Regional interdependence and manual therapy directed at the thoracic spine

The Effectiveness of Spinal Manipulative Therapy in Treating Spinal Pain Does Not Depend on the Application Procedures: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE: To assess whether spinal manipulative therapy (SMT) application procedures (ie, target, thrust, and region) impacted changes in pain and disability for adults with spine pain. DESIGN: Systematic review with network meta-analysis. LITERATURE SEARCH: We searched PubMed and Epistemonikos for systematic reviews indexed up to February 2022 and conducted a systematic search of 5 databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL [Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials], PEDro [Physiotherapy Evidence Database], and Index to Chiropractic Literature) from January 1, 2018, to September 12, 2023. We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) from recent systematic reviews and newly identified RCTs published during the review process and employed artificial intelligence to identify potentially relevant articles not retrieved through our electronic database searches. STUDY SELECTION CRITERIA: We included RCTs of the effects of high-velocity, low-amplitude SMT, compared to other SMT approaches, interventions, or controls, in adults with spine pain. DATA SYNTHESIS: The outcomes were spinal pain intensity and disability measured at short-term (end of treatment) and long-term (closest to 12 months) follow-ups. Risk of bias (RoB) was assessed using version 2 of the Cochrane RoB tool. Results were presented as network plots, evidence rankings, and league tables. RESULTS: We included 161 RCTs (11 849 participants). Most SMT procedures were equal to clinical guideline interventions and were slightly more effective than other treatments. When comparing inter-SMT procedures, effects were small and not clinically relevant. A general and nonspecific rather than a specific and targeted SMT approach had the highest probability of achieving the largest effects. Results were based on very low- to low-certainty evidence, mainly downgraded owing to large within-study heterogeneity, high RoB, and an absence of direct comparisons. CONCLUSION: There was low-certainty evidence that clinicians could apply SMT according to their preferences and the patients' preferences and comfort. Differences between SMT approaches appear small and likely not clinically relevant. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2025;55(2):1-14. Epub 7 January 2025. https://doi.org/10.2519/jospt.2025.12707.

Effect of adding thoracic manipulation for the management of patients with adhesive capsulitis: a randomized clinical trial

BACKGROUND

Research is supporting thoracic spine manipulation (TSM) as an intervention in treating adhesive capsulitis (AC) when coupled with physical therapy interventions.

PURPOSE

To investigate whether TSM improves AC outcomes when combined with physical therapy interventions.

METHOD

A double-blinded, randomized, controlled trial with 40 patients assigned into two groups. The experimental group (EG) received physical therapy intervention and TSM; the control group (CG) had physical therapy with sham manipulation. Both groups received interventions biweekly for 12 weeks. Outcomes included Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), Shoulder Pain and Disability Index (SPADI), scapular upward rotation, and shoulder passive range of motion conducted at baseline, after 1 session, 6 and 12 weeks.

RESULTS

Both groups improved significantly after 6 and 12 weeks in pain, disability (p = 0.01 for both; d = 1.53 and 1.46, respectively), scapular upward rotation, shoulder flexion (p = 0.02 for both; d = 2.2 and 0.92, respectively), abduction (p = 0.04; d = 0.07), and external rotation (p = 0.03; d = 0.7). However, CG showed no significant improvement in pain or disability after one session (p = 0.14 and p = 0.16, respectively; d = 0.46 for both). Between groups, results favored EG significantly in pain, disability, scapular upward rotation, shoulder flexion, and abduction (p = 0.02, p = 0.01, p = 0.02, p = 0.05, and p = 0.04, respectively) at 6 weeks (d = 0.81, d = 0.87, d = 0.67, d = 0.64, and d = 0.69, respectively).

CONCLUSION

The results suggest that adding TSM yielded superior clinical benefits when compared to physical therapy interventions in AC patients. Nevertheless, it is imperative to acknowledge a specific limitation in our study is the omission of passive internal rotation assessment. This aspect represents a notable constraint in our research.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRY NUMBER

Pan African clinical trial registry "PACTR202303495421928".

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.

Reliability and Validity of Visual Estimation in Determining Thorax Rotation Mobility using the Quadruped Lumbar-Locked Position

Background

Thoracic rotation mobility is crucial for athletes in rotational sports such as baseball, golf, and swimming to maintain the proper biomechanics associated with the sport. Accurate differentiation between normal mobility and active and passive physiological deficits in the thoracic region is critical for identifying the need for intervention to the thorax.

Purpose

To establish the reliability and discriminant validity of visual estimation of thorax rotation range of motion across clinicians of differing experience levels in determining normal mobility and active or passive physiological deficits when utilizing the quadruped lumbar-locked position.

Study Design

Cross-sectional.

Methods

Thirty-eight subjects (21 female, 17 male) with a mean age of 27 years ± 6.67 were assessed with the quadruped lumbar-locked thorax rotation test by three examiners with various clinical experience in real-time and again one week later. Bilateral active and passive lumbar-locked thorax rotation mobility was assessed by all raters and categorized as "Unrestricted" (≥50°) or "Restricted" (<50°) while a research assistant simultaneously measured the motion with a digital inclinometer. All raters were blinded to the results. All results were analyzed for intra-rater reliability and agreement.

Results

Test-retest intra-rater reliability ranged from 0.55-0.72 and percent absolute agreement ranged from 0.82-0.89. Inter-rater reliability ranged from 0.45-0.59 while percent absolute agreement between raters ranged from 0.74-0.84. There was a significant difference in range of motion between "Unrestricted" and "Restricted" categories for both active (Unrestricted=54.6-58.9; Restricted=40.4-44.4; p<0.001) and passive motion (Unrestricted=61.3-63.5; Restricted=39.2-39.7; p<0.001). The only interaction effect was for passive left rotation [Rater A Restricted x ® =34.3(30.4-38.2); Rater C Restricted (x ) ®=43.8(41.3-46.4); p=.000].

Conclusion

The quadruped lumbar-locked thorax rotation test demonstrates moderate to substantial test-retest intra-rater and inter-rater reliability regardless of clinical experience. The quadruped lumbar-locked thorax rotation test can accurately discriminate between individuals with active and passive physiological deficits regardless of rater experience using visual estimation.

Level of Evidence

3b.

Acute responses of postural alignment and intermuscular coherence to anti-gravitational muscle engagement-A randomized crossover trial

INTRODUCTION

Posture is a facet of clinical assessment in several rehabilitative disciplines. Despite extensive clinical focus, the precision with which posture can be evaluated and intervened upon is limited by the very general terms used to describe it. The purpose of this crossover trial was to quantify the effects of targeted postural intervention motivated by theoretical sagittal gravitational collapsing (SGC) tendencies on: 1) distance from SGC, 2) intermuscular coherence (iCOH), and 3) kinematic chain connectivity.

METHODS

Ten healthy adults (24.50 ± 1.18 years, 172.72 ± 10.19 cm, 76.47 ± 14.60 kg) completed pre- and post-intervention testing on two occasions involving contrasting interventions: promote postural muscle (PPM) vs. reduce compensatory muscle (RCM) engagement. Distance from SGC, iCOH, and kinematic chain connectivity were quantified from electromyography and/or kinematic data acquired during tests administered before and after interventions. Effects of Treatment [PPM, RCM] and Time [Pre, Post] were tested with linear mixed models.

RESULTS

A Treatment*Time interaction was observed for distance from SGC. Post-intervention distance from SGC was greater following PPM only (p < 0.01). A Treatment*Time interaction was observed for hi-frequency trunk muscle iCOH, with a post-intervention increase corresponding to the RCM intervention (p < 0.007). Additional iCOH effects did not differ by intervention.

CONCLUSION

Distance from SGC is acutely modifiable and increases following exercises to facilitate anti-SGC muscles. Convergent findings related to kinematic chain connectivity and prescriptive neural binding were not observed. These observations suggest that it may be possible to describe, evaluate, and intervene upon posture in reference to a specific, mechanistic theory regarding the function of postural alignment.

Dosage of joint mobilization for the management of patients with rotator cuff-related shoulder pain: A scoping review

BACKGROUND

Evidence supporting type and dosage of joint mobilizations and rationale for selecting joint mobilization dosage for patients with rotator cuff-related shoulder pain are limited.

OBJECTIVES

This scoping review aimed to systematically map the type and dosage of joint mobilizations used in previous trials for managing patients with rotator cuff-related shoulder pain; and summarize the rationale for adopting a specific joint mobilization dosage.

METHODS

We searched six databases. We included randomised controlled trials using joint mobilization for patients with rotator cuff-related shoulder pain. We extracted data regarding technique, treatment joint mobilization dosages and rationale for a specific dosage.

RESULTS

We included 32 studies. Most studies did not or partially report technique (67%) and within-session dosage (64%) of passive joint mobilization. Overall treatment was fully reported in 95% of studies. The dosage used for passive joint mobilization was heterogeneous (ranging from grade I to grade V). Most studies (85%) did not or partially report technique of mobilization with movement (MWM), whereas within-session and overall treatment dosages were fully reported in more than 85% of studies. Three sets of 10 repetitions were commonly used within-session dosage for MWM. We found very limited information on the rationale for selecting dosage of joint mobilization.

CONCLUSION

We found limited information about the dosage or the rationale for selecting joint mobilization, with a heterogeneous dosage being tested across trials. Our findings highlight the importance of detailed reporting for dosage and rationale for selecting a specific dosage of joint mobilization.

Prevalence, diagnosis and management of musculoskeletal disorders in elite athletes: A mini-review

Musculoskeletal injuries in elite sports are ones of the most impact issue because their remarkable impact on performance caused by drastic absence of training and competition and a progressive deterioration in physical health, emotional and social athletes' dimensions. Also, the prevalence of epidemiologic research found an incidence of musculoskeletal disorders vary within sports and in elite athletes which is even higher as a consequence of higher demand physical performance. This way, the loss of physical performance due to an sport injury impacts not only the individual economic sphere of the professional but also that ofsports entities, reaching, according to some studies, a loss estimated in the range of 74.7 million pounds. Thus, the purpose of this article is to review and to provide an overview of the most common musculoskeletal injuries in elite sports precipitating factors, clinical presentation, evidence-based diagnostic evaluation, and treatment recommendations with a view to preventing medical conditions or musculoskeletal injuries that may alter performance and general health in the elite athletes.

Cervical sensitivity, range of motion and strength in individuals with shoulder pain: A cross-sectional case control study

OBJECTIVES

To assess whether cervical sensitivity, range of motion (ROM) and strength are impaired in individuals with shoulder pain and how they interact with sociodemographic and clinical data.

METHODS

Forty-eight individuals with shoulder pain and 48 asymptomatic matched ones were included. Pressure pain thresholds (PPTs) in cervical region and tibialis anterior muscles, ROM of cervical flexion, extension, lateral flexions and rotations and cervical muscle strength of flexion, extension and lateral flexions were assessed. Between-groups comparisons and a logistic multiple regression model were performed.

RESULTS

The symptomatic group showed lower and not meaningful PPTs in trapezius of the unaffected/unmatched side, both sternocleidomastoid muscles, and tibialis anterior and reduced ROM in cervical extension (MD = -9.00°) when compared to the asymptomatic group. No differences were identified in muscle strength. Reduced PPT of the trapezius and reduced cervical extension ROM together accounted for 40.2% of the variance of the chance of presenting shoulder pain.

CONCLUSION

Individuals with shoulder pain have more, but not clinically relevant, cervical sensitivity and lower cervical extension than asymptomatic individuals. The lower the PPT of the upper trapezius and the cervical extension ROM, the higher was the chance to present shoulder pain. Regional interdependence between cervical spine and shoulder may explain cervical physical function alterations in shoulder pain.

The Effect of Upper Cervical Mobilization/Manipulation on Temporomandibular Joint Pain, Maximal Mouth Opening, and Pressure Pain Thresholds: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Objective

To evaluate the efficacy of upper cervical joint mobilization and/or manipulation on reducing pain and improving maximal mouth opening (MMO) and pressure pain thresholds (PPTs) in adults with temporomandibular joint (TMJ) dysfunction compared with sham or other intervention.

Data Sources

MEDLINE, CINAHL, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library from inception to June 3, 2022, were searched.

Study Selection

Eight randomized controlled trials with 437 participants evaluating manual therapy (MT) vs sham and MT vs other intervention were included. Two reviewers independently extracted data and assessed risk of bias.

Data Extraction

Two independent reviewers extracted information about origin, number of study participants, eligibility criteria, type of intervention, and outcome measures.

Data Synthesis

Manual therapy was statistically significant in reducing pain compared with sham (mean difference [MD]: -1.93 points, 95% confidence interval [CI]: -3.61 to -0.24, P=.03), and other intervention (MD: -1.03 points, 95% CI: -1.73 to -0.33, P=.004), improved MMO compared with sham (MD: 2.11 mm, 95% CI: 0.26 to 3.96, P=.03), and other intervention (MD: 2.25 mm, 95% CI: 1.01 to 3.48, P<.001), but not statistically significant in improving PPT of masseter compared with sham (MD: 0.45 kg/cm2, 95% CI: -0.21 to 1.11, P=.18), and other intervention (MD: 0.42 kg/cm2, 95% CI: -0.19 to 1.03, P=.18), or the PPT of temporalis compared with sham (MD: 0.37 kg/cm2, 95% CI: -0.03 to 0.77, P=.07), and other intervention (MD: 0.43 kg/cm2, 95% CI: -0.60 to 1.45, P=.42).

Conclusion

There appears to be limited benefit of upper cervical spine MT on TMJ dysfunction, but definitive conclusions cannot be made because of heterogeneity and imprecision of treatment effects.

The Effects of Spinal Manipulation Added to Exercise on Pain and Quality of Life in Patients with Thoracic Spinal Pain: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Background

There are not enough reliable studies available in physiotherapy to determine the effects of spinal manipulative therapy added to exercise on thoracic spinal pain and quality of life.

Objective

To investigate the effects of spinal manipulation on pain and quality of life in subjects with thoracic spinal pain. Study Design. It was an open-label "randomized controlled trial." Study Settings. Department of Physiotherapy, Services Hospital, Lahore, Pakistan. Participants. There were one hundred subjects with an age group between 18 and 60 years fulfilling the inclusion criteria. These subjects were divided equally into two groups; an experimental and a control group.

Methods

In the experimental group (n = 50), thoracic spinal manipulation was applied along with thoracic muscle strengthening exercises. In the control group (n = 50) thoracic muscle exercises alone were given. Pain was measured by visual analogue scale (VAS) and quality of life with SF-36. Measurements were taken at baseline, immediately after session, after 8th session, and later as follow-ups at 12 weeks. Repeated measure ANOVA and independent sample T-test were used for within and between-group comparisons.

Results

Mean age of subjects in control group was 38.56 ± 12.44 and in experimental group was 36.02 ± 11.32. Both groups demonstrated significant improvement in VAS score, and all domains of SF 36 but between-group comparison showed greater improvement in VAS of the experimental group compared to the baseline (P < 0.05), but between-group comparison of 8th session to follow-up has shown that effects of exercise persist while health-related quality of life in spinal manipulation group was significantly reduced after discontinuation of treatment. After the 8th session, spinal manipulation group showed notable results in terms of pain (mean diff 1.14 (0.62, 1.65) 95% CI and all aspects of SF 36 (P value <0.05). However, after week 12 of follow-up, no significant difference (P value >0.05) was observed among the study groups for pain and quality of life.

Conclusion

Spinal manipulation added to thoracic exercise was more effective than thoracic exercise alone for improving pain and quality of life at the end of 8th session of care. However, the inclusion of spinal manipulation was not found effective at the 12-week follow-up. This trial is registered with IRCT20190327043125N1.

Impact of audible pops associated with spinal manipulation on perceived pain: a systematic review

OBJECTIVES

An audible pop is the sound that can derive from an adjustment in spinal manipulative therapy and is often seen as an indicator of a successful treatment. A review conducted in 1998 concluded that there was little scientific evidence to support any therapeutic benefit derived from the audible pop. Since then, research methods have evolved considerably creating opportunities for new evidence to emerge. It was therefore timely to review the evidence.

METHODS

The following electronic databases were searched for relevant studies pertaining to the impact of audible pops in spinal manipulative therapy: PubMed, Index to Chiropractic Literature (ICL), Cumulative Index to Nursing & Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) and Web-of-Science. The main outcome was pain. Two reviewers independently selected studies, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias and quality of the evidence using the Downs and Black checklist. Results of the included literature were synthesized into a systematic review.

RESULTS

Five original research articles were included in the review, of which four were prospective cohort studies and one a randomized controlled trial. All studies reported similar results: regardless of the area of the spine manipulated or follow-up time, there was no evidence of improved pain outcomes associated with an audible pop. One study even reported a hypoalgesic effect to external pain stimuli after spinal manipulation, regardless of an audible pop.

CONCLUSIONS

Whilst there is still no consensus among chiropractors on the association of an audible pop and pain outcomes in spinal manipulative therapy, knowledge about the audible pop has advanced. This review suggests that the presence or absence of an audible pop may not be important regarding pain outcomes with spinal manipulation.

Physical Therapy Interventions for the Management of Biceps Tendinopathy: An International Delphi Study

Background

Shoulder pain related to the long head of the biceps tendon (LHBT) tendinopathy can be debilitating and difficult to treat especially in athletes who often elect for surgical intervention. Conservative management is recommended but there are limited established guidelines on the physical therapy (PT) management of the condition.

Hypothesis/Purpose

The purpose of this study was to establish consensus on conservative, non-surgical physical therapy interventions for individuals with LHBT tendinopathy using the Delphi method approach.

Study Design

Delphi Study.

Methods

Through an iterative process, experts in the PT field rated their agreement with a list of proposed treatment interventions and suggested additional interventions during each round. Agreement was measured using a four-point Likert scale. Descriptive statistics including median and percentage agreement were used to measure agreement. Data analysis at the end of Round III produced, by consensus, a list of PT interventions recommended for the management of individuals with LHBT tendinopathy. Consensus was defined as an a priori cutoff of ≥75% agreement.

Results

The respondent group included 29 international experts in the PT management of individuals with shoulder pain. At the conclusion of the study 61 interventions were designated as recommended based on consensus amongst experts and 9 interventions were not recommended based on the same criteria, 15 interventions did not achieve consensus.

Conclusion

There is a lack of well-defined, PT interventions used to treat LHBT tendinopathy. Expert respondents reached consensus on multimodal interventions including exercise, manual therapy and patient education to manage LHBT tendinopathy.

Level of Evidence

5.

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

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic review.

BACKGROUND

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

OBJECTIVE

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

PROSPERO ID

CRD42020219456.

The importance of selecting the correct site to apply spinal manipulation when treating spinal pain: Myth or reality? A systematic review

The concept that spinal manipulation therapy (SMT) outcomes are optimized when the treatment is aimed at a clinically relevant joint is commonly assumed and central to teaching and clinical use (candidate sites). This systematic review investigated whether clinical effects are superior when this is the case compared to SMT applied elsewhere (non-candidate sites). Eligible study designs were randomized controlled trials that investigated the effect of spinal manipulation applied to candidate versus non-candidate sites for spinal pain. We obtained data from four different databases. Risk of bias was assessed using an adjusted Cochrane risk of bias tool, adding four items for study quality. We extracted between-group differences for any reported outcome or, when not reported, calculated effect sizes from the within-group changes. We compared outcomes for SMT applied at a 'relevant' site to SMT applied elsewhere. We prioritized methodologically robust studies when interpreting results. Ten studies, all of acceptable quality, were included that reported 33 between-group differences-five compared treatments within the same spinal region and five at different spinal regions. None of the nine studies with low or moderate risk of bias reported statistically significant between-group differences for any outcome. The tenth study reported a small effect on pain (1.2/10, 95%CI - 1.9 to - 0.5) but had a high risk of bias. None of the nine articles of low or moderate risk of bias and acceptable quality reported that "clinically-relevant" SMT has a superior outcome on any outcome compared to "not clinically-relevant" SMT. This finding contrasts with ideas held in educational programs and clinical practice that emphasize the importance of joint-specific application of SMT.

Thoracic spine thrust manipulation for individuals with cervicogenic headache: a crossover randomized clinical trial

Objective: To determine if thoracic spine manipulation (TSM) improves pain and disability in individuals with cervicogenic headache (CeH).Methods: A randomized controlled crossover trial was conducted on 48 participants (mean age: 34.4 years) with CeH symptoms. Participants were randomized to 6 sessions of TSM or no treatment (Hold) and after 4-weeks, groups crossed over. Outcomes were collected at 4, 8 and 12 weeks and included: headache disability inventory (HDI), neck disability index (NDI), and the global rating of change (GRC). Outcomes were analyzed using a linear mixed-effects model with Bonferroni correction. Odds of achieving the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) on the GRC of +4 or greater were also calculated. Scores at 4 weeks represent the only timepoint where 1 group is fully treated and other group has not received any treatment.Results: Comparing hold to active treatment, HDI were not significantly different between groups (mean difference = 7.39, 95 CI: -4.39 to 19.18; P = 0.214) at any timepoint; the NDI was significant (mean difference = 6.90, 95 CI: 0.05 to 13.75; P = 0.048) at 4 weeks. Odds of achieving the +4 MCID on the GRC (OR = 38.0, 95 CI: 6.6 to 220.0; p < 0.001) favored TSM at 4 weeks.Conclusion: TSM had no effect on headache-related disability but resulted in significant improvements in neck-related disability and participant reported perceived improvement. Future studies are needed to examine the long-term impact of TSM in this population.

The effects of dry needling to the thoracolumbar junction multifidi on measures of regional and remote flexibility and pain sensitivity: A randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Dry needling (DN) has been consistently shown to decrease pain sensitivity and increase flexibility local to the site of treatment, however it is unclear whether these effects are limited to the region of treatment or can be observed remote to the area of treatment.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the immediate, short-term effects of DN to the thoracolumbar junction on regional and remote flexibility, and to observe if changes in pain sensitivity can occur remote to site of treatment.

DESIGN

Double-blind randomized clinical trial.

METHODS

Fifty-four subjects with low back pain and decreased length in at least one hamstring were randomized to receive either DN or sham DN to the T12 and L1 multifidi. Participants underwent regional (fingertip-to-floor) and remote flexibility (passive knee extension, passive straight leg raise) and pressure pain threshold (PPT) testing of the upper and lower extremity before, immediately after and 1 day after treatment. ANCOVAs were used to analyze flexibility data, with the covariate of pre-treatment values. Paired t-tests were used for difference in remote pain sensitivity.

RESULTS

Statistically larger improvements in regional flexibility, but not remote flexibility, were observed immediately post-treatment in those who received DN than in those receiving sham DN (p = .0495; adjusted difference 1.2, 95% CI 0.002-2.3). Differences between upper and lower extremity PPT were not significant.

CONCLUSION

DN can potentially have immediate changes in regional flexibility, but effects are not sustained at 24-h follow-up. DN may not affect remote flexibility or segmental pain sensitivity.

Physical Therapy Management of Neurogenic Thoracic Outlet Syndrome

Neurogenic thoracic outlet syndrome is a complex and challenging condition to manage. There is a lack of high-quality evidence to guide clinical decision making and therefore a need to individualize treatment. Examination includes identifying postural, anatomic, and biomechanical factors that contribute to compromise of the neurovascular structures. Patients can experience good outcomes with conservative management with pain science-informed physical therapy combined with biomechanical approaches addressing contributing impairments. Retraining movement patterns while maintaining patency allows for a greater tolerance to functional activities and can have a positive impact on quality of life. Close collaboration with the patient's care team is critical.

Spinal Manipulation and Electrical Dry Needling in Patients With Subacromial Pain Syndrome: A Multicenter Randomized Clinical Trial

OBJECTIVES

To compare the effects of spinal thrust manipulation and electrical dry needling (TMEDN group) to those of nonthrust peripheral joint/soft tissue mobilization, exercise, and interferential current (NTMEX group) on pain and disability in patients with subacromial pain syndrome (SAPS).

DESIGN

Randomized, single-blinded, multicenter parallel-group trial.

METHODS

Patients with SAPS were randomized into the TMEDN group (n = 73) or the NTMEX group (n = 72). Primary outcomes included the Shoulder Pain and Disability Index and the numeric pain-rating scale. Secondary outcomes included the global rating of change scale (GROC) and medication intake. The treatment period was 6 weeks, with follow-ups at 2 weeks, 4 weeks, and 3 months.

RESULTS

At 3 months, the TMEDN group experienced greater reductions in shoulder pain and disability (P<.001) compared to the NTMEX group. Effect sizes were large in favor of the TMEDN group. At 3 months, a greater proportion of patients within the TMEDN group achieved a successful outcome (GROC score of 5 or greater) and stopped taking medication (P<.001).

CONCLUSION

Cervicothoracic and upper-rib thrust manipulation combined with electrical dry needling resulted in greater reductions in pain, disability, and medication intake than nonthrust peripheral joint/soft tissue mobilization, exercise, and interferential current in patients with SAPS. The effects were maintained at 3 months. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2021;51(2):72-81. Epub 28 Aug 2020. doi:10.2519/jospt.2021.9785.

Directed vertebral manipulation is not better than generic vertebral manipulation in patients with chronic low back pain: a randomised trial

QUESTION

In people with chronic low back pain, what is the average effect of directing manipulation at the most painful lumbar level compared with generic manipulation of the spine?

DESIGN

Randomised controlled trial with concealed allocation, a blinded assessor and intention-to-treat analysis.

PARTICIPANTS

148 people with non-specific chronic low back pain with a minimum level of pain intensity of 3 points (measured from 0 to 10 on the Pain Numerical Rating Scale).

INTERVENTIONS

All participants received 10 spinal manipulation sessions over a 4-week period. The experimental group received treatment to the most painful segment of the lower back. The control group received treatment to the thoracic spine.

OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcome was pain intensity, measured at the end of the intervention (Week 4). Secondary outcomes were: pain intensity at Weeks 12 and 26; pressure pain threshold at Week 4; and global perceived change since onset and disability, both measured at Weeks 4, 12 and 26.

RESULTS

Each group was randomly allocated 74 participants. Data were collected at all time points for 71 participants (96%) in the experimental group and 72 (97%) in the control group. There were no clinically important between-group differences for pain intensity, disability or global perceived effect at any time point. The estimate of the effect of directing manipulation at the most painful lumbar level, as compared with generic manipulation, on pain intensity was too small to be considered clinically important: MD 0 (95% CI -0.9 to 0.9) at Week 4 and -0.1 (95% CI -1.0 to 0.8) at Week 26.

CONCLUSION

No clinically important differences were observed between directed manipulation and generic manipulation in people with chronic low back pain.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT02883634.

The Effect of High Velocity Low Amplitude Cervical Manipulations on the Musculoskeletal System: Literature Review

In manual therapy, high velocity low amplitude (HVLA) cervical manipulation techniques are frequently used, but often the physiological and biomechanical effects that can be obtained are not completely clear. The techniques are mostly used for the treatment of biomechanical joint dysfunction, but little is yet known about the possibility of using them in order to achieve better performance on healthy subjects. The objective of the study is to describe how cervical manipulation can impact on a musculoskeletal disorder.

A systematic search was carried out on the Pubmed electronic database from the beginning of January to March 2020. Two independent reviewers conducted the screening process through the PRISMA diagram to determine the eligibility of the articles. The inclusion criteria covered randomized controlled trial (RCT) manuscripts published in peer-reviewed journals with individuals of all ages from 2005 to 2020. The included intervention was thrust manipulation or HVLA directed towards the cervical spine region. After reviewing the literature, 21 of 74 articles were considered useful and relevant to the research question.

The results of the research show that HVLA techniques, on subjects with musculoskeletal disorders, are able to influence pain modulation, mobility and strength both in the treated area and at a distance. Cervical manipulations are effective in management of cervicalgia, epicondylalgia, temporomandibular joint disorders and shoulder pain. With regard to results on strength in healthy subjects, given the divergent opinions of the authors, we cannot yet state that manipulation can significantly influence this parameter.

Cervical manipulations can also have risks for the patient if applied when not appropriate but the frequency of complications due to vertebral manipulation are very low. However, the manipulation techniques might be limited by low patients tolerance or the presence of contraindications. In addition, the optimal number of manipulations to be performed and the long-term benefits produced are unknown.

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

Background

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

Methods

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

Results

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

Conclusion

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

Clinical trial registration

German clinical trial register DRKS00013964, retrospectively registered on 2.2.2018.

The Thoracic Spine in the Overhead Athlete

Overhead athletes are susceptible to many injuries, particularly in the shoulder and lumbar spine. Due to the heterogeneity of these two regional injuries, it is difficult to pinpoint the exact origin. A potential contributing factor that should be thoroughly evaluated is the thoracic spine. It can be challenging to quantify exactly how much thoracic spine mobility or lack thereof plays a role toward injury. Despite this, when examining mechanics of an overhead athlete, if neuromuscular control of the thorax is impaired, adjacent motion segments often take the brunt of the required movements. This article addresses the need to incorporate the thoracic spine when analyzing the entire kinetic chain. Clinical pearls regarding thoracic neuromuscular control and rehabilitation were explored, as well as a review of recent literature. Further investigation of thoracic spine therapeutic interventions should be considered when treating overhead athletes.

Immediate effects of cervical mobilisations on neck muscle activity during active neck movements in patients with non-specific neck pain. A double blind placebo controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Cervical mobilisations are used to treat people with neck pain but their mechanisms of action are unclear. One theorised reason for induced analgesia is effect on neck muscle activity.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of cervical mobilisations on muscle activity during active neck movements and whether changes in muscle activity are associated with changes in symptoms.

DESIGN

Double-blind randomised placebo controlled trial.

SETTING

Primary care.

PARTICIPANTS

40 patients (aged 19 to 80 years, 24 female) with non-specific neck pain.

INTERVENTIONS

One session of cervical mobilisations or motionless manual contact (placebo).

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

sternocleidomastoid (SCM), scalene (SCA), upper trapezius (UT) and erector spinae (ES) surface electromyography (SEMG) during active neck flexion, extension, side flexion and rotation was measured immediately before and after the intervention. Patients were classified as responders according to change in symptoms assessed using the Global Rating of Change Scale (GROC).

RESULTS

Compared with placebo, patients receiving mobilisation showed an increase in contralateral UT and ES SEMG during rotation and contralateral and ipsilateral SCM, SCA and UT during side flexion (P<0.05), however changes were mostly associated with an increase in range and speed of movement. The only association with GROC was increased (5%) SEMG in the contralateral SCM during side flexion in the mobilisation group (P=0.013).

CONCLUSION

Cervical mobilisations caused increased neck SEMG, mostly due to increased movement range and speed. Change in muscle activity is unlikely to be a major mechanism of action of cervical mobilisations in symptomatic improvement with physiological neck movements. (ClinicalTrials.gov record number: 2016/066).

CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRY

ClinicalTrials.gov record number: 2016/066.

Spinal manipulation after multiple fusions in an adult with scoliosis: a case report

BACKGROUND

Spinal fusion (SF)is a common surgical intervention for individuals with idiopathic scoliosis. However, individuals may experience continued pain and disability from suspected mechanical dysfunction.

CASE DESCRIPTION

The purpose of this case report was to describe how specific thrust manipulation (TM) was used to treat a patient with scoliosis after multilevel SF. The 25-year-old female patient presented with left-sided pain in the rib, thoracic, and lumbar and sacroiliac joint regions that had been aggravated by trail running. After clearance from her surgeon, physical therapy examination and subsequent diagnosis were consistent with mechanical dysfunction of the ribs, lumbar spine, and sacroiliac joint causing decreased ability to participate in high-level activities, such as running.

OUTCOMES

The patient was treated for eight visits her 4 months with specific TM, movement analysis, and physiotherapeutic scoliosis-specific exercises. Pain and function were assessed with the Trunk Appearance Perception scale (TAPS), Scoliosis Research Society questionnaire (SRS-22), Numeric Pain Rating Scale (NPRS), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and spirometry. Pain and function improved during treatment, but outcomes for the ODI and spirometry remained the same.

DISCUSSION

The current case report suggests specific TM to areas outside of the fused spinal segments may be beneficial for decreasing pain and improving functional activities and participation levels. However, more research is needed to verify the efficacy of this treatment in clinical practice.

A pragmatic regional interdependence approach to primary frozen shoulder: a retrospective case series

Objectives

Although the shoulder is known to move together with the scapula and other upper quarter joints, the current frozen shoulder clinical practice guidelines describe only physical therapy study treatments directed to the shoulder. None received a strong recommendation, highlighting the need for alternate interventions. This retrospective case series describes a pragmatic regional interdependence approach to frozen shoulder with impairment and functional outcomes, noting whether final ROM approached normal.

Methods

Five consecutive patients referred with frozen shoulder diagnoses attended 11-21 sessions over 5-10 weeks with one physical therapist. Treatment addressed inter-related regions (shoulder, shoulder girdle, scapulothoracic/humerothoracic, and spine) following a pragmatic approach using impairment-based interventions (joint/soft tissue mobilization, muscle stretching/strengthening) as well as patient education, modalities and warm up that addressed individual presentations.

Results

All patients improved on all outcomes. Mean shoulder ROM at discharge, the impairment outcome, demonstrated large effect size increases: flexion (117 ± 10-179 ± 12, d = 5.9), abduction (74 ± 8-175 ± 9, d = 9.3), external rotation (23 ± 7-89 ± 2, d = 12.0). The Disability of Arm Shoulder Hand functional outcome score upon follow up demonstrated a large effect size improvement (d = 1.5) from 40.0 ± 19.4-6.2 ± 3.7. Final ROM approached normal.

Discussion

This case series utilized a regional interdependence approach to frozen shoulder that included manual therapy interventions directed to consistent upper quarter body segments. Shoulder ROM was returned to near normal with functional improvements evident months after discharge. A pragmatic regional interdependence approach addressing multiple joints related to shoulder function may benefit other people with frozen shoulder.

Level of Evidence

4.

The effect of direction specific thoracic spine manipulation on the cervical spine: a randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVES

To determine the difference on neck outcomes with directional manipulation to the thoracic spine. There is evidence that thoracic spine manipulation is effective in treating patients with neck pain. However, there is no research that determines if the assessment of directional hypomobility and the selection of thrust direction offer improved outcomes.

METHODS

A total of 69 patients with cervical spine pain were randomly assigned to receive either a manipulation that was consistent with their thoracic spine motion loss (matched) or opposite their motion loss (unmatched). The patient was given care consistent with the orthopedic section guidelines for neck pain and the physical therapist's clinical reasoning. Baseline outcome measures (NPRS, NDI, GROC) were taken and reassessed two days and two weeks after treatment.

RESULTS

Both groups had positive results when pain, neck disability index, and global rating of change were assessed. There was no difference between the matched and unmatched groups.

DISCUSSION

Directional manipulation of hypomobile thoracic spine segments may not be required to improved outcomes in patients with neck pain. Future studies should assess a variety of factors when determining the best available treatment, including manual therapy procedures, exercise, and patient selection.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

1b.

INTER-RATER RELIABILITY OF THE SELECTIVE FUNCTIONAL MOVEMENT ASSESSMENT (SFMA) BY SFMA CERTIFIED PHYSICAL THERAPISTS WITH SIMILAR CLINICAL AND RATING EXPERIENCE

BACKGROUND

The Selective Functional Movement Assessment (SFMA) assesses posture, muscle balance, and movement patterns in order to identify relevant musculoskeletal dysfunction in a clinical population.

PURPOSE

The purposes of this study were to: (1) determine if raters with similar clinical experience and rating experience exhibit adequate agreement of the scoring for the SFMA during clinical use; (2) determine the reliability of the categorical scoring of the SFMA in a clinical population; (3) determine the reliability of the criterion checklist scoring of the SFMA in a clinical population; (4) compare the reliability of real-time assessment to recorded assessment.

DESIGN

Inter-rater reliability study.

METHODS

49 clinical subjects (20.7 years ± 1.6) were simultaneously assessed in real-time by two physical therapists and were recorded with digital video cameras in the sagittal and frontal view while they performed the fifteen component movement patterns that comprise the top-tier SFMA. The third physical therapist assessed the patterns from the video. Subjects were assessed using the SFMA categorical scoring and criterion checklist scoring tools.

RESULTS

The two live clinical raters demonstrated the greatest Cohen's Kappa scores (10 of 15) with moderate or better inter-rater agreement (Kappa > 0.40) using the categorical scoring tool. The overall ICC [2,1] score indicated fair to moderate agreement between all raters for the criterion checklist scoring (ICC, SEM, p-value) (0.61, 8.23, p < 0.001). Real time clinical use was the most reliable method for using the criterion checklist scoring tool (0.72, 1.95, p=0.43).

CONCLUSIONS

Using the categorical and criterion checklist tools in a clinical population to score the fifteen component fundamental movements of the SFMA demonstrated moderate or better reliability when performed clinically by certified SFMA raters.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Reliability, Level 2.

Utilization of Manipulative Treatment for Spine and Shoulder Conditions Between Different Medical Providers in a Large Military Hospital

OBJECTIVE

To describe the use of manipulative treatment for shoulder and spine conditions among various provider types.

DESIGN

Retrospective observational cohort.

SETTING

Single military hospital.

PARTICIPANTS

Consecutive sample of patients (N=7566) seeking care for an initial spine or shoulder condition from January 1 to December 31, 2009.

INTERVENTIONS

Manipulative treatment (eg, manual therapy, spinal and joint manipulation).

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE

Manipulation treatment was identified with procedure billing codes in the medical records. Spine and shoulder conditions were identified by using the International Classification of Diseases, 9th Revision codes. All data were abstracted from the Department of Defense Military Health System Management and Analysis Tool.

RESULTS

Of 7566 total patients seeking care, 2014 (26.6%) received manipulative treatment at least once, and 1883 of those received this treatment in a military facility (24.7%). Manipulative treatment was used most often for thoracic conditions and least often for shoulder conditions (50.8% and 24.2% of all patients). There was a total of 6706 unique medical visits with a manipulative treatment procedure (average of 3.3 manipulative treatment procedure visits per patient).

CONCLUSIONS

Manipulative treatment utilization rates for shoulder and spine conditions ranged from 26.6% to 50.2%. Chiropractors used manipulation the most and physical therapists the least.

Cervicothoracic Manual Therapy Plus Exercise Therapy Versus Exercise Therapy Alone in the Management of Individuals With Shoulder Pain: A Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial

Study Design Multicenter randomized controlled trial. Background Cervicothoracic manual therapy has been shown to improve pain and disability in individuals with shoulder pain, but the incremental effects of manual therapy in addition to exercise therapy have not been investigated in a randomized controlled trial. Objectives To compare the effects of cervicothoracic manual therapy and exercise therapy to those of exercise therapy alone in individuals with shoulder pain. Methods Individuals (n = 140) with shoulder pain were randomly assigned to receive 2 sessions of cervicothoracic range-of-motion exercises plus 6 sessions of exercise therapy, or 2 sessions of high-dose cervicothoracic manual therapy and range-of-motion exercises plus 6 sessions of exercise therapy (manual therapy plus exercise). Pain and disability were assessed at baseline, 1 week, 4 weeks, and 6 months. The primary aim (treatment group by time) was examined using linear mixed-model analyses and the repeated measure of time for the Shoulder Pain and Disability Index (SPADI), the numeric pain-rating scale, and the shortened version of the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand questionnaire (QuickDASH). Patient-perceived success was assessed and analyzed using the global rating of change (GROC) and the Patient Acceptable Symptom State (PASS), using chi-square tests of independence. Results There were no significant 2-way interactions of group by time or main effects by group for pain or disability. Both groups improved significantly on the SPADI, numeric pain-rating scale, and QuickDASH. Secondary outcomes of success on the GROC and PASS significantly favored the manual therapy-plus-exercise group at 4 weeks (P = .03 and P<.01, respectively) and on the GROC at 6 months (P = .04). Conclusion Adding 2 sessions of high-dose cervicothoracic manual therapy to an exercise program did not improve pain or disability in patients with shoulder pain, but did improve patient-perceived success at 4 weeks and 6 months and acceptability of symptoms at 4 weeks. More research is needed on the use of cervicothoracic manual therapy for treating shoulder pain. Level of Evidence Therapy, level 1b. Prospectively registered March 30, 2012 at www.ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01571674). J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2016;46(8):617-628. doi:10.2519/jospt.2016.6319.

Thrust joint manipulation utilization by U.S. physical therapists

STUDY DESIGN

Online survey study.

OBJECTIVE

To determine physical therapists' utilization of thrust joint manipulation (TJM) and their comfort level in using TJM between the cervical, thoracic, and lumbar regions of the spine. We hypothesized that physical therapists who use TJM would report regular use and comfort providing it to the thoracic and lumbar spines, but not so much for the cervical spine.

BACKGROUND

Recent surveys of first professional physical therapy degree programs have found that TJM to the cervical spine is not taught to the same degree as to the thoracic and lumbar spines.

METHODS

We developed a survey to capture the required information and had a Delphi panel of 15 expert orthopedic physical therapists review it and provide constructive feedback. A revised version of the survey was sent to the same Delphi panel and consensus was obtained on the final survey instrument. The revised survey was made available to any licensed physical therapists in the U.S.A. using an online survey system, from October 2014 through June 2015.

RESULTS

Of 1014 responses collected, 1000 completed surveys were included for analysis. There were 478 (48%) males; the mean age of respondents was 39.7 ± 10.81 years (range 24-92); and mean years of clinical experience was 13.6 ± 10.62. A majority of respondents felt that TJM was safe and effective when applied to lumbar (90.5%) and thoracic (91.1%) spines; however, a smaller percentage (68.9%) felt that about the cervical spine. More therapists reported they would perform additional screening prior to providing TJM to the cervical spine than they would for the lumbar and thoracic spines. Therapists agreed they were less likely to provide and feel comfortable with TJM in the cervical spine compared to the thoracic and lumbar spines. Finally, therapists who are male; practice in orthopedic spine setting; are aware of manipulation clinical prediction rules; and have manual therapy certification, are more likely to use TJM and be comfortable with it in all three regions.

CONCLUSION

Results indicate that respondents do not believe TJM for the cervical spine to be as safe and efficacious as that for the lumbar and thoracic spines. Further, they are more likely to perform additional screening, abstain from and do not feel comfortable performing TJM for the cervical spine.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Our research reveals there is a discrepancy between utilization of TJM at different spinal levels. This research provides an opportunity to address variability in clinical practice among physical therapists utilizing TJM.