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

Influence of Sagittal Cervical and Thoracic Range of Motion on Neck Pain Severity in Young White-Collar Workers: A Cross-Sectional Study

Background: Neck pain (NP) is a prevalent musculoskeletal disorder, especially among individuals with sedentary occupations. The interplay between cervical and thoracic spine mobility is hypothesized to contribute significantly to NP severity, yet this relationship requires further exploration. Methods: This cross-sectional study involved 179 young white-collar workers with NP lasting for at least six weeks. Participants were stratified into mild (n = 78) and moderate (n = 101) pain groups based on their scores on the Northwick Park Neck Pain Questionnaire (NPQ). Cervical and thoracic range of motion (ROM) in the sagittal plane was measured using inclinometers. NP severity was further assessed using the NPQ and the Neck Disability Index (NDI). Correlation, regression, and mediation analyses were conducted to investigate the relationship between cervical and thoracic ROM and NP severity. Results: Thoracic ROM was higher in the mild pain group (median: 47.35, IQR: 10.13) than in the moderate pain group (median: 42.10, IQR: 13.60; p < 0.001). The NDI had a negative correlation with thoracic ROM (r = -0.65; p < 0.05) and a positive correlation with cervical ROM (r = 0.84; p < 0.01). Additionally, thoracic ROM mediated the effect of cervical ROM on NP, particularly influencing NDI scores (p < 0.01). Conclusions: This study found a significant association between reduced thoracic ROM and increased NP severity, highlighting the role of thoracic spine mobility in NP among young white-collar workers. Targeted interventions for thoracic dysfunction may reduce compensatory cervical strain and improve NP management, suggesting that thoracic spine assessments should be integrated into routine clinical evaluations.

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.

Effectiveness of thoracic spine manipulation for upper quadrant musculoskeletal disorders: protocol for a systematic review

INTRODUCTION

Upper quadrant musculoskeletal disorders (UQMD), comprising of cranial, cervical, shoulder and upper extremity disorders, are among the most frequently reported disorders in clinical practice. Thoracic high velocity low amplitude thrust (Tx-HVLAT) manipulation is a form of conservative management recommended in systematic reviews as an effective treatment option for aspects of UQMD disorders such headache, shoulder pain and lateral elbow pain. However, no recent systematic reviews have assessed the effectiveness across UQMD. Therefore, this systematic review aims to update the current evidence on the effectiveness of Tx-HVLAT for patients with UQMD on (1) patient-reported outcomes, (2) performance measures or (3) psychosocial outcomes.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

The Cochrane Controlled Trials Register, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PEDro and Index to Chiropractic Literature will be searched from inception using Medical Subject Headings (MeSH), Thesaurus and/or free-text words. Combinations will be made based on localisation, disorder, intervention and design. Following guidelines as advised by the Cochrane Back Review Group, published randomised controlled trials will be included. Two review authors will independently assess the risk of bias (ROB) using the Cochrane Back Review Group's recommended ROB2 tool and will independently extract the data using a standardised data extraction form. Overall quality of the evidence will be evaluated using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) method. For continuous data, we will calculate standardised mean differences with 95% CIs. For dichotomous outcomes, relative risks and 95% CIs will be calculated. Where possible we will present a subgroup analysis by disorder. For pooling, a random-effects model will be used.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethics approval is not required for this systematic review. The study findings will be submitted to a relevant peer-reviewed journal for dissemination and presented at relevant conferences.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42023429996.

Protocol for the development of a 'trustworthy' living systematic review and meta analyses of manual therapy interventions to treat neuromusculoskeletal impairments

BACKGROUND

Preprocessed research resources are believed to be highly 'trustworthy' when translating research to clinical practice. However, the overall 'trustworthiness' is unknown if this evidence contains randomized clinical trials (RCTs) where prospective has not been/cannot be verified, has low confidence in estimated effects, and if they are not up to date.

OBJECTIVES

This protocol will be used to create a baseline benchmark for a series of trustworthy living systematic reviews (SRs) regarding manual therapy interventions.

METHODS

Data will originate from RCTs related to manual therapy neuromusculoskeletal interventions, indexed in 6 search engines in English from 1 January 2010, to the present. Two blinded reviewers will identify the RCTs and extract data using Covidence. The data will be synthesized based on consensus and analyzed using the Cochrane collaboration's Review Manager.

EXPECTED OUTCOMES

It is expected that there will be a shortage of RCTs with at least a moderate confidence in estimated effects that will allow for strong practice recommendations.

DISCUSSION

Identifying evidence that can be translated into strong practice recommendations is essential to identify beneficial and harmful interventions, decrease practice variability, and identify neuromusculoskeletal manual therapy interventions that require further disciplined methodological focus.

Manual therapy for non-radicular cervical spine related impairments: establishing a 'Trustworthy' living systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

To establish a 'trustworthy' living systematic review (SR) with a meta-analysis of manual therapy for treating non-radicular cervical impairments.

DESIGN

SR with meta-analysis.

LITERATURE SEARCH

Articles published between January 2010 and September 2022 were included from: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL); CINAHL; MEDLINE; PubMed; PEDro, and ProQuest Nursing and Allied Health.

METHODS

This SR included English-language randomized clinical trials (RCTs) of manual therapy involving adults used to treat non-radicular cervical impairments. The primary outcomes were pain and region-specific outcome measures. Cervicogenic headaches and whiplash were excluded to improve homogeneity. Two reviewers independently assessed RCTs. The prospective plan was to synthesize results with high confidence in estimated effects using GRADE.

RESULTS

Thirty-five RCTs were screened for registration status. Twenty-eight were not registered or registered prospectively. In 5 studies, the discussion and conclusion did not match the registry, or this could not be determined. One study did not meet the external validity criterion, and another was rated as having a high risk of bias. One study met the inclusion and exclusion criteria, so practice recommendations could not be made. The remaining study did not identify any clinically meaningful group differences.

DISCUSSION

Only one prospectively registered RCT met this SR's strict, high-quality standards. The single identified paper provides initial high-quality evidence on this topic.

CONCLUSION

This SR establishes a foundation of trustworthiness and can be used to generate research agendas to determine the potential clinical utility of manual therapy directed at the cervical spine for non-radicular cervical complaints.

Spinal manipulation and adverse event reporting in the pregnant patient limits estimation of relative risk: a narrative review

OBJECTIVE

To describe variability in spinal manipulation technique details and adverse event (AE) documentation of spinal manipulation during pregnancy.

METHODS

Five databases were searched for peer-reviewed investigations of spinal manipulation during pregnancy. Criteria for inclusion was as follows: high velocity, low amplitude thrust manipulation performed, subjects pregnant during manipulation, and English language. Studies were excluded when participants were not currently pregnant, and when the manipulation performed was not high-velocity, low-amplitude thrust. Data extraction included study design, number of participants, gestational age, spinal region, number of manipulations, manipulation technique details, profession of manipulator, AE reporting (Yes vs. No), type, and number of AE.

RESULTS

Out of 18 studies included in the review, only three provide details of the spinal manipulation technique. The reported variables include patient position, practitioner position, and direction of thrust. Fourteen studies documented AE; however, only seven provide AE details.

DISCUSSION

Reporting of spinal manipulation techniques and AE during pregnancy were inconsistent. Replication of methods in future investigations is limited without more detailed documentation of manipulation techniques performed. Furthermore, determining the relative risk and safety of spinal manipulation during pregnancy is not possible without more detailed reporting of AE. Due to these inconsistencies, a checklist is proposed for standardized reporting of spinal manipulation techniques and AE. With more consistent reporting of these parameters, results of future investigations may allow for more definitive and generalizable safety recommendations on spinal manipulation during pregnancy.

Effectiveness of Thoracic Spine Manipulation on the Management of Neck Pain: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Control Trials

There are contradicting findings regarding the effect of thoracic spine manipulation in decreasing pain and disability in patients with chronic mechanical neck pain. Hence, the purpose of this review was to evaluate the current evidence on the effectiveness of thoracic spine thrust manipulation in decreasing pain intensity, and neck disability among subjects with chronic mechanical neck pain. We made a comprehensive search of literature published between 2010 and 2020 from the electronic databases of PubMed, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), Cochrane Library, and Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro). We adhered to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-analysis (PRISMA). The methodological quality was assessed by the PEDro scale, and the level of evidence rated by Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) software. Finally, a meta-analysis was done using RevMan 5.3 with a random-effects model to calculate the mean difference (MD) and 95% confidence intervals for pain and disability. Eight eligible randomized controlled trials were identified with a total of 457 participants. The quality assessment of the included studies was found to be fair in quality (mean PEDro score of 6.63/10). The overall GRADE of the review showed low to moderate level of evidence. Effect size estimates of the studies showed modest differences in pain reduction, as it revealed a significant effect in Visual Analog Scale ((VAS) 0-100mm) (MD -12.46; 95% CI: -17.29, -7.64), and Pain Numeric Rating Scale ((PNRS) 0-10 pts) (MD -0.8; 95% CI: -1.60, -0.10). The thoracic manipulation also resulted in a significant effect in decreasing neck disability, in which the mean difference in Neck disability index (NDI) showed (MD -6.46; 95% CI: -10.43 -2.50). This review suggested that thoracic spine manipulation was effective in reducing pain and neck disability in all adults with chronic mechanical neck pain compared to other interventions.

Identifying Patient Characteristics Associated With the Occurrence of Post Treatment Non-serious Adverse Events After Cervical Spine Manual Therapy Treatment in Patients With Neck Pain

OBJECTIVES

To compare prevalence rates of serious and non-serious adverse events after manipulation and mobilization and to identify risk factors of serious and non-serious adverse events following 4 types of manual therapy treatment in patients with neck pain.

DESIGN

A prospective cohort study in primary care manual therapy practice.

PARTICIPANTS

Patients with neck pain (N=686) provided data on adverse events after 1014 manipulation treatments, 829 mobilization treatments, 437 combined manipulation and mobilization treatments, and 891 treatments consisting of "other treatment modality".

INTERVENTIONS

Usual care manual therapy.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

A chi-square test was performed to explore differences in prevalence rates. Logistic regression analysis was performed within the 4 treatment groups. A priori we defined associations between patient-characteristics and adverse events of odds ratio (OR)>2 or OR<0.5 as clinically relevant.

RESULTS

No serious adverse events, such as cervical artery dissection or stroke, were reported. With regard to non-serious adverse events, we found that these are common after manual therapy treatment: prevalence rates are ranging from 0.3% to 64.7%. We found a statistically significant difference between the 4 types of treatments, detrimental to mobilization treatment. Logistic regression analysis resulted in 3 main predictors related to non-serious adverse events after manual therapy treatment: smoking (OR ranges from 2.10 [95% confidence interval [CI] 1.37-3.11] to 3.33 [95% CI 1.83-5.93]), the presence of comorbidity (OR ranges from 2.32 [95% CI 1.22-4.44] to 3.88 [95% CI 1.62-9.26]), and female sex (OR ranges from 0.22 [95% CI 0.11-0.46] to 0.49 [95% CI 0.28-0.86]).

CONCLUSION

There is a significant difference in the occurrence of non-serious adverse events after mobilization compared with manipulation or a combination of manipulation and mobilization. Non-serious adverse events in manual therapy practice are common and are associated with smoking and the presence of comorbidity. In addition, women are more likely to report non-serious adverse events.

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.

Manual Therapy in Preadolescent Children: A Delphi Investigation of Physical Therapists in the United States

OBJECTIVE

Limited research has investigated the use of manual therapy to treat the preadolescent (0-12 years of age) population with musculoskeletal and neurological impairments. The purpose of this study was to identify the following among physical therapists holding advanced credentials in pediatrics, neurodevelopmental treatment, or manual therapy: (1) consensus regarding effective techniques in the preadolescent population, (2) differences in opinion, and (3) perceived decision-making barriers and factors regarding use of manual therapy techniques.

METHODS

Credentialed physical therapists in the United States were recruited for a 3-round Delphi investigation. An electronic survey in Round 1 identified musculoskeletal and neurological impairments and the manual techniques considered effective to treat such conditions, in addition to factors and barriers. Responses were used to create the second round, during which a 4-point Likert scale was used to score each survey item. A third round of scoring established consensus. Descriptive statistics and composite scores were calculated for each manual technique by impairment. Between-group differences were calculated using the Mann-Whitney U test with Bonferroni correction.

RESULTS

Consensus was determined for several concepts. First, neuromuscular techniques were considered effective across all impairments, and joint mobilizations (grades I-IV) were believed to be effective to treat joint and muscle and myofascial impairments. Second, visceral manipulation and craniosacral therapy were considered ineffective in treating most impairments. There was lack of consensus and clear differences of opinion regarding the use of grade V mobilizations and dry needling. Significant barriers to use of manual therapy were: lack of knowledge, lack of evidence, and fear of litigation and harming patients.

CONCLUSION

This study is an initial step for developing manual therapy guidelines, research, and educational opportunities regarding manual therapy in pediatric physical therapy.

Thoracic adverse events following spinal manipulative therapy: a systematic review and narrative synthesis

Objectives: Spinal manipulative therapy (SMT) is widely used by manual therapists to manage spinal complaints. Notwithstanding the perceived relative safety of SMT, instances of severe thoracic adverse events (AE) have been documented. An evidence synthesis is required to understand the nature, severity and characteristics of thoracic AE following all SMT. The primary objective of this study was to report thoracic AE following SMT and secondly to report patient characteristics to inform further research for safe practice. Methods: A systematic review and data synthesis were conducted according to a registered protocol (PROSPERO CRD42019123140). A sensitive topic-based search strategy for key databases, gray literature and registers used study population terms and keywords, to search to 12/6/19. Two reviewers were involved at each stage. Using the Oxford Center for Evidence-based Medicine (CEBM) the level evidence was evaluated with grade presented for each AE. Results were reported in the context of overall quality. Results: From 1013 studies identified from searches, 19 studies (15 single case studies and 4 case series) reporting 21 unique thoracic AE involving the spinal cord tissues [nonvascular (n = 7), vascular (n = 6)], pneumothorax or hemothorax (n = 3), fracture (n = 3), esophageal rupture (n = 1), rupture of thoracic aorta (n = 1), partial pancreatic transection (n = 1). Reported outcomes included fully recovery (n = 8), permanent neurological deficit (n = 5), and death (n = 4). Conclusion: Although causality cannot be confirmed, serious thoracic AE to include permanent neurological deficit and death have been reported following SMT. Findings highlight the importance of clinical reasoning, including pre-thrust examination, as part of best and safe practice for SMT.

Reaction Force Magnitude and Orientation During Supine Thoracic Spine Thrust Manipulation: An Exploratory Analysis and Reliability of Preload and Impulse Phase

OBJECTIVE

The main purpose of this study was to explore specific kinetic parameters during supine thoracic thrust manipulation and to analyze task reliability and differences between various practitioners METHODS: Kinetic parameters were assessed by examining ground reaction force magnitude and orientation (on the basis of the zenithal angle) using force platforms. The manipulative procedure (consisting of the application of 3 preloads followed by 1 single thrust adjustment) was performed by different practitioners at 3 sessions. Application of thrust was allowed for trained practitioners only. Preload force, peak force, and vector force orientation were compared between sessions and practitioners.

RESULTS

Reliability analysis showed that practitioners achieved similar preload and peak force independent of the session, with comparable force orientation data. Differences between practitioners were observed for preload and peak force but not regarding the zenithal angle during the thrust phase.

CONCLUSION

This study is the first that explores kinetic parameters for supine thoracic thrust manipulation. Task repeatability was confirmed and several differences were observed between practitioners. Certainly, there is a need for further investigation examining both dynamic parameters (ie, velocity and accelerations) and the potential neurologic effect of such manipulative technique.

Evidence for decreased Neurologic Pain Signature activation following thoracic spinal manipulation in healthy volunteers and participants with neck pain

•

The use of brain-based models of pain were explored in two clinical studies.

•

Neurologic pain signature activation decreased following spinal manipulation.

•

Spinal manipulation altered the processing of pain-related brain activity.

•

We provide evidence for a centrally mediated therapeutic action of spinal manipulation.

•

Brain-based models have potential as objective clinical biomarkers of pain.

Background Context

Spinal manipulation (SM) is a common treatment for neck and back pain, theorized to mechanically affect the spine leading to therapeutic mechanical changes. The link between specific mechanical effects and clinical improvement is not well supported. SM's therapeutic action may instead be partially mediated within the central nervous system.

Purpose

To introduce brain-based models of pain for spinal pain and manual therapy research, characterize the distributed central mechanisms of SM, and advance the preliminary validation of brain-based models as potential clinical biomarkers of pain.

Study Design

Secondary analysis of two functional magnetic resonance imaging studies investigating the effect of thoracic SM on pain-related brain activity: A non-controlled, non-blinded study in healthy volunteers (Study 1, n = 10, 5 females, and mean age = 31.2 ± 10.0 years) and a randomized controlled study in participants with acute to subacute neck pain (Study 2, n = 24, 16 females, mean age = 38.0 ± 15.1 years).

Methods

Functional magnetic resonance imaging was performed during noxious mechanical stimulation of the right index finger cuticle pre- and post-intervention. The effect of SM on pain-related activity was studied within brain regions defined by the Neurologic Pain Signature (NPS) that are predictive of physical pain.

Results

In Study 1, evoked mechanical pain (p < 0.001) and NPS activation (p = 0.010) decreased following SM, and the changes in evoked pain and NPS activation were correlated (r_RM² = 0.418, p = 0.016). Activation within the NPS subregions of the dorsal anterior cingulate cortex (dACC, p = 0.012) and right secondary somatosensory cortex/operculum (rS2_Op, p = 0.045) also decreased following SM, and evoked pain was correlated with dACC activity (r_RM² = 0.477, p = 0.019). In Study 2, neck pain (p = 0.046) and NPS (p = 0.033) activation decreased following verum but not sham SM. Associations between evoked pain, neck pain, and NPS activation, were not significant and less clear, possibly due to inadequate power, methodological limitations, or other confounding factors.

Conclusions

The findings provide preliminary evidence that SM may alter the processing of pain-related brain activity within specific pain-related brain regions and support the use of brain-based models as clinical biomarkers of pain.

Neck pain in South Africa: An overview of the prevalence, assessment and management for the contemporary clinician

BACKGROUND

Neck pain is a prevalent condition and is associated with high levels of disability and pain. The long-term prognosis can be poor, and therefore effective management in the acute stage is important.

OBJECTIVES

To provide an overview of the prevalence of neck pain and physiotherapy management and to provide evidence-informed recommendations for clinical practice within a South African context.

METHOD

The literature was reviewed considering prevalence, risk factors and examination. Management recommendations were derived from the highest levels of evidence of clinical practice guidelines, systematic reviews and randomised clinical trials.

RESULTS

Neck pain is classified into four grades, and three trajectories of recovery have been identified. Although the incidence of neck pain globally is high, in the South African context the majority of the population have limited access to physiotherapy management. Sound clinical reasoning is important in the assessment and decision-making process for management. Exercise, and mobilisation or manipulation are effective treatment options in the management of most types of neck pain. Other physical modalities such as needling, transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation, laser and intermittent traction may be used as an adjunct to management.

CONCLUSION

The burden of neck pain globally is high; however, there is a lack of information on current practice, prevalence and burden of neck pain in the South African context. Sound evidence-informed clinical reasoning to inform a working diagnosis and to enable patient-centred management is important.

CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS

A thorough assessment is essential to gather information to formulate hypotheses regarding diagnosis and prognosis for neck pain. Exercise, and mobilisation or manipulation are effective management options.

Immediate and Short-term Effects of Thoracic Spine Manipulation in Patients With Cervical Radiculopathy: A Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

Thoracic spine thrust manipulation has been shown to improve patient-rated outcomes for individuals with neck pain. However, there is limited evidence of its effectiveness in patients with cervical radiculopathy.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the immediate and short-term effects of thoracic manipulation to those of a sham thoracic manipulation in patients with cervical radiculopathy.

METHODS

In this multicenter randomized controlled trial, participants with cervical radiculopathy were randomized to receive either manipulation (n = 22) or sham manipulation (n = 21) of the thoracic spine. Outcomes were measured at baseline, immediately after treatment, and at a follow-up 48 to 72 hours after manipulation. A repeated-measures analysis of variance was used to analyze neck and upper extremity pain (numeric pain-rating scale), disability (Neck Disability Index), cervical range of motion (ROM), and endurance (deep neck flexor endurance test). The chi-square test was used to analyze changes in neck and upper extremity pain, centralization of symptoms, and beliefs about receiving the active manipulation treatment using a global rating of change scale.

RESULTS

Neck and upper extremity pain, cervical ROM, disability, and deep neck flexor endurance all showed significant interactions between group and time (P<.01). Immediately after treatment and at the 48-to-72-hour follow-up, the manipulation group had lower neck pain (P<.01), better cervical ROM (P<.01), lower disability (P<.01), and better deep neck flexor endurance (P = .02) compared to the sham manipulation group. The manipulation group had moderate to large effect-size changes over time. No between-group differences for upper extremity pain were found immediately following the intervention (P = .34) and at 48 to 72 hours after the intervention (P = .18). At 48 to 72 hours after treatment, a greater proportion of participants in the manipulation group reported improvement (global rating of change scale score of 4 or greater) in neck and upper extremity symptoms (P<.01), centralization of symptoms (P<.01), and beliefs about receiving an active manipulation (P = .01) compared to the sham manipulation group.

CONCLUSION

One session of thoracic manipulation resulted in improvements in pain, disability, cervical ROM, and deep neck flexor endurance in patients with cervical radiculopathy. Patients treated with manipulation were more likely to report at least moderate change in their neck and upper extremity symptoms up to 48 to 72 hours following treatment.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapy, level 2. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2019;49(5):299-309. doi:10.2519/jospt.2019.8150.

Effects of Cervical Rotatory Manipulation on Internal Carotid Artery in Hemodynamics Using an Animal Model of Carotid Atherosclerosis: A Safety Study

BACKGROUND Spinal manipulation, particularly in cervical rotatory manipulation (CRM), has become increasingly popular in physical therapies, with satisfying effect. However, it is still unclear whether CRM affects internal carotid arteries (ICA) with mild carotid atherosclerosis (CAS), especially in hemodynamics. MATERIAL AND METHODS Nine cynomolgus monkeys were randomly divided into 3 groups: the CAS-CRM, the CAS, and the blank control groups. CAS models were developed in the left ICA in the CAS-CRM and the CAS groups. The monkeys in the CAS-CRM group underwent CRM intervention for 3 weeks. Histology and hemodynamics were measured, including peak systolic velocity (PSV), end-diastolic velocity (EDV), time average velocity (TAV), resistance index (RI), and pulsatility index (PI). Measurements were made separately at 3 different rotation angles (0°, 45°, and 90°). RESULTS In the 3 groups, with the increase of rotation angle, the decreasing tendency of PSV, EDV, and TAV and the increasing tendency of RI and PI were statistically significant. At each angle, the monkeys in the CAS-CRM and the CAS groups had lower levels of PSV, EDV, and TAV and higher levels of RI and PI compared with the blank control group. No significant difference in hemodynamics was found between the CAS-CRM and the CAS groups. CONCLUSIONS Both the rotational angle and the atherosclerotic disease can affect the blood flow of the ICA. However, CRM does not cause adverse effects on hemodynamics in cynomolgus monkeys with mild CAS, and appears to be a relatively safe technique.

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

Management of thoracic spine pain and dysfunction: A survey of clinical practice in the UK

BACKGROUND

The thoracic spine (TS) is relatively under-researched compared to the neck and low back. As the challenge of managing spinal pain persists, understanding current physiotherapy clinical practice for TS pain and dysfunction is necessary to inform future research in this area.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate physiotherapy practice for managing thoracic spine pain and dysfunction (TSPD) in the UK, with a secondary focus on examining differences across settings and expertise.

DESIGN AND METHOD

A cross sectional e-survey informed by existing evidence was designed. Comprising closed and open questions, the survey is reported in line with Checklist for Reporting Results of Internet E-Surveys. Eligible participants were UK-trained physiotherapists managing patients with TSPD, recruited for 9 weeks up to 8/2/16. Data analysis included descriptive analyses (closed questions) and thematic analysis (open questions).

RESULTS

From the 485 respondents, fulfilling the required sample size, key findings included.

EXAMINATION

Active motion testing, palpation and postural assessment was 'always' undertaken by >89% of respondents.

MANAGEMENT

Active (exercises) and passive (e.g. mobilisations) techniques were used by >85% of respondents, with ∼50% using manipulation, taping and acupuncture. Practice settings: Although broadly similar passive techniques were used more in private practice and sport. Expertise: Broadly similar patterns were seen for use of exercise across levels of expertise, although differences observed for electrotherapy and manipulation.

CONCLUSION

Despite limited research exercise is widely used in all areas of practice and across all level of expertise. Further research is required to investigate exercise prescription for TSPD and implementation of evidence-based practice.

Scoping review of systematic reviews of complementary medicine for musculoskeletal and mental health conditions

OBJECTIVE

To identify potentially effective complementary approaches for musculoskeletal (MSK)-mental health (MH) comorbidity, by synthesising evidence on effectiveness, cost-effectiveness and safety from systematic reviews (SRs).

DESIGN

Scoping review of SRs.

METHODS

We searched literature databases, registries and reference lists, and contacted key authors and professional organisations to identify SRs of randomised controlled trials for complementary medicine for MSK or MH. Inclusion criteria were: published after 2004, studying adults, in English and scoring >50% on Assessing the Methodological Quality of Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR); quality appraisal checklist). SRs were synthesised to identify research priorities, based on moderate/good quality evidence, sample size and indication of cost-effectiveness and safety.

RESULTS

We included 84 MSK SRs and 27 MH SRs. Only one focused on MSK-MH comorbidity. Meditative approaches and yoga may improve MH outcomes in MSK populations. Yoga and tai chi had moderate/good evidence for MSK and MH conditions. SRs reported moderate/good quality evidence (any comparator) in a moderate/large population for: low back pain (LBP) (yoga, acupuncture, spinal manipulation/mobilisation, osteopathy), osteoarthritis (OA) (acupuncture, tai chi), neck pain (acupuncture, manipulation/manual therapy), myofascial trigger point pain (acupuncture), depression (mindfulness-based stress reduction (MBSR), meditation, tai chi, relaxation), anxiety (meditation/MBSR, moving meditation, yoga), sleep disorders (meditative/mind-body movement) and stress/distress (mindfulness). The majority of these complementary approaches had some evidence of safety-only three had evidence of harm. There was some evidence of cost-effectiveness for spinal manipulation/mobilisation and acupuncture for LBP, and manual therapy/manipulation for neck pain, but few SRs reviewed cost-effectiveness and many found no data.

CONCLUSIONS

Only one SR studied MSK-MH comorbidity. Research priorities for complementary medicine for both MSK and MH (LBP, OA, depression, anxiety and sleep problems) are yoga, mindfulness and tai chi. Despite the large number of SRs and the prevalence of comorbidity, more high-quality, large randomised controlled trials in comorbid populations are needed.

What is the effect of prolonged sitting and physical activity on thoracic spine mobility? An observational study of young adults in a UK university setting

OBJECTIVE

Sedentary behaviour has long been associated with neck and low back pain, although relatively little is known about the thoracic spine. Contributing around 33% of functional neck movement, understanding the effect of sedentary behaviour and physical activity on thoracic spinal mobility may guide clinical practice and inform research of novel interventions.

DESIGN

An assessor-blinded prospective observational study designed and reported in accordance with Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology.

SETTING

UK university (June-September 2016).

PARTICIPANTS

A convenience sample (18-30 years) was recruited and based on self-report behaviours, the participants were assigned to one of three groups: group 1, sitters-sitting >7 hours/day+physical activity<150 min/week; group 2, physically active-moderate exercise >150 min/week+sitting <4 hours/day and group 3, low activity-sitting 2-7 hours/day+physical activity <150 min/week.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Thoracic spine mobility was assessed in the heel-sit position using Acumar digital goniometer; a validated measure. Descriptive and inferential analyses included analysis of variance and analysis of covariance for between group differences and Spearman's rank correlation for post hoc analysis of associations.

RESULTS

The sample (n=92) comprised: sitters n=30, physically active n=32 and low activity n=30. Groups were comparable with respect to age and body mass index.Thoracic spine mobility (mean (SD)) was: group 1 sitters 64.75 (1.20), group 2 physically active 74.96 (1.18) and group 3 low activity 68.44 (1.22). Significant differences were detected between (1) sitters and low activity, (2) sitters and physically active (p<0.001). There was an overall effect size of 0.31. Correlations between thoracic rotation and exercise duration (r=0.67, p<0.001), sitting duration (r=-0.29, p<0.001) and days exercised (r=0.45, p<0.001) were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

Findings evidence reduced thoracic mobility in individuals who spend >7 hours/day sitting and <150 min/week of physical activity. Further research is required to explore possible causal relationships between activity behaviours and spinal musculoskeletal health.

Do findings identified on magnetic resonance imaging predict future neck pain? A systematic review

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) has the potential to identify pathology contributing to neck pain. However, the importance of findings on MRI remains unclear.

PURPOSE

We aimed to investigate whether findings on cervical spine MRI predict future neck pain.

STUDY DESIGN

A systematic review was carried out.

PATIENT SAMPLE

People with or without neck pain comprised the study sample.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Clinically important neck pain outcomes such as pain and disability.

METHODS

The review protocol was registered on PROSPERO [CRD42016049228]. MEDLINE, CINAHL, and EMBASE databases were searched. Prospective cohort studies investigating the association between baseline MRI findings and clinical outcome were included. Cohorts with serious underlying diseases as the cause of their neck pain were excluded. Associations between MRI findings and neck pain outcomes were extracted from the included studies.

RESULTS

A total of 12 studies met all inclusion criteria. Eight studies presented data on participants with current neck pain, two studies included a mixed sample, and two studies included a sample of participants with no current neck pain. Because of the heterogeneity between the studies in terms of MRI findings, populations, and clinical outcomes investigated, it was not possible to pool the results. No consistent associations between MRI findings and future outcomes were identified. Single studies of populations with neck pain reported significant associations for neck muscle fatty infiltrate (risk ratio [RR]: 21.00, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.97-148.31) with persistent neck disability; disc protrusion (mean difference ranged from -1.83 to -2.88 on a 10-point pain scale), and disc degeneration (RR: 0.59; 95% CI: 0.36-0.98) with neck pain. In a population without pain, the development of foraminal stenosis over a 10-year period was associated with development of neck pain (RR: 2.99; 95% CI: 1.23-7.23).

CONCLUSION

The limited number, heterogeneity, and small sample size of the included studies do not permit definitive conclusions on the association between MRI findings of the cervical spine with future neck pain.

Clinical outcomes following conservative management of chronic traumatic cervical myelopathy: A case report

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

There is limited evidence supporting the conservative management of patients with cervical myelopathy. The purpose of this report is to describe the intervention and outcomes of conservative physical therapy interventions for one patient with chronic cervical myelopathy.

CASE DESCRIPTION

This case was a 50-year-old male who sustained a neck injury following a rear-end collision 4 years prior to this therapeutic episode. The patient presented with decreased range of motion in the cervical spine and right upper extremity, strength deficits, altered sensation, poor posture, and reported chronic cervical region pain and difficulty sleeping.

INTERVENTION

The patient completed 10 weeks of conservative physical therapy. The patient completed the Neck Disability Index (NDI), Medical Outcome Survey Sleep Scale (MSS), short-form McGill Pain Questionnaire (SFMPQ), Patient-Specific Functional Scale (PSFS), and baseline clinical measurements of flexibility and strength were obtained.

OUTCOMES

After the 10-week episode of care, the following changes were noted from baseline: 18% improvement on the NDI, 26% improvement on the MSS, 25% decrease in pain on the SFMPQ, and a 39% improvement on the total score of the PSFS. Cervical range of motion measurements increased between 25% and 100%. Grip strength demonstrated a 465% increase on the right upper extremity and a 25% increase on the left upper extremity.

DISCUSSION

This case report suggests that conservative management of chronic traumatic cervical myelopathy was effective in helping to improve pain, sleep, and function in this patient with a traumatic mechanism of injury.

Neck Pain: Revision 2017

The Orthopaedic Section of the American Physical Therapy Association (APTA) has an ongoing effort to create evidence-based practice guidelines for orthopaedic physical therapy management of patients with musculoskeletal impairments described in the World Health Organization's International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health (ICF). The purpose of these revised clinical practice guidelines is to review recent peer-reviewed literature and make recommendations related to neck pain. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2017;47(7):A1-A83. doi:10.2519/jospt.2017.0302.

Changes in biochemical markers following spinal manipulation-a systematic review and meta-analysis

The aim of this meta-analysis was to determine the effectiveness of spinal manipulation in influencing various biochemical markers in healthy and or symptomatic population. Electronic databases (n = 10) were searched (from inception till September 2016) and eight trials (325 participants) that met the inclusion criteria were included in the meta-analysis. Two authors independently extracted and assessed the risk of bias in included studies. Standardised mean differences for outcome measures were used to calculate effect sizes. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) tool was used for assessing the quality of the body of evidence for each outcome of interest. There was moderate quality evidence that spinal manipulation influenced biochemical markers. There was moderate quality evidence of significant difference that spinal manipulation is better (SMD -0.46, 95% CI - 0.93 to 0) than control in eliciting changes in cortisol levels immediately after intervention. There was also a low quality evidence that spinal manipulation is better than control at post-intervention in increasing substance-P (SMD -0.48,95%CI-0.87 to -0.1), neurotensin (SMD -1.8,95%CI-2.56 to -1.04) and oxytocin levels (SMD -2.61,95%CI-3.5to-1.72). However, low quality evidence indicated that spinal manipulation did not influence epinephrine (SMD 0.1,95%CI- 0.56to0.75) or nor-epinephrine levels (SMD -0.06,95%CI-0.71to0.6). The current review found that spinal manipulation can increase substance-p, neurotensin, oxytocin and interleukin levels and may influence cortisol levels post-intervention. However, future trials targeting symptomatic populations are required to understand the clinical importance of such changes.

The risk associated with spinal manipulation: an overview of reviews

BACKGROUND

Spinal manipulative therapy (SMT) is a widely used manual treatment, but many reviews exist with conflicting conclusions about the safety of SMT. We performed an overview of reviews to elucidate and quantify the risk of serious adverse events (SAEs) associated with SMT.

METHODS

We searched five electronic databases from inception to December 8, 2015. We included reviews on any type of studies, patients, and SMT technique. Our primary outcome was SAEs. Quality of the included reviews was assessed using a measurement tool to assess systematic reviews (AMSTAR). Since there were insufficient data for calculating incidence rates of SAEs, we used an alternative approach; the conclusions regarding safety of SMT were extracted for each review, and the communicated opinion were judged by two reviewers independently as safe, harmful, or neutral/unclear. Risk ratios (RRs) of a review communicating that SMT is safe and meeting the requirements for each AMSTAR item, were calculated.

RESULTS

We identified 283 eligible reviews, but only 118 provided data for synthesis. The most frequently described adverse events (AEs) were stroke, headache, and vertebral artery dissection. Fifty-four reviews (46%) expressed that SMT is safe, 15 (13%) expressed that SMT is harmful, and 49 reviews (42%) were neutral or unclear. Thirteen reviews reported incidence estimates for SAEs, roughly ranging from 1 in 20,000 to 1 in 250,000,000 manipulations. Low methodological quality was present, with a median of 4 of 11 AMSTAR items met (interquartile range, 3 to 6). Reviews meeting the requirements for each of the AMSTAR items (i.e. good internal validity) had a higher chance of expressing that SMT is safe.

CONCLUSIONS

It is currently not possible to provide an overall conclusion about the safety of SMT; however, the types of SAEs reported can indeed be significant, sustaining that some risk is present. High quality research and consistent reporting of AEs and SAEs are needed.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42015030068 .

Are People With Whiplash-Associated Neck Pain Different From People With Nonspecific Neck Pain?

Study Design Secondary analysis of a prospective cohort study with cross-sectional and longitudinal analyses. Background The clinical importance of a history of whiplash-associated disorder (WAD) in people with neck pain remains uncertain. Objective To compare people with WAD to people with nonspecific neck pain, in terms of their baseline characteristics and pain and disability outcomes over 1 year. Methods Consecutive patients with neck pain who presented to a secondary-care spine center answered a comprehensive self-report questionnaire and underwent a physical examination. Patients were classified into a group of either those with WAD or those with nonspecific neck pain. We compared the outcomes of baseline characteristics of the 2 groups, as well as pain intensity and activity limitation at follow-ups of 6 and 12 months. Results A total of 2578 participants were included in the study. Of these, 488 (19%) were classified as having WAD. At presentation, patients with WAD were statistically different from patients without WAD for almost all characteristics investigated. While most differences were small (1.1 points on an 11-point pain-rating scale and 11 percentage points on the Neck Disability Index), others, including the presence of dizziness and memory difficulties, were substantial. The between-group differences in pain and disability increased significantly (P<.001) over 12 months. At 12-month follow-up, the patients with WAD had on average approximately 2 points more pain and 17 percentage points more disability than those with nonspecific neck pain. Conclusion People referred to secondary care with WAD typically had more self-reported pain and disability and experienced worse outcomes than those with nonspecific neck pain. Caution is required when interpreting the longitudinal outcomes due to lower-than-optimal follow-up rates. Level of Evidence Prognosis, level 2. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2016;46(10):894-901. Epub 3 Sep 2016. doi:10.2519/jospt.2016.6588.

Strategies to overcome size and mechanical disadvantages in manual therapy

The practice of manual therapy (MT) is often difficult when providing care for large patients and for practitioners small in stature or with other physical limitations. Many MT techniques can be modified using simple principles to require less exertion, permitting consistency with standards of practice even in the presence of physical challenges. Commonly used MT techniques are herein described and demonstrated with alternative preparatory and movement methods, which can also be adopted for use in other techniques. These alternative techniques and the procedures used to adapt them warrant discussion among practitioners and educators in order to implement care, consistent with the best treatment evidence for many common musculoskeletal (MSK) conditions. The inclusion in educational curricula and MT training programs is recommended to enrich skill development in physical therapists (PTs), spanning entry-level practitioners to those pursuing advanced manual skills.

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.

Understanding why the thoracic region is the 'Cinderella' region of the spine

The thoracic spine has for a long time been the 'Cinderella' region of the spine. There has been a lesser research focus to the thoracic region compared with the cervical and lumbar spine, and there continues to be a limited understanding of the aetiology and epidemiology of a range of neuromusculoskeletal presentations which have an anatomical connection to the thoracic spine. This paper firstly, provides a critical evaluation of the available evidence to provide some understanding for this under-exploration of the thoracic spine. Secondly the paper provides an evaluation of an emerging interest in this spinal region, with a body of evidence supporting the use of thoracic spine manipulation in the management of upper quadrant presentations. This has been linked to the theory of regional interdependence with the thoracic spine being viewed as a silent contributor to clinical presentations where a pain source lies elsewhere. Finally, a case for further research is made. Identified gaps in the current evidence base include, aetiology and epidemiology of thoracic spine pain and thoracic spine dysfunction, and to investigate mechanisms of action of currently used interventions.

Assessing the change in attitudes, knowledge, and perspectives of medical students towards chiropractic after an educational intervention

Objective : We assessed the change in attitudes, knowledge, and perspectives of medical students towards chiropractic after a 1-hour educational intervention. Methods : A mixed-methods approach was used with a 52-item cross-sectional paper survey and 1 focus group of third-year medical students. The views of these medical students towards chiropractic were assessed previously in their second-year of medical school. ANOVA and the Wilcoxon rank-sum test were used to assess between-group differences between the medical students' views before and after the educational intervention. The constant comparative method for analyzing qualitative data was used to identify emergent themes from the focus group transcript. Results : Of 112 third-year medical students, 58 completed the survey (51.7% response rate). The focus group consisted of 6 medical students. Self-reported understanding of chiropractic and number of attitude-positive responses were significantly higher in the group after the educational session. The average number of correct responses assessing knowledge on chiropractic also was significantly higher. Focus group themes were that medical students wanted exposure to chiropractic in clinical settings, had negative attitudes towards chiropractic formed from hidden curriculum, had concerns regarding evidence and safety of chiropractic, and thought that timing of the session on chiropractic was too late in the curriculum. Conclusions : The attitudes and knowledge of medical students towards chiropractic improved immediately after a 1-hour educational intervention. Formally educating medical students on chiropractic may help minimize hidden curriculum issues regarding chiropractic, as identified by the medical students, and facilitate collaboration between medical and chiropractic providers.

Role of rehabilitation medicine and physical agents in the treatment of cancer-associated pain

PURPOSE

To provide an overview of rehabilitation medicine- and physical modality-based approaches to cancer pain management, and to highlight the fact that these approaches are generally used in conjunction and that a majority are focused on minimizing pain during periods of mobility and the performance of activities of daily living.

METHODS

We performed a nonsystematic literature review and provide a description of the current standard of care.

RESULTS

Rehabilitative and physical modalities used to manage pain can be grouped into four categories: those that modulate nociception, stabilize or unload painful structures, influence physiological processes that indirectly influence nociception, or alleviate pain arising from the overloading of muscles and connective tissues that often occurs after surgery or with sarcopenia in late-stage cancer. Most modalities have been pragmatically refined over the years, and many have an evidence base, although few have been explicitly validated in the oncologic setting. With few exceptions, they are patient controlled and free of adverse effects.

CONCLUSION

Physical modalities and rehabilitation medicine offer a range of pain management approaches that may serve as beneficial adjuncts to the conventional systemic and interventional analgesic strategies used to control cancer-related pain. These approaches may be particularly beneficial to patients with movement-associated pain and those who are ambivalent regarding pharmacoanalgesia.

Immediate changes in neck pain intensity and widespread pressure pain sensitivity in patients with bilateral chronic mechanical neck pain: a randomized controlled trial of thoracic thrust manipulation vs non-thrust mobilization

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to compare the effects of thoracic thrust manipulation vs thoracic non-thrust mobilization in patients with bilateral chronic mechanical neck pain on pressure pain sensitivity and neck pain intensity.

METHODS

Fifty-two patients (58% were female) were randomly assigned to a thoracic spine thrust manipulation group or of thoracic non-thrust mobilization group. Pressure pain thresholds (PPTs) over C5-C6 zygapophyseal joint, second metacarpal, and tibialis anterior muscle and neck pain intensity (11-point Numerical Pain Rate Scale) were collected at baseline and 10 minutes after the intervention by an assessor blinded to group allocation. Mixed-model analyses of variance (ANOVAs) were used to examine the effects of the treatment on each outcome. The primary analysis was the group * time interaction.

RESULTS

No significant interactions were found with the mixed-model ANOVAs for any PPT (C5-C6: P>.252; second metacarpal: P>.452; tibialis anterior: P>.273): both groups exhibited similar increases in PPT (all, P<.01), but within-group and between-group effect sizes were small (standardized mean score difference [SMD]<0.22). The ANOVA found that patients receiving thoracic spine thrust manipulation experienced a greater decrease in neck pain (between-group mean difference: 1.4; 95% confidence interval, 0.8-2.1) than did those receiving thoracic spine non-thrust mobilization (P<.001). Within-group effect sizes were large for both groups (SMD>2.1), and between-group effect size was also large (SMD = 1.3) in favor of the manipulative group.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this randomized clinical trial suggest that thoracic thrust manipulation and non-thrust mobilization induce similar changes in widespread PPT in individuals with mechanical neck pain; however, the changes were clinically small. We also found that thoracic thrust manipulation was more effective than thoracic non-thrust mobilization for decreasing intensity of neck pain for patients with bilateral chronic mechanical neck pain.

Changes in biochemical markers of pain perception and stress response after spinal manipulation

STUDY DESIGN

Controlled, repeated-measures, single-blind randomized study.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effect of cervical or thoracic manipulation on neurotensin, oxytocin, orexin A, and cortisol levels.

BACKGROUND

Previous studies have researched the effect of spinal manipulation on pain modulation and/or range of movement. However, there is little knowledge of the biochemical process that supports the antinociceptive effect of spinal manipulation.

METHODS

Thirty asymptomatic subjects were randomly divided into 3 groups: cervical manipulation (n = 10), thoracic manipulation (n = 10), and nonmanipulation (control) (n = 10). Blood samples were extracted before, immediately after, and 2 hours after each intervention. Neurotensin, oxytocin, and orexin A were determined in plasma using enzyme-linked immuno assay. Cortisol was measured by microparticulate enzyme immuno assay in serum samples.

RESULTS

Immediately after the intervention, significantly higher values of neurotensin (P<.05) and oxytocin (P<.001) levels were observed with both cervical and thoracic manipulation, whereas cortisol concentration was increased only in the cervical manipulation group (P<.05). No changes were detected for orexin A levels. Two hours after the intervention, no significant differences were observed in between-group analysis.

CONCLUSION

The mechanical stimulus provided by spinal manipulation triggers an increase in neurotensin, oxytocin, and cortisol blood levels. Data suggest that the initial capability of the tissues to tolerate mechanical deformation affects the capacity of these tissues to produce an induction of neuropeptide expression. J