neck Pain: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Neck pain is a frequent health problem. Manual therapy (MT) and transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) are recommended techniques for treatment of mechanical neck disorders (MND) in Spanish Public Primary Care Physiotherapy Services. The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy of MT versus TENS in active mobility and endurance in cervical subacute or chronic neck pain. Ninety patients with MND were randomly allocated to receive ten 30-min sessions of either MT or TENS, in a multi-centered study through 12 Primary Care Physiotherapy Units in the Madrid community. Active cervical range of motion (CD-ROM) and endurance (Palmer and Epler test) were evaluated pre- and post-intervention and at 6-month follow-up. A generalized linear model of repeated measures was constructed for the analysis of differences. Post-intervention MT yielded a significant improvement in active mobility and endurance in patients with subacute or chronic MND, and at 6-month follow-up the differences were only significant in endurance and in sagittal plane active mobility. In the TENS group, no significant improvement was detected. With regard to other variables, MT improved mobility and endurance more effectively than TENS at post-intervention and at 6-month follow-up in the sagittal plane. Only MT generated significant improvements in cervical mobility and endurance in the three movement planes.

Comparative effectiveness of physical exercise interventions for chronic non-specific neck pain: a systematic review with network meta-analysis of 40 randomised controlled trials

OBJECTIVE

To compare the effectiveness of different physical exercise interventions for chronic non-specific neck pain.

DESIGN

Systematic review and network meta-analysis.

DATA SOURCES

Electronic databases: AMED, CINAHL, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Embase, MEDLINE, Physiotherapy Evidence Database, PsycINFO, Scopus and SPORTDiscus.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) describing the effects of any physical exercise intervention in adults with chronic non-specific neck pain.

RESULTS

The search returned 6549 records, 40 studies were included. Two networks of pairwise comparisons were constructed, one for pain intensity (n=38 RCTs, n=3151 participants) and one for disability (n=29 RCTs, n=2336 participants), and direct and indirect evidence was obtained. Compared with no treatment, three exercise interventions were found to be effective for pain and disability: motor control (Hedges' g, pain -1.32, 95% CI: -1.99 to -0.65; disability -0.87, 95% CI: -1.45 o -0.29), yoga/Pilates/Tai Chi/Qigong (pain -1.25, 95% CI: -1.85 to -0.65; disability -1.16, 95% CI: -1.75 to -0.57) and strengthening (pain -1.21, 95% CI: -1.63 to -0.78; disability -0.75, 95% CI: -1.28 to -0.22). Other interventions, including range of motion (pain -0.98 CI: -2.51 to 0.56), balance (pain -0.38, 95% CI: -2.10 to 1.33) and multimodal (three or more exercises types combined) (pain -0.08, 95% CI: -1.70 to 1.53) exercises showed uncertain or negligible effects. The quality of evidence was very low according to the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) criteria.

CONCLUSION

There is not one superior type of physical exercise for people with chronic non-specific neck pain. Rather, there is very low quality evidence that motor control, yoga/Pilates/Tai Chi/Qigong and strengthening exercises are equally effective. These findings may assist clinicians to select exercises for people with chronic non-specific neck pain.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42019126523.

Effectiveness and optimal dosage of exercise training for chronic non-specific neck pain: A systematic review with a narrative synthesis

BACKGROUND

Clinical guidelines make vague recommendations as to exercise training (ET) type and dosage to manage chronic non-specific neck pain (CNSNP).

OBJECTIVE

To synthesise evidence on the effectiveness of different ET programmes to reduce CNSNP and associated disability, and whether dosage affects outcomes.

METHODS

A systematic review and data synthesis was conducted according to a published registered protocol (PROSPERO CRD42018096187). A sensitive topic-based search was conducted of CINAHL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, PEDro, grey literature sources and key journals from inception to 6th January 2020 for randomised controlled trials, investigating ET for CNSNP or disability. Two reviewers independently completed eligibility screening, data extraction, risk of bias assessment (Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool) and rated the overall strength of evidence using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation. Data was tabulated for narrative synthesis and grouped by intervention, outcome and time point to compare across studies.

RESULTS

Twenty-six trials from 3990 citations (n = 2288 participants) investigated fifteen ET programmes. High RoB and low sample sizes reduced evidence quality. Clinical heterogeneity prevented meta-analyses. A range of ET programmes reduce pain/disability in the short term (low to moderate evidence). Pillar exercises reduce pain/disability in the intermediate term (low level evidence). Moderate to very large pain reduction is found with ET packages that include motor control + segmental exercises (low to moderate evidence). No high-quality trials investigated long term outcomes. Increased frequency of motor control exercises and progressively increased load of pillar exercise may improve effectiveness.

CONCLUSIONS

Motor control + segmental exercises are the most effective ET to reduce short term pain/disability, but long-term outcomes have not been investigated. Optimal motor control + segmental exercise variables and dosage is unknown and requires clarification. An adequately powered, low RoB trial is needed to evaluate the effectiveness and optimal dosage of motor control + segmental on long term outcomes.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42018096187.

Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) for chronic neck pain

BACKGROUND

Chronic neck pain is a highly prevalent condition, affecting 10% to 24% of the general population. Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) is the noninvasive, transcutaneous use of electrical stimulation to produce analgesia. It is a simple, low-cost and safe intervention used in clinical practice as an adjunct treatment for painful musculoskeletal conditions that have a considerable impact on daily activities, such as chronic neck pain. This review is a split from a Cochrane Review on electrotherapy for neck pain, published in 2013, and focuses specifically on TENS for chronic neck pain.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effectiveness of transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) (alone or in association with other interventions) compared with sham and other clinical interventions for the treatment of chronic neck pain.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched Cochrane Back and Neck Trials Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, five other databases and two trials registers to 9 November 2018. We also screened the reference lists of relevant studies to identify additional trials. There were no language, source, or publication date restrictions.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) involving adults (≥ 18 years of age) with chronic neck pain (lasting > 12 weeks) that compared TENS alone or in combination with other treatments versus active or inactive treatments. The primary outcomes were pain, disability and adverse events.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two independent review authors selected the trials, extracted data and assessed the risk of bias of included studies. A third review author was consulted in case of disagreements. We used the Cochrane 'Risk of bias' tool (adapted by Cochrane Back and Neck), to assess the risk of bias of individual trials and GRADE to assess the certainty of evidence. We used risk ratios (RRs) to measure treatment effects for dichotomous outcomes, and mean differences (MDs) for continuous outcomes, with their respective 95% confidence intervals (CIs).

MAIN RESULTS

We included seven RCTs with a total of 651 participants, mean age 31.7 to 55.5 years, conducted in three different countries (Turkey, Jordan and China). The length of follow-up ranged from one week to six months. Most RCTs used continuous TENS, with a frequency of 60 Hz to 100 Hz, pulse width of 40 μs to 250 μs and tolerable intensity, described as a tingling sensation without contraction, in daily sessions lasting 20 to 60 minutes. Due to heterogeneity in interventions and outcomes, we did not pool individual study data into meta-analyses. Overall, we judged most studies as being at low risk for selection bias and high risk for performance and detection bias. Based on the GRADE approach, there was very low-certainty evidence from two trials about the effects of conventional TENS when compared to sham TENS at short-term (up to 3 months after treatment) follow-up, on pain (assessed by the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS)) (MD -0.10, 95% CI -0.97 to 0.77) and the percentage of participants presenting improvement of pain (RR 1.57, 95% CI 0.84 to 2.92). None of the included studies reported on disability or adverse events.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This review found very low-certainty evidence of a difference between TENS compared to sham TENS on reducing neck pain; therefore, we are unsure about the effect estimate. At present, there is insufficient evidence regarding the use of TENS in patients with chronic neck pain. Additional well-designed, -conducted and -reported RCTs are needed to reach robust conclusions.

Visceral Origin: An Underestimated Source of Neck Pain. A Systematic Scoping Review

The diagnosis of neck pain is challenging. Many visceral disorders are known to cause it, and clinical practice guidelines recommend to rule them out during neck pain diagnosis. However, the absence of suspicion of any cause impedes one from establishing that specific aetiology as the final diagnosis. To investigate the degree of consideration given to visceral aetiology, a systematic search of trials about neck pain was carried out to evaluate their selection criteria. The search yielded 309 eligible articles, which were screened by two independent reviewers. The PEDro scale score was used to assess the methodological quality of the studies. The following information was retrieved: number of authors affiliated to a clinical or non-clinical institution, number of citations in the Web of Science, study aims, characteristics of participants, and eligibility criteria. The top 15 most cited trials, and the 15 most recent studies about treatment efficacy in neck pain, published in first quartile journals of the Journal Citation Reports, were selected. Females represented 67.5% of participants. A single study was of poor methodological quality (4/10). Based on the eligibility criteria of the articles that were systematically reviewed, it would appear that visceral aetiology was not considered in eighty percent of the trials on neck pain, showing a low level of suspicion both in research and clinical settings.

Cross-cultural Adaptation and Validation of the Simplified-Chinese Version of Neck Bournemouth Questionnaire for Patients in Mainland China

STUDY DESIGN

A prospective study.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to develop and assess the internal reliability and structure validity of a simplified Chinese version of the Neck Bournemouth Questionnaire (SC-NBQ) for evaluation of patients with nonspecific neck pain (NP) in mainland China.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

The NBQ has been cross-culturally translated into several languages with good internal consistency and construct validity to evaluate low back pain and NP. However, the NBQ has been not translated or validated for Chinese-speaking patients.

METHODS

The SC-NBQ was developed by standard cross-translation procedures, and completed by 106 patients with nonspecific NP, along with other self-reported questionnaires, including the Neck Disability Index (NDI), Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), Functional Rating Index (FRI), and 36-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36). The internal consistency, test-retest reliability, and construct validity of the SC-NBQ were determined.

RESULTS

The NBQ was successfully translated into Chinese. All patients completed the SC-NBQ twice, and the other instruments. Score distribution demonstrated that there was no floor or ceiling effects of the SC-NBQ. Cronbach α coefficient (α = 0.89) and intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC = 0.97) showed good internal consistency and test-retest reliability. A good construct validity was shown by strong correlation with HADS (r = 0.75), NDI (r = 0.82), FRI (r = 0.90) and SF-36 physical functioning (r = 0.75), and bodily pain (r = 0.75) subscales.

CONCLUSION

The SC-NBQ demonstrated good internal consistency, test-retest reliability, and construct validity, and may be used for the evaluation of NP in Chinese-speaking patients.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

2.

The clinical reasoning process in randomized clinical trials with patients with non-specific neck pain is incomplete: A systematic review

OBJECTIVE

Primarily to evaluate the completeness of the description of the clinical reasoning process in RCTs with patients with non-specific neck pain with an argued or diagnosed cause i.e. an impairment or activity limitation. Secondly, to determine the association between the completeness of the clinical reasoning process and the degree of risk of bias.

DATA SOURCES

Pubmed, Cinahl and PEDro were systematically searched from inception to July 2016.

STUDY SELECTION

RCTs (n = 122) with patients with non-specific neck pain receiving physiotherapy treatment published in English were included.

DATA EXTRACTION

Data extraction included study characteristics and important features of the clinical reasoning process based on the Hypothesis-Oriented Algorithm for Clinicians II (HOAC II)].

DATA SYNTHESIS

Thirty-seven studies (30%) had a complete clinical reasoning process of which 8 (6%) had a 'diagnosed cause' and 29 (24%) had an 'argued cause'. The Spearmans rho association between the extent of the clinical reasoning process and the risk of bias was -0.2.

CONCLUSIONS

In the majority of studies (70%) the described clinical reasoning process was incomplete. A very small proportion (6%) had a 'diagnosed cause'. Therefore, a better methodological quality does not necessarily imply a better described clinical reasoning process.

The effect of cervical traction combined with conventional therapy on grip strength on patients with cervical radiculopathy

Objective: To determine if combining intermittent cervical traction with conventional physical therapy methods is more effective than using conventional approaches alone in the improvement of the grip strength and treatment of the patients with unilateral cervical 7 (C7) radiculopathy.

Design: Randomized controlled trial (RCT).

Setting: An outpatient physical therapy clinic, University of Social Welfare and Rehabilitation Science, Iran.

Patients: A sample of convenience of 30 patients with unilateral C7 radiculopathy participated in this study. Patients were assigned randomly to a control (N=15, mean age=46.939 ±5.32) and an experimental group (N=15, mean age=47.53 ±5.6).

Interventions: Electrotherapyu/exercise treatment for control group and combined cervical traction and electrotherapyu/exercise for experimental group. Ten physical therapy sessions, three times a week for each group.

Main outcome measures: Grip strength as an appropriate objective parameter was measured before treatment and after 5 and 10 treatment sessions.

Results: Statistical analysis (paired t-test) revealed significant increase in grip strength after 10 treatment sessions in control (p<0.01) and experimental group (p<0.01) compared with pretreatment score. In the ANCOVA, controlling for pretest scores, no significant difference was found between the two groups in the after 10 treatment sessions grip score (p=0.65). However, the change in grip strength after five sessions was significantly greater for the experimental group than for the control group (P=0.04).

Conclusions: The application of cervical traction combined with electrotherapy and exercise produced an immediate improvement in the hand grip function in patients with cervical radiculopathy.

A randomized clinical trial of TENS and exercise for patients with chronic neck pain

Objective: To investigate the effect of transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) on acupuncture points and neck exercise in chronic neck pain patients.

Design: A randomized clinical trial.

Setting: Hospital-based practice.

Subjects: Two hundred and eighteen patients with chronic neck pain.

Interventions: Subjects were randomized into three groups, receiving either (1) TENS over the acupuncture points plus infrared irradiation (TENS group); (2) exercise training plus infrared irradiation (exercise group); or (3) infrared irradiation alone (control); twice a week for six weeks.

Outcome measures: The values of verbal numeric pain scale, Northwick Park Neck Pain Questionnaire, and isometric neck muscle strength were assessed before, at the end of the six-week treatment, and at the six-month follow-up.

Results: Results demonstrated that after the six-week treatment, significant improvement in the verbal numerical pain scale was found only in the TENS group (0.60±2.54, p=0.027) and the exercise group (1.57±2.67, p<0.001). Though significant reduction in Northwick Park Neck Pain Questionnaire score was found in all three groups, post-hoc tests showed that both the TENS and the exercise group produced better improvement (0.38±0.60% and 0.39±0.62% respectively) than the control group (0.23±0.63%). Significant improvement (p = <0.001 to 0.03) in neck muscle strength was observed in all three groups, however, the improvement in the control group was not clinically significant and it could not be maintained at the six-month follow-up.

Conclusions: After the six-week treatment, patients in the TENS and exercise group had a better and clinically relevant improvement in disability, isometric neck muscle strength, and pain. All the improvements in the intervention groups were maintained at the six-month follow-up.

The effects of cervical traction, cranial rhythmic impulse, and Mckenzie exercise on headache and cervical muscle stiffness in episodic tension-type headache patients

[Purpose] The purpose of this study was to examine the effects of cervical traction treatment, cranial rhythmic impulse treatment, a manual therapy, and McKenzie exercise, a dynamic strengthening exercise, on patients who have the neck muscle stiffness of the infrequent episodic tension-type (IETTH) headache and frequent episodic tension-type headache(FETTH), as well as to provide the basic materials for clinical interventions. [Subjects] Twenty-seven subjects (males: 15, females: 12) who were diagnosed with IETTH and FETTH after treatment by a neurologist were divided into three groups: (a cervical traction group (CTG, n=9), a cranial rhythmic contractiongroup (CRIG, n=9), and a McKenzie exercise group (MEG, n=9). An intervention was conducted for each group and the differences in their degrees of neck pain and changes in muscle tone were observed. [Results] In the within-group comparison of each group, headache significantly decreased in CTG. According to the results of the analysis of the muscle tone of the upper trapezius, there was a statistically significant difference in MEG on the right side and in CRIG on the left side. According to the results of the analysis of the muscle tone of the sternocleidomastoid muscle, there was a statistically significant difference in MEG on the right side and in CRIG on the left side. [Conclusion] In the comparison of the splenius capitis muscle between the groups, there was a statistically significant difference on the right side. Hence, compared to the other methods, cervical traction is concluded to be more effective at reducing headaches in IETTH and FETTH patients.

Manipulation and mobilisation for neck pain contrasted against an inactive control or another active treatment

BACKGROUND

Manipulation and mobilisation are commonly used to treat neck pain. This is an update of a Cochrane review first published in 2003, and previously updated in 2010.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of manipulation or mobilisation alone compared wiith those of an inactive control or another active treatment on pain, function, disability, patient satisfaction, quality of life and global perceived effect in adults experiencing neck pain with or without radicular symptoms and cervicogenic headache (CGH) at immediate- to long-term follow-up. When appropriate, to assess the influence of treatment characteristics (i.e. technique, dosage), methodological quality, symptom duration and subtypes of neck disorder on treatment outcomes.

SEARCH METHODS

Review authors searched the following computerised databases to November 2014 to identify additional studies: the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL). We also searched ClinicalTrials.gov, checked references, searched citations and contacted study authors to find relevant studies. We updated this search in June 2015, but these results have not yet been incorporated.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) undertaken to assess whether manipulation or mobilisation improves clinical outcomes for adults with acute/subacute/chronic neck pain.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently selected studies, abstracted data, assessed risk of bias and applied Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methods (very low, low, moderate, high quality). We calculated pooled risk ratios (RRs) and standardised mean differences (SMDs).

MAIN RESULTS

We included 51 trials (2920 participants, 18 trials of manipulation/mobilisation versus control; 34 trials of manipulation/mobilisation versus another treatment, 1 trial had two comparisons). Cervical manipulation versus inactive control: For subacute and chronic neck pain, a single manipulation (three trials, no meta-analysis, 154 participants, ranged from very low to low quality) relieved pain at immediate- but not short-term follow-up. Cervical manipulation versus another active treatment: For acute and chronic neck pain, multiple sessions of cervical manipulation (two trials, 446 participants, ranged from moderate to high quality) produced similar changes in pain, function, quality of life (QoL), global perceived effect (GPE) and patient satisfaction when compared with multiple sessions of cervical mobilisation at immediate-, short- and intermediate-term follow-up. For acute and subacute neck pain, multiple sessions of cervical manipulation were more effective than certain medications in improving pain and function at immediate- (one trial, 182 participants, moderate quality) and long-term follow-up (one trial, 181 participants, moderate quality). These findings are consistent for function at intermediate-term follow-up (one trial, 182 participants, moderate quality). For chronic CGH, multiple sessions of cervical manipulation (two trials, 125 participants, low quality) may be more effective than massage in improving pain and function at short/intermediate-term follow-up. Multiple sessions of cervical manipulation (one trial, 65 participants, very low quality) may be favoured over transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) for pain reduction at short-term follow-up. For acute neck pain, multiple sessions of cervical manipulation (one trial, 20 participants, very low quality) may be more effective than thoracic manipulation in improving pain and function at short/intermediate-term follow-up. Thoracic manipulation versus inactive control: Three trials (150 participants) using a single session were assessed at immediate-, short- and intermediate-term follow-up. At short-term follow-up, manipulation improved pain in participants with acute and subacute neck pain (five trials, 346 participants, moderate quality, pooled SMD -1.26, 95% confidence interval (CI) -1.86 to -0.66) and improved function (four trials, 258 participants, moderate quality, pooled SMD -1.40, 95% CI -2.24 to -0.55) in participants with acute and chronic neck pain. A funnel plot of these data suggests publication bias. These findings were consistent at intermediate follow-up for pain/function/quality of life (one trial, 111 participants, low quality). Thoracic manipulation versus another active treatment: No studies provided sufficient data for statistical analyses. A single session of thoracic manipulation (one trial, 100 participants, moderate quality) was comparable with thoracic mobilisation for pain relief at immediate-term follow-up for chronic neck pain. Mobilisation versus inactive control: Mobilisation as a stand-alone intervention (two trials, 57 participants, ranged from very low to low quality) may not reduce pain more than an inactive control. Mobilisation versus another active treatment: For acute and subacute neck pain, anterior-posterior mobilisation (one trial, 95 participants, very low quality) may favour pain reduction over rotatory or transverse mobilisations at immediate-term follow-up. For chronic CGH with temporomandibular joint (TMJ) dysfunction, multiple sessions of TMJ manual therapy (one trial, 38 participants, very low quality) may be more effective than cervical mobilisation in improving pain/function at immediate- and intermediate-term follow-up. For subacute and chronic neck pain, cervical mobilisation alone (four trials, 165 participants, ranged from low to very low quality) may not be different from ultrasound, TENS, acupuncture and massage in improving pain, function, QoL and participant satisfaction at immediate- and intermediate-term follow-up. Additionally, combining laser with manipulation may be superior to using manipulation or laser alone (one trial, 56 participants, very low quality).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Although support can be found for use of thoracic manipulation versus control for neck pain, function and QoL, results for cervical manipulation and mobilisation versus control are few and diverse. Publication bias cannot be ruled out. Research designed to protect against various biases is needed. Findings suggest that manipulation and mobilisation present similar results for every outcome at immediate/short/intermediate-term follow-up. Multiple cervical manipulation sessions may provide better pain relief and functional improvement than certain medications at immediate/intermediate/long-term follow-up. Since the risk of rare but serious adverse events for manipulation exists, further high-quality research focusing on mobilisation and comparing mobilisation or manipulation versus other treatment options is needed to guide clinicians in their optimal treatment choices.

Exercises for mechanical neck disorders

BACKGROUND

Neck pain is common, disabling and costly. Exercise is one treatment approach.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness of exercises to improve pain, disability, function, patient satisfaction, quality of life and global perceived effect in adults with neck pain.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, MANTIS, ClinicalTrials.gov and three other computerized databases up to between January and May 2014 plus additional sources (reference checking, citation searching, contact with authors).

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing single therapeutic exercise with a control for adults suffering from neck pain with or without cervicogenic headache or radiculopathy.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently conducted trial selection, data extraction, 'Risk of bias' assessment and clinical relevance. The quality of the evidence was assessed using GRADE. Meta-analyses were performed for relative risk and standardized mean differences (SMD) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) after judging clinical and statistical heterogeneity.

MAIN RESULTS

Twenty-seven trials (2485 analyzed /3005 randomized participants) met our inclusion criteria.For acute neck pain only, no evidence was found.For chronic neck pain, moderate quality evidence supports 1) cervico-scapulothoracic and upper extremity strength training to improve pain of a moderate to large amount immediately post treatment [pooled SMD (SMDp) -0.71 (95% CI: -1.33 to -0.10)] and at short-term follow-up; 2) scapulothoracic and upper extremity endurance training for slight beneficial effect on pain at immediate post treatment and short-term follow-up; 3) combined cervical, shoulder and scapulothoracic strengthening and stretching exercises varied from a small to large magnitude of beneficial effect on pain at immediate post treatment [SMDp -0.33 (95% CI: -0.55 to -0.10)] and up to long-term follow-up and a medium magnitude of effect improving function at both immediate post treatment and at short-term follow-up [SMDp -0.45 (95%CI: -0.72 to -0.18)]; 4) cervico-scapulothoracic strengthening/stabilization exercises to improve pain and function at intermediate term [SMDp -14.90 (95% CI:-22.40 to -7.39)]; 5) Mindfulness exercises (Qigong) minimally improved function but not global perceived effect at short term. Low evidence suggests 1) breathing exercises; 2) general fitness training; 3) stretching alone; and 4) feedback exercises combined with pattern synchronization may not change pain or function at immediate post treatment to short-term follow-up. Very low evidence suggests neuromuscular eye-neck co-ordination/proprioceptive exercises may improve pain and function at short-term follow-up.For chronic cervicogenic headache, moderate quality evidence supports static-dynamic cervico-scapulothoracic strengthening/endurance exercises including pressure biofeedback immediate post treatment and probably improves pain, function and global perceived effect at long-term follow-up. Low grade evidence supports sustained natural apophyseal glides (SNAG) exercises.For acute radiculopathy, low quality evidence suggests a small benefit for pain reduction at immediate post treatment with cervical stretch/strengthening/stabilization exercises.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

No high quality evidence was found, indicating that there is still uncertainty about the effectiveness of exercise for neck pain. Using specific strengthening exercises as a part of routine practice for chronic neck pain, cervicogenic headache and radiculopathy may be beneficial. Research showed the use of strengthening and endurance exercises for the cervico-scapulothoracic and shoulder may be beneficial in reducing pain and improving function. However, when only stretching exercises were used no beneficial effects may be expected. Future research should explore optimal dosage.

Effectiveness of an 8-week exercise programme on pain and specificity of neck muscle activity in patients with chronic neck pain: a randomized controlled study

BACKGROUND

Although exercise can be effective for relief of neck pain, little is known about the effect of exercise on the neural control of neck muscles.

METHODS

A randomized controlled trial was conducted on 46 women with chronic neck pain to investigate the immediate effectiveness of an 8-week exercise programme on pain and directional specificity of neck muscle activity. At baseline, the patients completed questionnaires including the neck disability index (NDI) and performed a circular contraction of their head in the horizontal plane at 15 N force, with continuous change in force direction in the range 0-360°. Electromyography (EMG) was recorded from the sternocleidomastoid (SCM) and splenius capitis (SCap) muscles. Tuning curves of the EMG amplitude were computed, which depicts muscle activity over a range of force directions. The mean point of the tuning curves defined a directional vector, which determined the specificity of muscle activity. Patients were randomly assigned either to a training or control group.

RESULTS

A significant between-group difference in the change in NDI was observed. A reduction in NDI was observed following training (pre: 18.2 ± 7.4; post: 14.1 ± 6.5; p < 0.01) but not for the control group (pre: 17.5 ± 6.3; post: 16.6 ± 7.4). The training group showed higher specificity of muscle activity post-intervention (pre: 18.6 ± 9.8%, post: 24.7 ± 14.3%; p < 0.05), whereas no change occurred for the control group (pre: 19.4 ± 11.9%, post: 18.2 ± 10.1%).

CONCLUSION

An exercise programme that aims to enhance motor control of the cervical spine improves the specificity of neck muscle activity and reduces pain and disability in patients with neck pain.

Evidence of Physiotherapy Interventions for Patients with Chronic Neck Pain: A Systematic Review of Randomised Controlled Trials

Chronic neck pain (CNP) is common and costly, and the effect of physiotherapeutic interventions on the condition is unclear. We reviewed the literature for evidence of effect of physiotherapy interventions on patients with CNP. Five bibliographic databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, Cochrane Library, and PEDro) were systematically searched. Randomised, placebo and active-treatment-controlled trials including physiotherapy interventions for adults with CNP were selected. Data were extracted primary outcome was pain. Risk of bias was appraised. Effect of an intervention was assessed, weighted to risk of bias. 42 trials reporting on randomised comparisons of various physiotherapy interventions and control conditions were eligible for inclusion involving 3919 patients with CNP. Out of these, 23 were unclear or at high risk of bias, and their results were considered moderate- or low-quality evidence. Nineteen were at low risk of bias, and here eight trials found effect on pain of a physiotherapy intervention. Only exercise therapy, focusing on strength and endurance training, and multimodal physiotherapy, cognitive-behavioural interventions, massage, manipulations, laser therapy, and to some extent also TNS appear to have an effect on CNP. However, sufficient evidence for application of a specific physiotherapy modality or aiming at a specific patient subgroup is not available.

Systematic review of manual therapies for nonspecific neck pain

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the effectiveness of manual therapies in the treatment of nonspecific neck pain.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Medline and the Cochrane Library were searched for randomized controlled trials of manual therapy or mobilization, used alone or with exercises to treat pain and functional impairment related to nonspecific neck pain. Cochrane Back Review Group criteria were used to assess the quality of the trials and the level of evidence (unclear, limited, moderate, or high) for short-, medium-, and long-term effects.

RESULTS

Of 27 identified trials, 18 were of high quality. In acute neck pain, effective treatments were thoracic manipulation combined with electrothermal therapy in the short term and cervical manipulation in the long term. In chronic neck pain and neck pain of variable duration, both pain and function improved consistently at all follow-up time points. None of the manual therapies used alone or in combination was superior over the others. In the long term, exercises alone or combined with manual therapies were superior over manual therapies used alone.

CONCLUSION

Manual therapies contribute usefully to the management of nonspecific neck pain. The level of evidence is moderate for short-term effects of upper thoracic manipulation in acute neck pain, limited for long-term effects of neck manipulation, and limited for all techniques and follow-up durations in chronic neck pain.

Massage for mechanical neck disorders

BACKGROUND

The prevalence of mechanical neck disorders (MND) is known to be both a hindrance to individuals and costly to society. As such, massage is widely used as a form of treatment for MND.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of massage on pain, function, patient satisfaction, global perceived effect, adverse effects and cost of care in adults with neck pain versus any comparison at immediate post-treatment to long-term follow-up.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched The Cochrane Library (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, MANTIS, CINAHL, and ICL databases from date of inception to 4 Feburary 2012.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Studies using random assignment were included.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently conducted citation identification, study selection, data abstraction and methodological quality assessment. Using a random-effects model, we calculated the risk ratio and standardised mean difference.

MAIN RESULTS

Fifteen trials met the inclusion criteria. The overall methodology of all the trials assessed was either low or very low GRADE level. None of the trials were of strong to moderate GRADE level. The results showed very low level evidence that certain massage techniques (traditional Chinese massage, classical and modified strain/counter strain technique) may have been more effective than control or placebo treatment in improving function and tenderness. There was very low level evidence that massage may have been more beneficial than education in the short term for pain bothersomeness. Along with that, there was low level evidence that ischaemic compression and passive stretch may have been more effective in combination rather than individually for pain reduction. The clinical applicability assessment showed that only 4/15 trials adequately described the massage technique. The majority of the trials assessed outcomes at immediate post-treatment, which is not an adequate time to assess clinical change. Due to the limitations in the quality of existing studies, we were unable to make any firm statement to guide clinical practice. We noted that only four of the 15 studies reported side effects. All four studies reported post-treatment pain as a side effect and one study (Irnich 2001) showed that 22% of the participants experienced low blood pressure following treatment.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

No recommendations for practice can be made at this time because the effectiveness of massage for neck pain remains uncertain.As a stand-alone treatment, massage for MND was found to provide an immediate or short-term effectiveness or both in pain and tenderness. Additionally, future research is needed in order to assess the long-term effects of treatment and treatments provided on more than one occasion.

Exercises for mechanical neck disorders

BACKGROUND

Neck disorders are common, disabling and costly. The effectiveness of exercise as a physiotherapy intervention remains unclear.

OBJECTIVES

To improve pain, disability, function, patient satisfaction, quality of life and global perceived effect in adults with neck pain.

SEARCH METHODS

Computerized searches were conducted up to February 2012.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included single therapeutic exercise randomized controlled trials for adults with neck pain with or without cervicogenic headache or radiculopathy.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently conducted selection, data extraction, 'Risk of bias' assessment, and clinical relevance. The quality of the body of evidence was assessed using GRADE. Relative risk and standardized mean differences (SMD) were calculated.  After judging clinical and statistical heterogeneity, we performed meta-analyses.

MAIN RESULTS

Six of the 21 selected trials had low risk of bias. Moderate quality evidence shows that combined cervical, scapulothoracic stretching and strengthening are beneficial for pain relief post treatment (pooled SMD -0.35, 95% confidence interval (CI): -0.60, -0.10) and at intermediate follow-up (pooled SMD -0.31, 95% CI: -0.57, -0.06), and improved function short term and intermediate term (pooled SMD -0.45, 95% CI: -0.72, -0.18) for chronic neck pain. Moderate quality evidence demonstrates patients are very satisfied with their care when treated with therapeutic exercise. Low quality evidence shows exercise is of benefit for pain in the short term and for function up to long-term follow-up for chronic neck pain. Low to moderate quality evidence shows that chronic neck pain does not respond to upper extremity stretching and strengthening or a general exercise program.Low to moderate quality evidence supports self-mobilization, craniocervical endurance and low load cervical-scapular endurance exercises in reducing pain, improving function and global perceived effect in the long term for subacute/chronic cervicogenic headache. Low quality evidence supports neck strengthening exercise in acute cervical radiculopathy for pain relief in the short term.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Low to moderate quality evidence supports the use of specific cervical and scapular stretching and strengthening exercise for chronic neck pain immediately post treatment and intermediate term, and cervicogenic headaches in the long term. Low to moderate evidence suggests no benefit for some upper extremity stretching and strengthening exercises or a general exercise program.  Future trials should consider using an exercise classification system to establish similarity between protocols and adequate sample sizes. Factorial trials would help determine the active treatment agent within a treatment regimen where a standardized representation of dosage is essential. Standardized reporting of adverse events is needed for balancing the likelihood of treatment benefits over potential harms.

Ottawa Panel evidence-based clinical practice guidelines on therapeutic massage for neck pain

OBJECTIVE

To update evidence-based clinical practice guideline (EBCPG) on the use of massage compared to a control or other treatments for adults (>18 years) suffering from sub-acute and chronic neck pain.

METHODS

A literature search was performed from January 1, 1948 to December 31, 2010 for relevant articles. The Ottawa Panel created inclusion criteria focusing on high methodological quality and grading methods. Recommendations were assigned a grade (A, B, C, C+, D, D+, D-) based on strength of evidence.

RESULTS

A total of 45 recommendations from ten articles were developed including 8 positive recommendations (6 grade A and 2 grade C+) and 23 neutral recommendations (12 grade C and 11 grade D).

DISCUSSION

Therapeutic massage can decrease pain, tenderness, and improve range of motion for sub-acute and chronic neck pain.

CONCLUSION

The Ottawa Panel was able to demonstrate that the massage interventions are effective for relieving immediate post-treatment neck pain symptoms, but data is insufficient for long-term effects.

Patient education for neck pain

BACKGROUND

Neck disorders are common, disabling, and costly. The effectiveness of patient education strategies is unclear.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the short- to long-term effects of therapeutic patient education (TPE) strategies on pain, function, disability, quality of life, global perceived effect, patient satisfaction, knowledge transfer, or behaviour change in adults with neck pain associated with whiplash or non-specific and specific mechanical neck pain with or without radiculopathy or cervicogenic headache.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched computerised bibliographic databases (inception to 11 July 2010).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Eligible studies were randomised controlled trials (RCT) investigating the effectiveness of TPE for acute to chronic neck pain.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Paired independent review authors conducted selection, data abstraction, and 'Risk of bias' assessment. We calculated risk ratio (RR) and standardised mean differences (SMD). Heterogeneity was assessed; no studies were pooled.

MAIN RESULTS

Of the 15 selected trials, three were rated low risk of bias. Three TPE themes emerged.Advice focusing on activation: There is moderate quality evidence (one trial, 348 participants) that an educational video of advice focusing on activation was more beneficial for acute whiplash-related pain when compared with no treatment at intermediate-term [RR 0.79 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.59 to 1.06)] but not long-term follow-up [0.89 (95% CI, 0.65 to 1.21)]. There is low quality evidence (one trial, 102 participants) that a whiplash pamphlet on advice focusing on activation is less beneficial for pain reduction, or no different in improving function and global perceived improvement from generic information given out in emergency care (control) for acute whiplash at short- or intermediate-term follow-up. Low to very low quality evidence (nine trials using diverse educational approaches) showed either no evidence of benefit or difference for varied outcomes. Advice focusing on pain & stress coping skills and workplace ergonomics: Very low quality evidence (three trials, 243 participants) favoured other treatment or showed no difference spanning numerous follow-up periods and disorder subtypes.  Low quality evidence (one trial, 192 participants) favoured specific exercise training for chronic neck pain at short-term follow-up.Self-care strategies: Very low quality evidence (one trial, 58 participants) indicated that self-care strategies did not relieve pain for acute to chronic neck pain at short-term follow-up.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

With the exception of one trial, this review has not shown effectiveness for educational interventions, including advice to activate, advice on stress-coping skills, workplace ergonomics and self-care strategies. Future research should be founded on sound adult learning theory and learning skill acquisition.

Translation and validation of the German version of the Bournemouth Questionnaire for Neck Pain

Background

Clinical outcome measures are important tools to monitor patient improvement during treatment as well as to document changes for research purposes. The short-form Bournemouth questionnaire for neck pain patients (BQN) was developed from the biopsychosocial model and measures pain, disability, cognitive and affective domains. It has been shown to be a valid and reliable outcome measure in English, French and Dutch and more sensitive to change compared to other questionnaires. The purpose of this study was to translate and validate a German version of the Bournemouth questionnaire for neck pain patients.

Methods

German translation and back translation into English of the BQN was done independently by four persons and overseen by an expert committee. Face validity of the German BQN was tested on 30 neck pain patients in a single chiropractic practice. Test-retest reliability was evaluated on 31 medical students and chiropractors before and after a lecture. The German BQN was then assessed on 102 first time neck pain patients at two chiropractic practices for internal consistency, external construct validity, external longitudinal construct validity and sensitivity to change compared to the German versions of the Neck Disability Index (NDI) and the Neck Pain and Disability Scale (NPAD).

Results

Face validity testing lead to minor changes to the German BQN. The Intraclass Correlation Coefficient for the test-retest reliability was 0.99. The internal consistency was strong for all 7 items of the BQN with Cronbach α's of .79 and .80 for the pre and post-treatment total scores. External construct validity and external longitudinal construct validity using Pearson's correlation coefficient showed statistically significant correlations for all 7 scales of the BQN with the other questionnaires. The German BQN showed greater responsiveness compared to the other questionnaires for all scales.

Conclusions

The German BQN is a valid and reliable outcome measure that has been successfully translated and culturally adapted. It is shorter, easier to use, and more responsive to change than the NDI and NPAD.

Treatment of patients with degenerative cervical radiculopathy using a multimodal conservative approach in a geriatric population: a case series

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective clinical case series.

OBJECTIVE

To describe the management of 10 patients with advanced cervical spondyloarthrosis with radiculopathy, using manual therapy, intermittent mechanical cervical traction, and home exercises.

BACKGROUND

Predictors and short-term outcomes of cervical radiculopathy have been published. These predictors have not been developed for, or applied to, geriatric patients with spondylitic radiculopathy.

CASE DESCRIPTION

A series of 10 patients (aged 67 to 82 years) were referred to a physical therapist for medically prediagnosed cervical spondyloarthrosis and radiculopathy, as determined by magnetic resonance imaging. Neck Disability Index (NDI), numeric pain rating scale (NPRS), upper limb tension testing, Spurling's test, and the cervical distraction test were all completed on each patient at initial examination and at discharge. NDI and NPRS data were also collected at 6 months posttreatment. Intervention included manual therapy (including high-velocity low-amplitude thrust manipulation) of the upper thoracic and cervical spine, intermittent mechanical cervical traction, and a home program (including deep cervical flexor strengthening) for 6 to 12 sessions over a period of 3 to 6 weeks.

OUTCOMES

All 10 patients had substantial improvement in NPRS and NDI scores. The mean NPRS score was less than 1/10, and the mean NDI score was 6/50 at discharge, compared to the original mean NPRS and NDI scores of 5.7 and 27.4, respectively. All patients reported maintaining those gains for 6 months.

DISCUSSION

A multimodal approach for patients diagnosed with cervical spondyloarthrosis with radicular symptoms was useful in this geriatric population to reduce pain, minimize radicular symptoms, and improve functional outcomes.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapy, level 4.

Treatment of a patient with cervical radiculopathy using thoracic spine thrust manipulation, soft tissue mobilization, and exercise

While there is currently little evidence to suggest which non-operative treatment approach is best for the management of patients with cervical radiculopathy, emerging evidence suggests that these patients benefit from a multimodal treatment approach. The purpose of this case report is to describe the physical therapy management of a patient with cervical radiculopathy. Diagnosis was based on the patient's meeting three of the four criteria in the diagnostic test cluster currently used to identify patients with cervical radiculopathy. Treatment included thrust manipulation of the thoracic spine, soft tissue mobilization, and therapeutic exercise. After three visits, patient-perceived disability, as measured by the Patient-Specific Functional Scale, improved from 5/10 to 10/10. The Numeric Pain Rating Score decreased from 4.66/10 to 0/10. The patient rated his improvement as a very great deal better on the Global Rating of Change Scale. These clinically meaningful improvements were maintained at the 14-week follow-up. While a cause-and-effect relationship may not be established from a case report, a multimodal approach including thoracic spine manipulation, soft tissue mobilization, and therapeutic exercise was associated with decreased pain and perceived disability in a patient with cervical radiculopathy. Further research is needed to investigate benefits of the components of this approach.

Lower trapezius muscle strength in individuals with unilateral neck pain

STUDY DESIGN

Descriptive and within-subject comparative study.

OBJECTIVES

To examine lower trapezius muscle strength in individuals with unilateral neck pain.

BACKGROUND

Previous research has established the presence of reduced cervical flexor, extensor, and rotator muscle strength in individuals with neck pain. Some authors have suggested that individuals with neck pain have limited strength of the lower trapezius muscle, yet no research has investigated this claim.

METHODS

Twenty-five individuals with unilateral neck pain participated in this study. Participants completed the Northwick Park Neck Pain Questionnaire (NPQ) as a measure of disability. Side of neck pain, duration of neck pain, and hand dominance were recorded. Lower trapezius muscle strength was assessed bilaterally in each participant, using a handheld dynamometer.

RESULTS

A significant difference in lower trapezius strength was found between sides (P<.001), with participants demonstrating an average of 3.9 N less force on the side of neck pain. The tested levels of association between NPQ score and percent strength deficit (r = -0.31, P = .13), and between symptom duration and percent strength deficit (r = -0.25, P = .22), were not statistically significant. No significant association was found between hand dominance and side of stronger lower trapezius (P = .59).

CONCLUSION

The results of this study demonstrate that individuals with unilateral neck pain exhibit significantly less lower trapezius strength on the side of neck pain compared to the contralateral side. This study suggests a possible association between lower trapezius muscle weakness and neck pain.

A randomised controlled trial of preventive spinal manipulation with and without a home exercise program for patients with chronic neck pain

Background

Evidence indicates that supervised home exercises, combined or not with manual therapy, can be beneficial for patients with non-specific chronic neck pain (NCNP). The objective of the study is to investigate the efficacy of preventive spinal manipulative therapy (SMT) compared to a no treatment group in NCNP patients. Another objective is to assess the efficacy of SMT with and without a home exercise program.

Methods

Ninety-eight patients underwent a short symptomatic phase of treatment before being randomly allocated to either an attention-group (n = 29), a SMT group (n = 36) or a SMT + exercise group (n = 33). The preventive phase of treatment, which lasted for 10 months, consisted of meeting with a chiropractor every two months to evaluate and discuss symptoms (attention-control group), 1 monthly SMT session (SMT group) or 1 monthly SMT session combined with a home exercise program (SMT + exercise group). The primary and secondary outcome measures were represented by scores on a 10-cm visual analog scale (VAS), active cervical ranges of motion (cROM), the neck disability index (NDI) and the Bournemouth questionnaire (BQ). Exploratory outcome measures were scored on the Fear-avoidance Behaviour Questionnaire (FABQ) and the SF-12 Questionnaire.

Results

Our results show that, in the preventive phase of the trial, all 3 groups showed primary and secondary outcomes scores similar to those obtain following the non-randomised, symptomatic phase. No group difference was observed for the primary, secondary and exploratory variables. Significant improvements in FABQ scores were noted in all groups during the preventive phase of the trial. However, no significant change in health related quality of life (HRQL) was associated with the preventive phase.

Conclusions

This study hypothesised that participants in the combined intervention group would have less pain and disability and better function than participants from the 2 other groups during the preventive phase of the trial. This hypothesis was not supported by the study results. Lack of a treatment specific effect is discussed in relation to the placebo and patient provider interactions in manual therapies. Further research is needed to delineate the specific and non-specific effects of treatment modalities to prevent unnecessary disability and to minimise morbidity related to NCNP. Additional investigation is also required to identify the best strategies for secondary and tertiary prevention of NCNP.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT00566930

Development of a clinical prediction rule to identify patients with neck pain who are likely to benefit from home-based mechanical cervical traction

The objective of the study was to identify the population of patients with neck pain who improved with home-based mechanical cervical traction (HMCT). A prospective cohort study was conducted in a physical therapy clinic at a local hospital. Patients with neck pain referred to the clinic for physical therapy were included in the study. A HMCT program was given to participants for 2 weeks. The patient's demographic data, Numerical Pain Scale (NPS) score, Neck Disability Index (NDI) and Fear-Avoidance Beliefs Questionnaire score were collected, and standard physical examination of the cervical spine was conducted before intervention. The NPS score, NDI and a global rating of perceived improvement were collected after the intervention was completed. A total of 103 patients participated in the study and 47 had a positive response to HMCT. A clinical prediction rule with four variables (Fear-Avoidance Beliefs Work Subscale score < 13, pre-intervention pain intensity ≥ 7/10, positive cervical distraction test and pain below shoulder) was identified. With satisfaction of at least three out of four variables (positive likelihood ratio = 4.77), the intervention's success rate increased from 45.6% to over 80%. It appears that patients with neck pain who are likely to respond to HMCT may be identified.

Primary care randomized clinical trial: manual therapy effectiveness in comparison with TENS in patients with neck pain

This study investigated effectiveness of manual therapy (MT) with transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) to reduce pain intensity in patients with mechanical neck disorder (MND). A randomized multi-centered controlled clinical trial was performed in 12 Primary Care Physiotherapy Units in Madrid Region. Ninety patients were included with diagnoses of subacute or chronic MND without neurological damage, 47 patients received MT and 43 TENS. The primary outcome was pain intensity measured in millimeters using the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS). Also disability, quality of life, adverse effects and sociodemographic and prognosis variables were measured. Three evaluations were performed (before, when the procedure finished and six months after). Seventy-one patients (79%) completed the follow-up measurement at six months. In more than half of the treated patients the procedure had a clinically relevant "short term" result after having ended the intervention, when either MT or TENS was used. The success rate decreased to one-third of the patients 6 months after the intervention. No differences can be found in the reduction of pain, in the decrease of disability nor in the quality of life between both therapies. Both analyzed physiotherapy techniques produce a short-term pain reduction that is clinically relevant.

Multimodal group rehabilitation compared to usual care for patients with chronic neck pain: a pilot study

The aim of this pilot randomised controlled trial (RCT) was to compare multimodal group rehabilitation to usual care physiotherapy for patients with chronic neck pain (CNP). Participants (n=14) were randomly assigned to one of two interventions, multimodal group rehabilitation or usual care physiotherapy. Multimodal group rehabilitation involved stability, strengthening and proprioceptive exercises along with an educational programme. Patients attended for 1h, once a week for six weeks. The usual care group was treated as deemed appropriate by their physiotherapist. A blinded assessor recorded baseline and post-intervention scores of disability and pain using the neck disability index (NDI) and the 0-10 pain numerical rating scale (NRS), respectively. One participant from each group dropped out before receiving any intervention. Post-intervention both groups significantly improved in both function and pain scores (p ≤ 0.01). The mean change in the NDI scores for the multimodal group versus the usual care group were 12.3 ± 5.3% and 7.4 ± 4.8%, and pain NRS score changes were 4.6 ± 2.3 and 4.5 ± 2.2, respectively. There was no significant difference in improvements in disability (p = 0.84) or pain (p = 0.67) between groups. These results warrant further investigation of multimodal group rehabilitation for CNP, and provide data to inform an appropriately powered full-scale RCT with long-term follow-up.

Manual therapy with or without physical medicine modalities for neck pain: a systematic review

Manual therapy interventions are often used with or without physical medicine modalities to treat neck pain. This review assessed the effect of 1) manipulation and mobilisation, 2) manipulation, mobilisation and soft tissue work, and 3) manual therapy with physical medicine modalities on pain, function, patient satisfaction, quality of life (QoL), and global perceived effect (GPE) in adults with neck pain. A computerised search for randomised trials was performed up to July 2009. Two or more authors independently selected studies, abstracted data, and assessed methodological quality. Pooled relative risk (RR) and standardised mean differences (SMD) were calculated when possible. We included 19 trials, 37% of which had a low risk of bias. Moderate quality evidence (1 trial, 221 participants) suggested mobilisation, manipulation and soft tissue techniques decrease pain and improved satisfaction when compared to short wave diathermy, and that this treatment combination paired with advice and exercise produces greater improvements in GPE and satisfaction than advice and exercise alone for acute neck pain. Low quality evidence suggests a clinically important benefit favouring mobilisation and manipulation in pain relief [1 meta-analysis, 112 participants: SMD -0.34(95% CI: -0.71, 0.03), improved function and GPE (1 trial, 94 participants) for participants with chronic cervicogenic headache when compared to a control at intermediate and long term follow-up; but no difference when used with various physical medicine modalities.

Adverse events associated with the use of cervical manipulation and mobilization for the treatment of neck pain in adults: a systematic review

Adverse events (AE) are a concern for practitioners utilizing cervical manipulation or mobilization. While efficacious, these techniques are associated with rare but serious adverse events. Five bibliographic databases (PubMed, CINAHL, PEDro, AMED, EMBASE) and the gray literature were searched from 1998 to 2009 for any AE associated with cervical manipulation or mobilization for neck pain. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs), prospective or cross-sectional observational studies were included. Two independent reviewers conducted study selection, method quality assessment and data abstraction. Pooled relative risks (RR) were calculated. Study quality was assessed using the Cochrane system, a modified Critical Appraisal Skills Program form and the McHarm scale to assess the reporting of harms. Seventeen of 76 identified citations resulted in no major AE. Two pooled estimates for minor AE found transient neurological symptoms [RR 1.96 (95% CI: 1.09-3.54) p < 0.05]; and increased neck pain [RR 1.23 (95% CI: 0.85-1.77) p > .05]. Forty-four studies (58%) were excluded for not reporting AE. No definitive conclusions can be made due to a small number of studies, weak association, moderate study quality, and notable ascertainment bias. Improved reporting of AE in manual therapy trials as recommended by the CONSORT statement extension on harms reporting is warranted.

Manipulation or mobilisation for neck pain

BACKGROUND

Manipulation and mobilisation are often used, either alone or combined with other treatment approaches, to treat neck pain.

OBJECTIVES

To assess if manipulation or mobilisation improves pain, function/disability, patient satisfaction, quality of life, and global perceived effect in adults with acute/subacute/chronic neck pain with or without cervicogenic headache or radicular findings.

SEARCH STRATEGY

CENTRAL (The Cochrane Library 2009, issue 3) and MEDLINE, EMBASE, Manual Alternative and Natural Therapy, CINAHL, and Index to Chiropractic Literature were updated to July 2009.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials on manipulation or mobilisation.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently selected studies, abstracted data, and assessed risk of bias. Pooled relative risk and standardised mean differences (SMD) were calculated.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 27 trials (1522 participants).Cervical Manipulation for subacute/chronic neck pain : Moderate quality evidence suggested manipulation and mobilisation produced similar effects on pain, function and patient satisfaction at intermediate-term follow-up. Low quality evidence showed manipulation alone compared to a control may provide short- term relief following one to four sessions (SMD pooled -0.90 (95%CI: -1.78 to -0.02)) and that nine or 12 sessions were superior to three for pain and disability in cervicogenic headache. Optimal technique and dose need to be determined.Thoracic Manipulation for acute/chronic neck pain : Low quality evidence supported thoracic manipulation as an additional therapy for pain reduction (NNT 7; 46.6% treatment advantage) and increased function (NNT 5; 40.6% treatment advantage) in acute pain and favoured a single session of thoracic manipulation for immediate pain reduction compared to placebo for chronic neck pain (NNT 5, 29% treatment advantage).Mobilisation for subacute/chronic neck pain: In addition to the evidence noted above, low quality evidence for subacute and chronic neck pain indicated that 1) a combination of Maitland mobilisation techniques was similar to acupuncture for immediate pain relief and increased function; 2) there was no difference between mobilisation and acupuncture as additional treatments for immediate pain relief and improved function; and 3) neural dynamic mobilisations may produce clinically important reduction of pain immediately post-treatment. Certain mobilisation techniques were superior.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Cervical manipulation and mobilisation produced similar changes. Either may provide immediate- or short-term change; no long-term data are available. Thoracic manipulation may improve pain and function. Optimal techniques and dose are unresolved. Further research is very likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and is likely to change the estimate.

Self-regulation in a small professional group is an important step toward professionalization: the Chiropractic Association in Singapore

OBJECTIVE

The chiropractic profession is immersed in the process of professionalization with particular consideration of self-regulation as an avenue toward state recognition in Singapore. The purpose of this article is to discuss the emergence of chiropractic as a profession in Singapore and the Chiropractic Association (Singapore).

DISCUSSION

The concept of professionalization is varied and context based, and the institutionalization of formal knowledge plays an important role in the socialization of how a profession forms a unifying identity. The difference in institutional socialization of the professions plays a role in the way a profession is perceived in the hierarchy of societal power. Continuing professional development is an essential part of professionalism and is best done within the realm of self-regulation and autonomous control of the profession itself.

CONCLUSION

The social process of professionalization can be a process of internal conflict and external battles almost from the profession's inception with university training only entering late in its development, rather than being a linear development. A sequential progress ensued as with other professions, with the seeking of legal protection and a code of ethics as the final areas reached toward becoming an acknowledged member of the health care system.

The effect of two exercise regimes; motor control versus endurance/strength training for patients with whiplash-associated disorders: a randomized controlled pilot study

Objective: To compare the effect of exercise regimes with focus on either motor control training or endurance/strength training for patients with whiplash-associated disorders in subacute phase.

Design: Randomized controlled trial.

Setting: An outpatient spine clinic in Norway.

Participants: Twenty-five subjects with a whiplash-associated disorder still having symptoms or disability six weeks after injury.

Interventions: The participants received 6—10 sessions of physiotherapy for six weeks with focus on either motor control or endurance and strength of neck muscles.

Measurements: The primary outcome measure was the Neck Disability Index. Secondary outcome measures were pain intensity, neck functioning and sick leave.

Results: No statistical significant differences concerning primary and secondary outcome measures were demonstrated between the groups. Approximately half of the participants in both groups obtained a clinically important change (improvement) on perceived disability assessed by Neck Disability Index at six weeks and one-year follow-up. The changes within both groups were statistically significant at six weeks, but not at one-year follow-up. For most pain-related variables clinical significant improvement was demonstrated in both groups at six weeks, but for fewer participants at one year. There was also statistical significant improvement within groups in some of the physical performance tests at one-year follow-up.

Conclusion: The changes associated with motor control training and endurance/ strength training of neck muscles were similar for reduced disability, pain and for improving physical performance. With a low number of participants and no control group, however, we cannot be sure whether the improvements are due to interventions or other reasons.

The assessment of the cervical spine. Part 1: Range of motion and proprioception

Neck pain and headache of cervical origin are complaints affecting an increasing number of the general population. Mechanical factors such as sustained neck postures or movements and long-term "abnormal" physiologic loads on the neck are believed to affect the cervical structures and compromise neck function. A comprehensive assessment of neck function requires evaluation of its physical parameters such as range of motion, proprioception, strength and endurance/fatigue. The complicated structure of the cervical spine however, makes it difficult for any clinician to obtain reliable and valid results. The aim of the first part of this systematic critical review is to identify the factors influencing the assessment of range of motion and proprioception of the cervical spine.

Identifying the best treatment among common nonsurgical neck pain treatments: a decision analysis

STUDY DESIGN

Decision analysis.

OBJECTIVE

To identify the best treatment for nonspecific neck pain.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

In Canada and the United States, the most commonly prescribed neck pain treatments are nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), exercise, and manual therapy. Deciding which treatment is best is difficult because of the trade-offs between beneficial and harmful effects, and because of the uncertainty of these effects.

METHODS

(Quality-adjusted) life expectancy associated with standard NSAIDs, Cox-2 NSAIDs, exercise, mobilization, and manipulation were compared in a decisionanalytic model. Estimates of the course of neck pain, background risk of adverse events in the general population, treatment effectiveness and risk, and patient-preferences were input into the model. Assuming equal effectiveness, we conducted a baseline analysis using risk of harm only. We assessed the stability of the baseline results by conducting a second analysis that incorporated effectiveness data from a high-quality randomized trial.

RESULTS

There were no important differences across treatments. The difference between the highest and lowest ranked treatments predicted by the baseline model was 4.5 days of life expectancy and 3.4 quality-adjusted life-days. The difference between the highest and lowest ranked treatments predicted by the second model was 7.3 quality-adjusted life-days.

CONCLUSION

When the objective is to maximize life expectancy and quality-adjusted life expectancy, none of the treatments in our analysis were clearly superior.

Cervical muscles strength testing: methods and clinical implications

BACKGROUND

Neck muscles are responsible for directing the head and for maintaining its posture. As a result, the muscular mechanical output is correspondingly moderate but not insignificant as evidenced by a positive therapeutic effect when reconditioning is indicated.

SPECIAL FEATURES

Cervical muscle strength (CS) measurement and interpretation occupy a unique niche in the domain of muscle performance. Due to the wide variety of devices and protocols, a vast range of strength scores has been reported, denying the formation of reliable reference values.

METHODS

A literature search based on the keywords "cervical/head/neck" strength was conducted. The search yielded 34 relevant papers which were reviewed according to preset criteria.

SUMMARY

Overall studies indicate that compared to normal subjects patients suffering from neck-related disorders present with significant reduction in CS, whereas women are weaker than men by about 40%. Noteworthy a significant drop in CS in both sexes is delayed until the seventh decade. In terms of its reproducibility, CS findings have been investigated using primarily relative parameters, and hence, the associated error is not yet established. Therefore, application of CS as a clinical outcome measure, particularly for assessing change due to intervention, should be critically conducted.

Maximal voluntary isometric neck strength deficits in adults with whiplash-associated disorders and association with pain and fear of movement

STUDY DESIGN

Controlled laboratory study using a cross-sectional, repeated-measures design.

OBJECTIVES

To quantify maximal voluntary isometric neck forces in healthy subjects and individuals with whiplash-associated disorder (WAD), using an objective measurement system to evaluate the test-retest properties of these strength measurements and to assess the links between neck strength, pain, kinesiophobia, and catastrophizing in patients with WAD.

BACKGROUND

The prognosis of WAD is difficult to predict due to a lack of objective measurement methods and to our limited understanding of the role of psychological factors in the development of chronic WAD symptoms.

METHODS AND MEASURES

Fourteen subjects with chronic WAD grade I or II and an age-matched, healthy group (n = 28) participated in this study. Cervical strength was measured with the Multi-Cervical Unit (MCU) in 6 directions, and pain was measured with a visual analog scale. Individuals in the WAD group completed the Neck Disability Index (NDI), the Tampa Scale for Kinesiophobia (TSK), and the Pain Catastrophizing Scale (PCS).

RESULTS

Significant deficits in strength were observed for the individuals in the WAD group compared to the healthy group, particularly in extension, retraction, and left lateral flexion (P<.05). The MCU demonstrated good intratester reliability for the healthy group (ICC = 0.80-0.92) and the WAD group (ICC = 0.85-0.98), and small standard errors of measurement for both groups. No significant association was found between neck strength and NDI, TSK, and PCS.

CONCLUSION

The MCU demonstrated good test-retest properties for healthy subjects and individuals with WAD. Cervical strength was lower in individuals with WAD; however, the strength deficits were not clearly linked with psychological factors.

Patient education for neck pain with or without radiculopathy

BACKGROUND

Neck disorders are common, disabling, and costly. The effectiveness of patient education strategies is unclear.

OBJECTIVES

To assess whether patient education strategies, either alone or in combination with other treatments, are of benefit for pain, function, global perceived effect, quality of life, or patient satisfaction, in adults with neck pain with and without radiculopathy.

SEARCH STRATEGY

Computerized bibliographic databases were searched from their start up to May 31, 2008.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Eligible studies were quasi or randomized trials (RCT) investigating the effectiveness of patient education strategies for neck disorder.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Paired independent review authors carried out study selection, data abstraction, and methodological quality assessment. Relative risk and standardized mean differences (SMD) were calculated. The appropriateness of combining studies was assessed on clinical and statistical grounds. Because of differences in intervention type or disorder, no studies were considered appropriate to pool.

MAIN RESULTS

Of the 10 selected trials, two (20%) were rated high quality. Advice was assessed as follows:Eight trials of advice focusing on activation compared to no treatment or to various active treatments, including therapeutic exercise, manual therapy and cognitive behavioural therapy, showed either inferiority or no difference for pain, spanning a full range of follow-up periods and disorder types. When compared to rest, two trials that assessed acute whiplash-associated disorders (WAD) showed moderate evidence of no difference for various forms of advice focusing on activation. Two trials studying advice focusing on pain & stress coping skills found moderate evidence of no benefit for pain in chronic mechanical neck disorder (MND) at intermediate/long-term follow-up. One trial compared the effects of ' traditional neck school ' to no treatment, yielding limited evidence of no benefit for pain at intermediate-term follow-up in mixed acute/subacute/chronic neck pain.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This review has not shown effectiveness for educational interventions in various disorder types and follow-up periods, including advice to activate, advice on stress coping skills, and 'neck school'. In future research, further attention to methodological quality is necessary. Studies of multimodal interventions should consider study designs, such as factorial designs, that permit discrimination of the specific educational components.