Immediate effects of a thoracic spine thrust manipulation on the autonomic nervous system: a randomized clinical trial

The effect of a spinal thrust manipulation's audible pop on brain wave activity: a quasi-experimental repeated measure design

Introduction

High velocity thrust manipulation is commonly used when managing joint dysfunctions. Often, these thrust maneuvers will elicit an audible pop. It has been unclear what conclusively causes this audible sound and its clinical meaningfulness. This study sought to identify the effect of the audible pop on brainwave activity directly following a prone T7 thrust manipulation in asymptomatic/healthy subjects.

Methods

This was a quasi-experimental repeated measure study design in which 57 subjects completed the study protocol. Brain wave activity was measured with the Emotiv EPOC+, which collects data with a frequency of 128 HZ and has 14 electrodes. Testing was performed in a controlled environment with minimal electrical interference (as measured with a Gauss meter), temperature variance, lighting variance, sound pollution, and other variable changes that could have influenced or interfered with pure EEG data acquisition. After accommodation each subject underwent a prone T7 posterior-anterior thrust manipulation. Immediately after the thrust manipulation the brainwave activity was measured for 10 seconds.

Results

The non-audible group (N = 20) consisted of 55% males, and the audible group (N = 37) consisted of 43% males. The non-audible group EEG data revealed a significant change in brain wave activity under some of the electrodes in the frontal, parietal, and the occipital lobes. In the audible group, there was a significant change in brain wave activity under all electrodes in the frontal lobes, the parietal lobe, and the occipital lobes but not the temporal lobes.

Conclusion

The audible sounds caused by a thoracic high velocity thrust manipulation did not affect the activity in the audible centers in the temporal brain region. The results support the hypothesis that thrust manipulation with or without audible sound results in a generalized relaxation immediately following the manipulation. The absence of a significant difference in brainwave activity in the frontal lobe in this study might indicate that the audible pop does not produce a "placebo" mechanism.

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.

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

PURPOSE

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Effectiveness of spinal manipulation in influencing the autonomic nervous system - a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Spinal manipulation (SM) has been hypothesized to influence the autonomic nervous system (ANS). Further, it has been proposed that the effects may vary depending on the segment manipulated. The aim of this systematic review was to synthesize the current level of evidence for SM in influencing the ANS in healthy and/or symptomatic population.

METHODS

Various databases (n = 8) were searched (inception till May 2023) and 14 trials (n = 618 participants) were included in the review. Two authors independently screened, extracted and assessed the risk of bias in included studies. The data were synthesized using standard mean differences and meta-analysis for the primary outcome measures. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) was used for assessing the quality of the body of evidence for each outcome of interest.

RESULTS

Overall, there was low quality evidence that SM did not influence any measure of ANS including heart rate variability (HRV), oxy-hemoglobin, blood pressure, epinephrine and nor-epinephrine. However, there was low quality evidence that cervical spine manipulation may influence high frequency parameter of HRV, indicating its influence on the parasympathetic nervous system.

CONCLUSION

When compared with control or sham interventions, SM did not alter the ANS. Due to invalid methodologies and the low quality of included studies, findings must be interpreted with great caution. Future studies are needed which employ rigorous data collection processes to verify the true physiological implications of SM on ANS.

Effectiveness and safety of thoracic manipulation in the treatment of neck pain: An updated systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this meta-analysis was to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of thoracic manipulation (TM) in patients with neck pain (NP).

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this meta-analysis was to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of thoracic manipulation (TM) in patients with neck pain (NP).

METHODS

Seven electronic databases were searched from their inception through October 2023 by two authors. The methodological quality assessments were performed with the Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro) scale. Pain, cervical range of motion (ROM), disability, and quality of life (QOL) were estimated for TM treatment in patients with NP.

RESULTS

Eighteen randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with 914 patients were included with a PEDro score of 6.923 ± 3.120. Pooled effect sizes of pain (SMD =-0.481, 95% CI -0.653 to -0.309, P= 0.000), disability (SMD =-1.435, 95% CI -2.480 to -0.390, P= 0.007), QOL-physical component score (PCS) (SMD = 0.658, 95% CI 0.290 to 1.025, P= 0.000), ROM of flexion (SMD = 0.921, 95% CI 0.287 to 1.555, P= 0.000), ROM of extension (SMD = 0.572, 95% CI 0.321 to 0.822, P= 0.000), ROM of left lateral flexion (SMD = 0.593, 95% CI 0.075 to 1.112, P= 0.025) and ROM of left rotation (SMD = 0.230, 95% CI 0.010 to 0.450, P= 0.04) were favored by the TM group.

CONCLUSIONS

TM provides short-term effect on relieving neck pain, increasing cervical ROM, and disability in patients with NP without serious side effects. Continuous therapy and distraction therapy are recommended as optimal choice on reducing pain and improving cervical ROM, especially in patients with chronic NP (> 3 months). The TM-induced improvements in the QOL of patients with NP should be verified by more further high-quality RCTs.

Neuromodulation of the Autonomic Nervous System in Chronic Low Back Pain: A Randomized, Controlled, Crossover Clinical Trial

Chronic pain is a societal concern influencing the autonomic nervous system. This system can be captured with automated pupillometry. The direct connection between the epidermal cells and the brain is presented as part of the central nervous system, reflecting the modulation of the autonomic system. This study's aim was to investigate if tape containing magnetic particles (TCMP) has an immediate effect on the autonomic nervous system (ANS) and influences chronic low back pain. Twenty-three subjects completed this study. Subjects were randomized to either receive the control tape (CT) or TCMP first. Each subject underwent a pain provocative pressure test on the spinous process, followed by the skin pinch test and automated pupillometry. Next, the TCMP/control tape was applied. After tape removal, a second provocative spinous process pressure test and skin pinch test were performed. Subjects returned for a second testing day to receive the other tape application. The results demonstrate that TCMP had an immediate significant effect on the autonomic nervous system and resulted in decreased chronic lower back pain. We postulate that this modulation by TCMP s has an immediate effect on the autonomic system and reducing perceived pain, opening a large field of future research.

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

PURPOSE

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Pain Neuroscience Education Delivered by a Student Physical Therapist for a Patient with Persistent Musculoskeletal Pain

Patient: Female, 65-year-old

Final Diagnosis: Fibromyalgia • neck pain radiculopathy • rotator cuff injury bilaterally

Symptoms: Chronic pain

Medication: —

Clinical Procedure: Manual therapy • pain neuroscience education

Specialty: Rehabilitation

Thoracic Spinal Manipulation Effect on Neuroendocrine Response in People With Achilles Tendinopathy: A Randomized Crossover Trial

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of the present study was to determine the neuroendocrine response after a thoracic spinal manipulation in people with Achilles tendinopathy.

METHODS

This was a randomized 2-sequence, 2-period crossover trial. A total of 24 participants, mean (standard deviation) age of 48 (7) years, with a diagnosis of Achilles tendinopathy (>3 mo) were randomly assigned into sequence 1 (sham intervention and then thoracic spinal manipulation) or sequence 2 (thoracic spinal manipulation and then sham intervention). The trial was conducted at a university laboratory with a washout period of 1 week. The primary outcome measure was the testosterone/cortisol (T/C) ratio (salivary samples). The secondary outcome measures included heart rate variability (measured with electrocardiography) and total oxygenation index (nmol/L) of calf muscle and Achilles tendon (measured with near-infrared spectroscopy). A 2-way mixed-model analysis of variance was performed. The statistic of interest was the condition by time interaction.

RESULTS

A statistically significant condition by time interaction was found for the T/C ratio (mean difference: -0.16; confidence interval: -0.33 to 0.006; interaction: P < .05) and the total oxygenation index (mean difference: 1.35; confidence interval: -1.3 to 4.1; interaction: P < .05) of calf muscle but not for Achilles tendon (P = .6); however, no difference was found for heart rate variability (P = .5).

CONCLUSION

In people with Achilles tendinopathy, thoracic spinal manipulation resulted in immediate increase in the total oxygenation index in the calf muscle followed by an increase in the T/C ratio 6 hours post-intervention.

The immediate effect of a single session of pain neuroscience education on pain and the autonomic nervous system in subjects with persistent pain, a pilot study

BACKGROUND

The autonomic nervous system is a system that operates at the subconscious level and has been associated with neurobehavioral aspects of pain. Overall, persistent pain has a stimulating effect on the sympathetic nervous system. A promising emerging nonpharmacological treatment to manage persistent pain is neuroscience-based pain education. The overarching goal of neuroscience-based pain education is to change cognitions about pain and the pain experience through education. The aim was to determine the immediate and short-term impact of a neuroscience-based pain education video on the autonomic nervous system and pain in a subgroup of individuals with persistent pain.

METHODS

A convenience sample of 26 subjects were recruited for this study. Each subject indicated their pain level at the time of testing using a Visual Analogue Scale. Automated pupillometry was utilized to measure pupil diameter. After two minutes of accommodation to the goggles, the pupil was measured continuously for 60 s. Following this a 5-minute video presentation "Understanding Pain" was watched, followed by a continuous pupil measurement for 60 s. Three minutes after this measure, the final pupil diameter measurement was taken for 60 s. After completing the final pupil measure, the subject was asked to fill out a second Visual Analogue Scale and a Global Rate of Change.

OUTCOMES

Each subject completed a Global Rating of Change Scale and the mean score was 1.14 (SD = 1.61 and a SEM = 0.), supporting the hypothesis of an overall self-perceived benefit from the intervention. There was a statistically significant difference in pain following the video, P < 0.01. A significant correlation was observed between the self-perceived decrease in pain level and the Global Rating of Change score, p = 0.02. There was no statistically significant difference in the mean pupil diameter following the video with p = 0.76 for the right eye and p = 0.250 for the left eye.

DISCUSSION

This pilot study demonstrated that a 5-minute neuroscience-based pain education video reduced perceived pain in a small sample of subjects with persistent pain. Watching the neuroscience-based pain education video did not seem to result in an immediate generalized autonomic nervous system response. However, it resulted in a different reaction on each eye. This unequal response might be the result of the hemispheric lateralization of the ANS. This study supports the fact that the pain experience is determined by the balance between conscious cognitive processes and subconscious processes based on previous psychological experiences.

Sham treatment effects in manual therapy trials on back pain patients: a systematic review and pairwise meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To assess the effects and reliability of sham procedures in manual therapy (MT) trials in the treatment of back pain (BP) in order to provide methodological guidance for clinical trial development.

DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analysis.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

Different databases were screened up to 20 August 2020. Randomised controlled trials involving adults affected by BP (cervical and lumbar), acute or chronic, were included.Hand contact sham treatment (ST) was compared with different MT (physiotherapy, chiropractic, osteopathy, massage, kinesiology and reflexology) and to no treatment. Primary outcomes were BP improvement, success of blinding and adverse effect (AE). Secondary outcomes were number of drop-outs. Dichotomous outcomes were analysed using risk ratio (RR), continuous using mean difference (MD), 95% CIs. The minimal clinically important difference was 30 mm changes in pain score.

RESULTS

24 trials were included involving 2019 participants. Very low evidence quality suggests clinically insignificant pain improvement in favour of MT compared with ST (MD 3.86, 95% CI 3.29 to 4.43) and no differences between ST and no treatment (MD -5.84, 95% CI -20.46 to 8.78).ST reliability shows a high percentage of correct detection by participants (ranged from 46.7% to 83.5%), spinal manipulation being the most recognised technique.Low quality of evidence suggests that AE and drop-out rates were similar between ST and MT (RR AE=0.84, 95% CI 0.55 to 1.28, RR drop-outs=0.98, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.25). A similar drop-out rate was reported for no treatment (RR=0.82, 95% 0.43 to 1.55).

CONCLUSIONS

MT does not seem to have clinically relevant effect compared with ST. Similar effects were found with no treatment. The heterogeneousness of sham MT studies and the very low quality of evidence render uncertain these review findings.Future trials should develop reliable kinds of ST, similar to active treatment, to ensure participant blinding and to guarantee a proper sample size for the reliable detection of clinically meaningful treatment effects.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42020198301.

A systematic review and meta-analysis on effect of spinal mobilization and manipulation on cardiovascular responses

Background: Spinal pain or misalignment is a very common disorder affecting a significant number of populations resulting in substantial disability and economic burden. Various manual therapeutic techniques such as spinal manipulations and mobilizations can be used to treat and manage pain and movement dysfunctions such as spinal mal-alignments and associated complications. These manual therapeutic techniques can affect the cardiovascular parameters.

Objective: The objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to assess the effect of spinal manipulation and mobilization on cardiovascular parameters.

Methods: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the effects of spinal mobilization and manipulation on cardiovascular responses. Mean changes in Systolic Blood Pressure (SBP), Diastolic Blood Pressure (DBP) and Heart Rate (HR) were primary outcome measures. RevMan 5.3 software was used for the meta-analyses. Quality of the included studies was assessed by PEDro Rating scale. Risk of bias was assessed by Cochrane collaboration tool of risk of bias.

Results: Results of meta-analysis showed that there was statistically significant decrease in SBP ([Formula: see text], 95% [Formula: see text], 0.08; [Formula: see text]) with moderate heterogeneity ([Formula: see text], [Formula: see text]) in experimental group as compared to control group. There was statistically non-significant decrease in DBP ([Formula: see text], 95% [Formula: see text], 0.69; [Formula: see text]) with high heterogeneity ([Formula: see text], [Formula: see text]), Change HR was statistically non-significant ([Formula: see text], 95% [Formula: see text], 3.11; [Formula: see text]) with moderate heterogeneity ([Formula: see text], [Formula: see text]). Exclusion of short duration studies in sensitivity analysis revealed a statistically significant change in DBP ([Formula: see text], 95% [Formula: see text], [Formula: see text]; [Formula: see text]). However, the result was statistically non-significant for HR after sensitivity analysis.

Conclusion: Spinal manipulations and mobilizations may result in significant decrease of systolic as well as diastolic Blood Pressure.

Neurophysiological Effects of High Velocity and Low Amplitude Spinal Manipulation in Symptomatic and Asymptomatic Humans: A Systematic Literature Review

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic review.

OBJECTIVE

To summarize the evidence of neurophysiological effects of spinal manipulative therapy (SMT) with a high velocity low amplitude thrust (HVLA-SMT) in asymptomatic and symptomatic humans.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

HVLA-SMT is effective in reducing back pain, but its mode of action is not fully understood.

METHODS

A systematic literature search (until July 2018) was conducted by a professional librarian in seven databases (Medline (OvidSP), Premedline (PubMed), EMBASE, Cochrane, CINAHL, PEDro, and Scopus). Two authors selected the studies according to the a priori described criteria and scored study quality. Only controlled studies of at least moderate quality were included. Effects of HVLA-SMT on a particular outcome measure were defined as more than one study showing a significantly greater effect of HVLA-SMT compared with the control intervention.

RESULTS

From the 18 studies included (932 participants in total), there was evidence only for an association between HVLA-SMT and changes in the autonomic nervous system, reflected in changes in heart rate variability and skin conductance. Most studies focused on healthy volunteers and none related neurophysiologic changes to pain reduction.

CONCLUSION

This systematic review points to HVLA-SMT affecting the autonomic nervous system. The effects seem to depend on the spinal level of HVLA-SMT application and might differ between healthy volunteers and pain patients. There is a need for high-quality studies that include patients, well characterized for pain duration and outcome measure baseline values, and address the relation between changes in neurophysiology and pain.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

2.

Time effect for in-situ dry needling on the autonomic nervous system, a pilot study

Study design: Pilot study.Background: Dry needling has been an emerging treatment option for physical therapists over the last decade. Despite the fact that studies have demonstrated the overall benefit of dry needling, there is no clear understanding how long needles should be left in place (situ). This pilot study investigated the effects of needles remaining in situ based on autonomic responses over time.Methods: A convenience sample of 21 subjects were recruited for this study. Automated pupillometry was utilized to obtain a direct measure of autonomic nervous system activity. Directly following a baseline measurement, 8 type J Seirin Acupuncture needles were inserted paravertebral at the C7-T3 segments. A total of 8 post-needling 60 seconds pupil measurements were taken at 3 minutes intervals for 24 minutes post needling.Outcomes: A statistical significant difference in mean pupil diameter was found following the needle intervention (p < .01), which implies an increased sympathetic activity. This subject sample had a statistically significantly larger mean pupil diameter immediately after the needling, which lasted until measure point 7, at 18 minutes (P < .05). At measure point 8 there was no longer a statistical significant difference compared to the premeasurement measure.Discussion: The results of this study provide evidence that dry needling results in a significant increased activity of the sympathetic nervous system for up to 18 minutes. Between 18 and 21 minutes autonomic activity returned to a non-significant difference compared to baseline. The results of this study could assist clinicians in clinical decision making to determine needle placement time.

The acute effects of joint manipulative techniques on markers of autonomic nervous system activity: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized sham-controlled trials

Background

The autonomic nervous system (ANS) interests many chiropractors and manual therapists, because joint manipulative techniques (JMT), e.g. high velocity low amplitude (HVLA) manipulations and mobilizations, appear to produce acute changes in ANS mediated physiology. The complexity of this issue justifies a systematic critical literature review.

Objective

To review the literature comparing the acute changes in markers of ANS activity between JMT applied on spinal or peripheral joints and a sham procedure in healthy or symptomatic subjects.

Method

We searched PsycINFO, PEDro, PubMed, Cochrane library, EMBASE, and Medline up to December 2017. We updated the search with PubMed, Cochrane library, EMBASE, and Medline including July 2018. Inclusion criteria were: randomized sham-controlled trials assessing the effect of JMT on markers of ANS activity; manually applied JMT, regardless of technique, applied on either healthy or symptomatic humans; outcome measurements recorded at baseline and repeated during and/or after interventions. Selection of articles and data extraction were performed independently by two reviewers. The quality of studies was assessed using the Cochrane ‘risk of bias’ tool and a technical check-list. Results were reported narratively with some meta-analyses. The Cochrane GRADE approach was used to assess the certainty of evidence.

Results

Twenty-nine of 2267 studies were included in the synthesis. Mobilizations (oscillatory technique) probably produce an immediate and short-term, bilateral increase in skin sympathetic nerve activity (reflected by an increase in skin conductance) regardless of the area treated (moderate-certainty evidence). It is uncertain whether the sympathetic arousal also explains an increase in respiratory rate (very low-certainty evidence). Our evaluation of the literature suggests that spinal sustained apophyseal glides (SNAGs) mobilization and HVLA manipulation of the spine may have no acute effect on the studied markers of ANS activity (very low- to low-certainty evidence).

Conclusion

Some types of mobilizations probably produce an immediate and short-term, statistically significant increase in skin sympathetic nerve activity when compared to a sham procedure, whereas spinal SNAGs and spinal HVLA techniques may have no acute effect on the studied markers of ANS activity. No region-specific results were noted. The literature suffers from several shortcomings, for which reason we strongly suggest further research.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12998-019-0235-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Manipulation and Mobilization for Treating Chronic Nonspecific Neck Pain: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis for an Appropriateness Panel

BACKGROUND

Mobilization and manipulation therapies are widely used by patients with chronic nonspecific neck pain; however, questions remain around efficacy, dosing, and safety, as well as how these approaches compare to other therapies.

OBJECTIVES

Based on published trials, to determine the efficacy, effectiveness, and safety of various mobilization and manipulation therapies for treatment of chronic nonspecific neck pain.

STUDY DESIGN

A systematic literature review and meta-analysis.

METHODS

We identified studies published between January 2000 and September 2017, by searching multiple electronic databases, examining reference lists, and communicating with experts. We selected randomized controlled trials comparing manipulation and/or mobilization therapies to sham, no treatment, each other, and other active therapies, or when combined as multimodal therapeutic approaches. We assessed risk of bias by using the Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network criteria. When possible, we pooled data using random-effects meta-analysis. Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation was applied to determine the confidence in effect estimates. This project was funded by the National Center for Complementary and Integrative Health under award number U19AT007912 and ultimately used to inform an appropriateness panel.

RESULTS

A total of 47 randomized trials (47 unique trials in 53 publications) were included in the systematic review. These studies were rated as having low risk of bias and included a total of 4,460 patients with nonspecific chronic neck pain who were being treated by a practitioner using various types of manipulation and/or mobilization interventions. A total of 37 trials were categorized as unimodal approaches and involved thrust or nonthrust compared with sham, no treatment, or other active comparators. Of these, only 6 trials with similar intervention styles, comparators, and outcome measures/timepoints were pooled for meta-analysis at 1, 3, and 6 months, showing a small effect in favor of thrust plus exercise compared to an exercise regimen alone for a reduction in pain and disability. Multimodal approaches appeared to be effective at reducing pain and improving function from the 10 studies evaluated. Health-related quality of life was seldom reported. Some 22/47 studies did not report or mention adverse events. Of the 25 that did, either no or minor events occurred.

LIMITATIONS

The current evidence is heterogeneous, and sample sizes are generally small.

CONCLUSIONS

Studies published since January 2000 provide low-moderate quality evidence that various types of manipulation and/or mobilization will reduce pain and improve function for chronic nonspecific neck pain compared to other interventions. It appears that multimodal approaches, in which multiple treatment approaches are integrated, might have the greatest potential impact. The studies comparing to no treatment or sham were mostly testing the effect of a single dose, which may or may not be helpful to inform practice. According to the published trials reviewed, manipulation and mobilization appear safe. However, given the low rate of serious adverse events, other types of studies with much larger sample sizes would be required to fully describe the safety of manipulation and/or mobilization for nonspecific chronic neck pain.

KEY WORDS

Chronic neck pain, nonspecific, chiropractic, manipulation, mobilization, systematic review, meta-analysis, appropriateness.

Thoracic spine manipulation for the management of mechanical neck pain: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Objective

To investigate the role of thoracic spine manipulation (TSM) on pain and disability in the management of mechanical neck pain (MNP).

Data sources

Electronic databases PubMed, CINAHL, Pedro, Embase, AMED, the Cochrane Library, and clinicaltrials.gov were searched in January 2018.

Study selection

Eligible studies were completed RCTs, written in English, had at least 2 groups with one group receiving TSM, had at least one measure of pain or disability, and included patients with MNP of any duration. The search identified 1717 potential articles, with 14 studies meeting inclusion criteria.

Study appraisal and synthesis methods

Methodological quality was evaluated independently by two authors using the guidelines published by the Cochrane Collaboration. Pooled analyses were analyzed using a random-effects model with inverse variance methods to calculate mean differences (MD) and 95% confidence intervals for pain (VAS 0-100mm, NPRS 0-10pts; 0 = no pain) and disability (NDI and NPQ 0–100%; 0 = no disability).

Results

Across the included studies, there was increased risk of bias for inadequate provider and participant blinding. The GRADE approach demonstrated an overall level of evidence ranging from very low to moderate. Meta-analysis that compared TSM to thoracic or cervical mobilization revealed a significant effect favoring the TSM group for pain (MD -13.63; 95% CI: -21.79, -5.46) and disability (MD -9.93; 95% CI: -14.38, -5.48). Meta-analysis that compared TSM to standard care revealed a significant effect favoring the TSM group for pain (MD -13.21; 95% CI: -21.87, -4.55) and disability (MD -11.36; 95% CI: -18.93, -3.78) at short-term follow-up, and a significant effect for disability (MD -4.75; 95% CI: -6.54, -2.95) at long-term follow-up. Meta-analysis that compared TSM to cervical spine manipulation revealed a non-significant effect (MD 3.43; 95% CI: -7.26, 14.11) for pain without a distinction between immediate and short-term follow-up.

Limitations

The greatest limitation in this systematic review was the heterogeneity among the studies making it difficult to assess the true clinical benefit, as well as the overall level of quality of evidence.

Conclusions

TSM has been shown to be more beneficial than thoracic mobilization, cervical mobilization, and standard care in the short-term, but no better than cervical manipulation or placebo thoracic spine manipulation to improve pain and disability.

Trial registration

PROSPERO CRD42017068287

Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging of Cerebral Hemodynamic Responses to Pain Following Thoracic Thrust Manipulation in Individuals With Neck Pain: A Randomized Trial

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to examine whether cerebral activation in response to noxious mechanical stimuli varies with thrust manipulation (TM) when compared with sham manipulation (SM) as measured by blood oxygenation level-dependent functional magnetic resonance imaging.

METHODS

Twenty-four volunteers (67% female) with complaints of acute or subacute mechanical (nontraumatic) neck pain satisfied eligibility requirements and agreed to participate. Participants were randomized to receive TM to the thoracic spine or SM, and then underwent functional magnetic resonance scanning while receiving noxious stimuli before and after TM or SM. An 11-point numeric pain rating scale was administered pre- and postmanipulation for neck pain and to determine perceptions of pain intensity with respect to neck pain and mechanical stimuli. Blood oxygenation level-dependent functional magnetic resonance imaging recorded the cerebral hemodynamic response to the mechanical stimuli.

RESULTS

Imaging revealed significant group differences, with those individuals in the manipulation group exhibiting increased areas of activation (postmanipulation) in the insular and somatosensory cortices and individuals in the sham group exhibiting greater areas of activation in the precentral gyrus, supplementary motor area, and cingulate cortices (P < .05). However, between-group differences on the numeric pain rating scale for mechanical stimuli and for self-reported neck pain were not statistically significant.

CONCLUSIONS

This study provides preliminary level 2b evidence suggesting cortical responses in patients with nontraumatic neck pain may vary between thoracic TM and a sham comparator.

Influence of Spinal Manipulation on Autonomic Modulation and Heart Rate in Patients With Rotator Cuff Tendinopathy

Objective

The purpose of this study was to analyze the influence of thoracic spinal manipulation (SM) on autonomic modulation and heart rate in patients with rotator cuff tendinopathy.

Methods

The design of the study was quasi-experimental. Participants were divided into 3 study groups: the asymptomatic group (n = 30), which received SM; the tendinitis group (TG, n = 30), which received SM; and the placebo group (PG, n = 30), which received placebo manipulation. Heart rate variability was analyzed with an electrocardiogram before and after intervention. For intragroup analysis, the paired Wilcoxon test was used to compare the means (pre vs post) of sex and age divided into 5 age groups. The Kruskal-Wallis test was employed for analysis between the groups, and a significance level of 5% was adopted.

Results

The TG demonstrated an increase in respiratory rate (mean of the selected intervals corresponding to parasympathetic activity) post intervention for both sexes (P = .04). Heart rate exhibited reduction post intervention in women in the TG (P = .05). The PG demonstrated an increase in respiratory rate post intervention for both sexes (female P = .01; male P = .02). In the age groups, only the PG presented any difference in the 40- to 50-year and 50- to 60-year age groups (P = .03) for the same variable. Heart rate exhibited a reduction post intervention in women in the PG (P = .01) and a reduction in the 50- to 60-year age group (P = .04). No difference in the studied variables was observed in the asymptomatic group, and there were no differences among the groups.

Conclusions

Upper thoracic SM does not directly influence autonomic modulation or heart rate.

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.

Immediate Effects of Thoracic Spine Thrust Manipulation on Neurodynamic Mobility

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to investigate the immediate effects of thoracic spine thrust manipulation (TSM) on the upper limb provocation test (ULPT) and seated slump test (SST) in individuals with identified neurodynamic mobility impairments. A secondary aim was to determine if correlation existed between the perception of effect and improvements in neurodynamic mobility following a thrust manipulation compared with mobilization.

METHODS

A pretest-posttest experimental design randomized 48 adults into 2 groups: TSM or mobilization. Participants with identified neurodynamic mobility impairment as assessed with the ULPT or SST received a pre-assigned intervention (TSM, n = 64 limbs; mobilization, n = 66 limbs). Perception of effect was assessed to determine its influence on outcome. Repeated-measures analysis of variance was used to examine the effects of intervention, and Fisher's exact test and independent t tests were used to determine the influence of perception.

RESULTS

Both the ULPT (P < .001) and SST (P < .001) revealed improvements at posttest regardless of intervention. The ULPT effect sizes for TSM (d = 0.70) and mobilization (d = 0.69) groups were medium. For the SST, the effect size for the TSM group (d = 0.53) was medium, whereas that for the mobilization group (d = 0.26) was small. Participants in the mobilization group with positive perception had significantly greater (P < .05) mean neurodynamic mobility changes than those with a negative perception.

CONCLUSIONS

Neurodynamic mobility impairment improved regardless of intervention. The magnitude of change was greater in the ULPT than SST. Although both interventions appeared to yield similar outcomes, individuals who received mobilization and expressed a positive perception of effect exhibited significantly greater changes in neurodynamic mobility than those without a positive perception.

[Acute Effects on TH4 Thoracic Spine Mobilisation Techniques on the Sympathetic Nervous System - a Cross-Over Feasibility Study]

Acute Effects on TH4 Thoracic Spine Mobilisation Techniques on the Sympathetic Nervous System - a Cross-Over Feasibility Study Abstract. Up to date, empiric evidence about effects of thoracic spine mobilisation (TH4) on the sympathetic nervous system is lacking. The primary goal of this feasibility study was to determine adherence rate, side effects and the protocol as well as the implementation of the study design. The secondary goal was to analyse and interpret acute effects on the sympathetic nervous system after thoracic mobilisation in anterior thrust and posterior thrust on six healthy participants on two following days. The feasibility of this study was adequate. The spine mobilisations did not produce any adverse effects. The anterior thrust spine mobilisations showed a tendency in reducing the heart rate activity.

Neuroendocrine Response Following a Thoracic Spinal Manipulation in Healthy Men

Study Design Controlled laboratory study. Background Spinal manipulation (SM) can trigger a cascade of responses involving multiple systems, including the sympathetic nervous system and the endocrine system, specifically, the hypothalamic-pituitary axis. However, no manual therapy study has investigated the neuroendocrine response to SM (ie, sympathetic nervous system-hypothalamic-pituitary axis) in the same trial. Objective To determine short-term changes in sympathetic nervous system activity, heart rate variability, and endocrine activity (cortisol, testosterone, and testosterone-cortisol [T/C] ratio) following a thoracic SM. Methods Twenty-four healthy men aged between 18 and 45 years were randomized into 2 groups: thoracic SM (n = 12) and sham (n = 12). Outcome measures were salivary cortisol (micrograms per deciliter), salivary testosterone (picograms per milliliter), T/C ratio, heart rate variability, and changes in oxyhemoglobin concentration of the right calf muscle (micromoles per liter). Measurements were done before and at 5 minutes, 30 minutes, and approximately 6 hours after intervention. Results A statistically significant group-by-time interaction was noted for T/C ratio (P<.05) and salivary cortisol (P<.01) concentrations. Significant between-group differences were noted for salivary cortisol concentration at 5 minutes (mean difference, 0.35; 95% confidence interval: 0.12, 0.6; interaction: P<.01) and for T/C ratio at 6 hours postintervention (mean difference, -0.09; 95% confidence interval: -0.16, -0.04; P = .02). However, SM did not differentially alter oxyhemoglobin, testosterone, or heart rate variability relative to responses in the sham group. Conclusion Thoracic SM resulted in an immediate decrease in salivary cortisol concentration and reduced T/C ratio 6 hours after intervention. A pattern of immediate sympathetic excitation was also observed in the SM group. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2017;47(9):617-627. Epub 13 Jul 2017. doi:10.2519/jospt.2017.7348.

T4 Syndrome: A Scoping Review of the Literature

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this scoping review was to identify any available evidence regarding T4 syndrome.

METHODS

Databases were searched from inception through October 2015 and included PubMed, CINAHL, PEDro, Google Scholar, Osteomed-DR; Index to Chiropractic Literature, PROSPERO, and Chiroaccess. All studies with information about T4 syndrome that were published in a peer-reviewed journal or textbook were included. The information was organized in the format of the International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health. Studies were ranked using Sackett's levels of evidence.

RESULTS

Eight articles met the inclusion criteria. Studied areas included theoretical pathophysiology and symptom etiology, diagnosis, symptoms, treatment, and outcomes of T4 syndrome. The methodological quality of included studies was low.

CONCLUSION

T4 syndrome is a diagnosis of exclusion that appears to be rare. It has been treated conservatively in the literature using mobilization and exercise. There is no high-quality evidence published about T4 syndrome, and we caution clinicians when considering it as a primary means to determine patient care.

Are manual therapies, passive physical modalities, or acupuncture effective for the management of patients with whiplash-associated disorders or neck pain and associated disorders? An update of the Bone and Joint Decade Task Force on Neck Pain and Its Associated Disorders by the OPTIMa collaboration

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

In 2008, the Bone and Joint Decade 2000-2010 Task Force on Neck Pain and Its Associated Disorders (Neck Pain Task Force) found limited evidence on the effectiveness of manual therapies, passive physical modalities, or acupuncture for the management of whiplash-associated disorders (WAD) or neck pain and associated disorders (NAD).

PURPOSE

This review aimed to update the findings of the Neck Pain Task Force, which examined the effectiveness of manual therapies, passive physical modalities, and acupuncture for the management of WAD or NAD.

STUDY DESIGN/SETTING

This is a systematic review and best evidence synthesis.

SAMPLE

The sample includes randomized controlled trials, cohort studies, and case-control studies comparing manual therapies, passive physical modalities, or acupuncture with other interventions, placebo or sham, or no intervention.

OUTCOME MEASURES

The outcome measures were self-rated or functional recovery, pain intensity, health-related quality of life, psychological outcomes, or adverse events.

METHODS

We systematically searched five databases from 2000 to 2014. Random pairs of independent reviewers critically appraised eligible studies using the Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network criteria. Studies with a low risk of bias were stratified by the intervention's stage of development (exploratory vs. evaluation) and synthesized following best evidence synthesis principles. Funding was provided by the Ministry of Finance.

RESULTS

We screened 8,551 citations, and 38 studies were relevant and 22 had a low risk of bias. Evidence from seven exploratory studies suggests that (1) for recent but not persistent NAD grades I-II, thoracic manipulation offers short-term benefits; (2) for persistent NAD grades I-II, technical parameters of cervical mobilization (eg, direction or site of manual contact) do not impact outcomes, whereas one session of cervical manipulation is similar to Kinesio Taping; and (3) for NAD grades I-II, strain-counterstrain treatment is no better than placebo. Evidence from 15 evaluation studies suggests that (1) for recent NAD grades I-II, cervical and thoracic manipulation provides no additional benefit to high-dose supervised exercises, and Swedish or clinical massage adds benefit to self-care advice; (2) for persistent NAD grades I-II, home-based cupping massage has similar outcomes to home-based muscle relaxation, low-level laser therapy (LLLT) does not offer benefits, Western acupuncture provides similar outcomes to non-penetrating placebo electroacupuncture, and needle acupuncture provides similar outcomes to sham-penetrating acupuncture; (3) for WAD grades I-II, needle electroacupuncture offers similar outcomes as simulated electroacupuncture; and (4) for recent NAD grades III, a semi-rigid cervical collar with rest and graded strengthening exercises lead to similar outcomes, and LLLT does not offer benefits.

CONCLUSIONS

Our review adds new evidence to the Neck Pain Task Force and suggests that mobilization, manipulation, and clinical massage are effective interventions for the management of neck pain. It also suggests that electroacupuncture, strain-counterstrain, relaxation massage, and some passive physical modalities (heat, cold, diathermy, hydrotherapy, and ultrasound) are not effective and should not be used to manage neck pain.

T4 syndrome - A distinct theoretical concept or elusive clinical entity? A case report

T4 syndrome has existed as a clinical concept for more than three decades and it has been identified as a source of upper extremity (UE) symptoms. This case report explores the clinical reasoning in the diagnoses and management of a patient with symptoms consistent with T4-type syndrome and critically discusses the concept of T4 syndrome using recent research to help explain the clinical presentation. Manual therapy treatment focused on stimulation of the sympathetic ganglia, decreasing local upper thoracic pain and UE referral pattern noted during passive examination. The successful outcomes included immediate and lasting symptom relief after upper thoracic spinal manipulation. Although treatment has been based on the theory that mechanical thoracic dysfunction can produce sympathetic nervous system (SNS) referred pain, the role the sympathetic reflexes potentially plays on the referral symptoms to the UE presently remains unclear.

Is manipulative therapy clinically necessary for relief of neck pain? A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To summarize and critically assess the effificacy of Eastern and Western manipulative therapies for the treatment of neck pain in adults.

METHODS

A search of PubMed/MEDLINE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, ClinicalTrials.gov, EMBASE, etc. from their inception date to January 2014 with Chinese, Japanese, and Korean databases. Two reviewers independently selected randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with negative control or blank control, extracted data and assessed methodological quality. Meta-analysis and levels of evidence were performed by Revman5.1 and Grades of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach.

RESULTS

Nineteen clinical trials with adequate randomization were included in this review, 11 of them had a low risk of bias. The primary outcome for short-term pain had no significant differences, however, the secondary outcome, only the Numerical Pain Rating Scale (NPRS) score of intermediate-term [n=916, pooled mean differences (MD) =-0.29, P=0.02], the Neck Disability Index (NDI) score of short-term (n=1,145, pooled MD=-2.10, P<0.01), and intermediate-term (n=987, pooled MD=-1.45, P=0.01) were signifificantly reduced with moderate quality evidence. However, it supported the minimally clinically important difference (MCID) of the Visual Analogue Scale and NPRS pain score to be 13 mm, while NDI was 3.5 points. The meta-analysis only suggested a trend in favor of manipulative therapy rather than clinical signifificance.

CONCLUSIONS

The results do not support the existing evidences for the clinical value of Eastern or Western manipulative therapy for neck pain of short-term follow-up according to MCIDs. The limitations of our review related to blinding, allocation concealment and small sample size.

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.

Immediate and Short-Term Effects of Upper Thoracic Manipulation on Myoelectric Activity of Sternocleidomastoid Muscles in Young Women With Chronic Neck Pain: A Randomized Blind Clinical Trial

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to assess the immediate and short-term effects of upper thoracic spine manipulation on pain intensity and myoelectric activity of the sternocleidomastoid muscles in young women with chronic neck pain.

METHODS

A randomized clinical trial was carried out involving 32 women with chronic neck pain (mean age, 24.8 ± 5.4 years) allocated to an experimental group and a placebo group. Three evaluations were carried out: baseline, immediate postintervention, and short-term postintervention (48-72 hours after intervention). Myoelectric activity of the right and left sternocleidomastoid muscles was assessed at rest and during isometric contractions for cervical flexion and elevation of the shoulder girdle. Neck pain intensity was assessed at rest using a visual analog scale. Comparisons of the data were performed using 2-way repeated-measures analysis of variance with the Bonferroni correction. The level of significance was set at P < .05.

RESULTS

A moderate treatment effect on myoelectric activity of the right and left sternocleidomastoid muscles during isometric elevation of the shoulder girdle was found in the experimental group only on the short-term postintervention evaluation (d > 0.40). No statistically significant differences were found for any of the variables analyzed in the intergroup comparisons at the different evaluation times (P > .05).

CONCLUSION

No statistically significant differences were found in the intragroup or intergroup analyses of the experimental and placebo groups regarding myoelectric activity of the cervical muscles or the intensity of neck pain at rest in the immediate or short-term postintervention evaluations.

Thoracic manipulation versus mobilization in patients with mechanical neck pain: a systematic review

OBJECTIVES

Thoracic manipulation is widely used in physical therapy and has been shown to be effective at addressing mechanical neck pain. However, thoracic mobilization may produce similar effects. The purpose of this systematic review was to evaluate the current literature regarding the effectiveness of thoracic manipulation versus mobilization in patients with mechanical neck pain.

METHODS

ProQuest, NCBI-PubMed, APTA's Hooked on Evidence, Cochrane Library, CINAHL and SPORTDiscus were searched to identify relevant studies. Fourteen studies meeting the inclusion criteria were analyzed using the Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro) scale and the GRADE approach.

RESULTS

The literature as assessed by the PEDro scale was fair and the GRADE method showed overall quality ranging from very low to moderate quality. The 14 included studies showed positive outcomes on cervical pain levels, range of motion, and/or disability with the use of thoracic manipulation or mobilization. There was a paucity of literature directly comparing thoracic manipulation and mobilization.

DISCUSSION

Current limitations in the body of research, specifically regarding the use of thoracic mobilization, limit the recommendation of its use compared to thoracic manipulation for patients with mechanical neck pain. There is, however, a significant amount of evidence, although of varied quality, for the short-term benefits of thoracic manipulation in treating patients with this condition. Further high quality research is necessary to determine which technique is more effective in treating patients with mechanical neck pain.

Spinal manipulation under anesthesia: a narrative review of the literature and commentary

As exhibited throughout the medical literature over many decades, there is a lack of uniformity in the manner in which spine pain patients have historically qualified for and received manipulation under anesthesia (MUA). Also, for different professions that treat the same types of spinal conditions via the same means, fundamental MUA decision points vary within the published protocols of different professional associations. The more recent chiropractic literature communicates that the evidence to support the efficacy of MUA of the spine remains largely anecdotal. In addition, it has been reported that the types of spinal conditions most suitable for MUA are without clear-cut consensus, with various indications for MUA of the low back resting wholly upon the opinions and experiences of MUA practitioners. This article will provide a narrative review of the MUA literature, followed by a commentary about the current lack of high quality research evidence, the anecdotal and consensus basis of existing clinical protocols, as well as related professional, ethical and legal concerns for the chiropractic practitioner. The limitations of the current medical literature related to MUA via conscious/deep sedation need to be recognized and used as a guide to clinical experience when giving consideration to this procedure. More research, in the form of controlled clinical trials, must be undertaken if this procedure is to remain a potential treatment option for chronic spine pain patients in the chiropractic clinical practice.

Using functional magnetic resonance imaging to determine if cerebral hemodynamic responses to pain change following thoracic spine thrust manipulation in healthy individuals

STUDY DESIGN

Case series.

OBJECTIVES

To use blood oxygenation level-dependent functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) to determine if supraspinal activation in response to noxious mechanical stimuli varies pre- and post-thrust manipulation to the thoracic spine.

BACKGROUND

Recent studies have demonstrated the effectiveness of thoracic thrust manipulation in reducing pain and improving function in some individuals with neck and shoulder pain. However, the mechanisms by which manipulation exerts such effects remain largely unexplained. The use of fMRI in the animal model has revealed a decrease in cortical activity in response to noxious stimuli following manual joint mobilization. Supraspinal mediation contributing to hypoalgesia in humans may be triggered following spinal manipulation.

METHODS

Ten healthy volunteers (5 women, 5 men) between the ages of 23 and 48 years (mean, 31.2 years) were recruited. Subjects underwent fMRI scanning while receiving noxious stimuli applied to the cuticle of the index finger at a rate of 1 Hz for periods of 15 seconds, alternating with periods of 15 seconds without stimuli, for a total duration of 5 minutes. Subjects then received a supine thrust manipulation directed to the midthoracic spine and were immediately returned to the scanner for reimaging with a second delivery of noxious stimuli. An 11-point numeric pain rating scale was administered immediately after the application of noxious stimuli, premanipulation and postmanipulation. Blood oxygenation level-dependent fMRI recorded the cerebral hemodynamic response to the painful stimuli premanipulation and postmanipulation.

RESULTS

The data indicated a significant reduction in subjects' perception of pain (P<.01), as well as a reduction in cerebral blood flow as measured by the blood oxygenation level-dependent response following manipulation to areas associated with the pain matrix (P<.05). There was a significant relationship between reduced activation in the insular cortex and decreased subjective pain ratings on the numeric pain rating scale (r = 0.59, P<.05).

CONCLUSION

This study provides preliminary evidence that suggests that supraspinal mechanisms may be associated with thoracic thrust manipulation and hypoalgesia. However, because the study lacked a control group, the results do not allow for the discernment of the causative effects of manipulation, which may also be related to changes in levels of subjects' fear, anxiety, or expectation of successful outcomes with manipulation. Future investigations should strive to elicit more conclusive findings in the form of randomized clinical trials.

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.

The effect of thoracic spine manipulation on pain and disability in patients with non-specific neck pain: a systematic review

PURPOSE

The aim of this systematic review was to determine the efficacy of thoracic spine manipulation (TSM) in reducing pain and disability in patients diagnosed with non-specific neck pain.

METHODS

An extensive literature search of PubMed, The Cochrane Library, CINAHL and EMBASE was conducted in February 2012. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) or controlled clinical trials evaluating the effect of TSM in patients aged 18 to 65 years with non-specific neck pain were eligible. Methodological quality of the studies was assessed according to the Physiotherapy Evidence Database scale (PEDro). Qualitative analyses were conducted by means of the best evidence synthesis of van Peppen et al.

RESULTS

The methodological quality of the 10 included RCTs (677 patients) varied between four and eight points. Eight studies reported significant reduction in pain and/or disability by TSM. Overall, according to the best evidence synthesis, there is insufficient evidence that TSM is more effective than control interventions in reducing pain and disability in patients with non-specific neck pain.

CONCLUSIONS

TSM has a therapeutic benefit to some patients with neck pain, when compared to the effect of interventions such as electrotherapy/thermal programme, infrared radiation therapy, spinal mobilization and exercises. However, in comparison to cervical spine manipulation, no evidence is found that TSM is more effective in reducing pain and disability. Implications for Rehabilitation TSM is often used in the treatment of non-specific neck pain, which is a major health problem in the Western society. There is insufficient evidence that TSM is more effective in reducing pain and disability than control treatments in patients with non-specific neck pain. Despite the insufficient evidence that TSM is more effective than control treatments, TSM has a therapeutic benefit to some patients with neck pain. Therefore, TSM alone or in combination with other interventions is a suitable intervention to use in the treatment of non-specific neck pain.

The effectiveness of Long's manipulation on patients with chronic mechanical neck pain: a randomized controlled trial

Long's manipulation (LM) is a representative Chinese manipulation approach incorporating both spinal manipulation and traditional Chinese massage (TCM) techniques. This randomized controlled trial (RCT) aimed to compare the immediate and short-term relative effectiveness of LM to TCM on patients with chronic neck pain. Patients were randomly assigned to either LM group or TCM group. LM group was treated with Long's manipulation, while the TCM group received TCM therapy. Patients attended 8 sessions of treatment (one session every three days). Outcome measures included neck disability (Northwick Park Neck Pain Questionnaire; NPQ), pain intensity (Numeric Pain Rating Scale; NPRS), patient perceived satisfaction of care (PPS) (11-point scale), craniovertebral angle (CV angle) and cervical range of motion (ROM). A blinded assessor performed assessment at baseline, immediate after treatment and 3 months post treatment. LM group achieved significantly greater improvement than TCM group in pain intensity (p < 0.001), neck disability (p = 0.049) and satisfaction (p < 0.001) up to 3-month follow-up. There was no significant difference in improvements in CV angle and most of cervical ROM between groups (p = 0.169 ∼ 0.888) with an exception of flexion at 3-month follow-up (p = 0.005). This study shows that LM could produce better effects than TCM in relieving pain and improving disability in the management of patients with chronic mechanical neck pain.

Suboccipital decompression enhances heart rate variability indices of cardiac control in healthy subjects

OBJECTIVES

Osteopathic manipulative treatment (OMT) focused on the upper cervical spine is theorized to affect the function of the vagus nerve and thereby influence the parasympathetic branch of the autonomic nervous system. This study was designed to determine the acute effect of upper cervical spine manipulation on cardiac autonomic control as measured by heart rate variability.

DESIGN

Nineteen healthy, young adult subjects underwent three different experimental interventions administered in random order: cervical OMT, sham manipulation, and time control. Six minutes of electrocardiographic data were collected before and after each intervention, and heart rate variability was assessed by both time-domain and frequency-domain measures.

RESULTS

No differences in resting heart rate or any measure of heart rate variability were observed between the baseline periods prior to each intervention. The OMT protocol resulted in an increase in the standard deviation of the normal-to-normal intervals (0.12±0.082 seconds, p<0.01), an increase in the high frequency spectral power (p=0.03), and a decrease in the low/high frequency spectral ratio (p=0.01) relative to the sham and time control conditions. No significant differences between sham and time control were observed (p>0.11 for all variables).

CONCLUSIONS

These data support the hypothesis that upper cervical spine manipulation can acutely affect measures of heart rate variability in healthy individuals.

Short-term effects of manipulation to the upper thoracic spine of asymptomatic subjects on plasma concentrations of epinephrine and norepinephrine-a randomized and controlled observational study

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to investigate the short-term effects of spinal manipulation applied to a hypomobile segment of the upper thoracic spine (T1-T6), on plasma concentrations of norepinephrine (NE) and epinephrine (E) in asymptomatic subjects, under strictly controlled conditions.

METHODS

Fifty-six asymptomatic subjects were randomly assigned to receive either a chiropractic manipulative intervention or a sham intervention in the upper thoracic spine. A 20-gauge catheter fitted with a saline lock was used to sample blood before, immediately after, and 15 minutes after intervention. Plasma NE and E concentrations were determined using an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. Changes in plasma catecholamine concentrations were analyzed within and between groups using 1- and 2-sample t tests, respectively.

RESULTS

The plasma samples of 36 subjects (18 treatment, 18 control) were used in the analysis. Mean plasma concentrations of NE and E did not significantly differ between the 2 groups at any time point and did not change significantly after either the manipulative or sham intervention.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this study indicate that a manipulative thrust directed to a hypomobile segment in the upper thoracic spine of asymptomatic subjects does not have a measurable effect on the plasma concentrations of NE or E. These results provide a baseline measure of the sympathetic response to spinal manipulation.