Comparative Effects of Mulligan's Mobilization, Spinal Manipulation, and Conventional Massage Therapy in Cervicogenic Headache-A Prospective, Randomized, Controlled Trial

Mulligan manual therapy added to exercise improves headache frequency, intensity and disability more than exercise alone in people with cervicogenic headache: a randomised trial

QUESTION

What is the effect of a 4-week regimen of Mulligan manual therapy (MMT) plus exercise compared with exercise alone for managing cervicogenic headache? Is MMT plus exercise more effective than sham MMT plus exercise? Are any benefits maintained at 26 weeks of follow-up?

DESIGN

A three-armed, parallel-group, randomised clinical trial with concealed allocation, blinded assessment of some outcomes and intention-to-treat analysis.

PARTICIPANTS

Ninety-nine people with cervicogenic headache as per International Classification of Headache Disorders (ICHD-3).

INTERVENTIONS

Participants were randomly allocated to 4 weeks of: MMT with exercise, sham MMT with exercise or exercise alone.

OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcome was headache frequency. Secondary outcomes were headache intensity, headache duration, medication intake, headache-related disability, upper cervical rotation range of motion, pressure pain thresholds and patient satisfaction. Outcome measures were collected at baseline and at 4, 13 and 26 weeks.

RESULTS

MMT plus exercise reduced headache frequency more than exercise alone immediately after the intervention (MD between groups in change from baseline: 2 days/month, 95% CI 2 to 3) and this effect was still evident at 26 weeks (MD 4 days, 95% CI 3 to 4). There were also benefits across all time points in several secondary outcomes: headache intensity, headache duration, headache-related disability, upper cervical rotation and patient satisfaction. Pressure pain thresholds showed benefits at all time points at the zygapophyseal joint and suboccipital areas but not at the upper trapezius. The outcomes in the sham MMT with exercise group were very similar to those of the exercise alone group.

CONCLUSIONS

In people with cervicogenic headache, adding MMT to exercise improved: headache frequency, intensity and duration; headache-related disability; upper cervical rotation; and patient satisfaction. These benefits were not due to placebo effects.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

CTRI/2019/06/019506.

Additional Effect of Extracorporeal Shockwave Therapy with Lidocaine Injection on Clinical and MRI Findings in Frozen Shoulder: A Prospective, Randomized, Double-Blinded, Placebo-Controlled Trial

INTRODUCTION

Frozen shoulder is a very common musculoskeletal condition and the evidence related to the additional effects of extracorporeal shockwave therapy (ESWT) with intra-articular (IA) lidocaine injection in individuals with frozen shoulder is rare. Therefore, this study aims to compare and investigate the additional effects of extracorporeal shockwave therapy (ESWT) with intra-articular (IA) lidocaine injection in a frozen shoulder.

METHODS

Sixty eligible participants with frozen shoulder were included and the active group (n = 30, age 52.12 ± 5.2 years) received a lidocaine injection (1% lidocaine (Xylocaine) and 2cc (80 mg) methylprednisolone acetate) with active ESWT (3.5 bar air pressure and 2000 pulses with an energy flux density (EFD) ¼ 0.16 mJ/mm2) three sessions a week for 4 weeks. The placebo group (n = 30, age 53.56 ± 5.5 years) received lidocaine injection with placebo treatment (a special head that blocked the shock waves) three sessions a week for 4 weeks. Both groups received progressive resistance exercises (PRE) to the shoulder muscles. The primary outcome was pain intensity, measured with the visual analogue scale. The other outcome measures were the thickness of the coracohumeral ligament (CHL) measured by magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), abduction, and lateral rotation range of motion (ROM), functional disability, kinesiophobia, depression status, and quality of life. Participants were assessed at baseline, after 4 weeks, 8 weeks, and at 6-month follow-up.

RESULTS

The post-intervention at 4 weeks showed an improvement of 2.0 (CI 95% 1.71-2.28) in the active group compared to the placebo group. Similar effects were noted after 8 weeks (2.2) (CI 95% 1.91-2.48) and at the 6-month (1.9) (CI 95% 1.61-2.18) follow-up. Similar improvements were also found in the thickness of the CHL ligament (0.6) (CI 95% 0.46-0.73), abduction and lateral rotation (ROM) (- 23.6) (CI 95% - 27.47 to -19.72), (- 18.10) (CI 95% - 19.72 to - 16.47), functional disability (16.2) (CI 95% 14.85-17.54), kinesiophobia (11.0 (CI 95% 10.21-11.98), depression status (4.4) (CI 95% 4.03-4.76) and quality of life (0.9) (CI 95% 0.79-1.00) (p = 0.001) at the 6-month follow-up period, where mean estimates and their confidence intervals all included worthwhile effects. There were no adverse reactions or side effects noted in either the active or placebo groups during and after the treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

The study concluded that the addition of extracorporeal shockwave therapy after intra-articular lidocaine injection improves pain, functional disability, range of motion, kinesiophobia, depression status, and quality of life in people with frozen shoulder.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

https://ctri.nic.in , identifier; CTRI/2020/04/024834 prospectively registered on 24/04/2020.

Comparative effectiveness of cervical vs thoracic spinal-thrust manipulation for care of cervicogenic headache: A randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

There is ample evidence supporting the use of different manipulative therapy techniques for Cervicogenic Headache (CgH). However, no technique can be singled as the best available treatment for patients with CgH. Therefore, the objective of the study is to find and compare the clinical effects of cervical spine over thoracic spine manipulation and conventional physiotherapy in patients with CgH.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

It is a prospective, randomized controlled study conducted between July 2020 and January 2023 at the University hospital. N = 96 eligible patients with CgH were selected based on selection criteria and they were divided into cervical spine manipulation (CSM; n = 32), thoracic spine manipulation (TSM; n = 32) and conventional physiotherapy (CPT; n = 32) groups, and received the respective treatment for four weeks. Primary (CgH frequency) and secondary CgH pain intensity, CgH disability, neck pain frequency, neck pain intensity, neck pain threshold, cervical flexion rotation test (CFRT), neck disability index (NDI) and quality of life (QoL) scores were measured. The effects of treatment at various intervals were analyzed using a 3 × 4 linear mixed model analysis (LMM), with treatment group (cervical spine manipulation, thoracic spine manipulation, and conventional physiotherapy) and time intervals (baseline, 4 weeks, 8 weeks, and 6 months), and the statistical significance level was set at P < 0.05.

RESULTS

The reports of the CSM, TSM and CPT groups were compared between the groups. Four weeks following treatment CSM group showed more significant changes in primary (CgH frequency) and secondary (CgH pain intensity, CgH disability, neck pain frequency, pain intensity, pain threshold, CFRT, NDI and QoL) than the TSM and CPT groups (p = 0.001). The same gradual improvement was seen in the CSM group when compared to TSM and CPT groups (p = 0.001) in the above variables at 8 weeks and 6 months follow-up.

CONCLUSION

The reports of the current randomized clinical study found that CSM resulted in significantly better improvements in pain parameters (intensity, frequency and threshold) functional disability and quality of life in patients with CgH than thoracic spine manipulation and conventional physiotherapy.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinical trial registration: CTRI/2020/06/026092 trial was registered prospectively on 24/06/2020.

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

BACKGROUND

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

OBJECTIVE

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

Effectiveness of Nonpharmacological Measures on Improving Headache Score, Strength, Pain, and Quality of Life in Cervicogenic Headaches: A Systematic Review

Cervicogenic headache (CGH) is a common condition affecting a significant portion of the population and is effectively managed through various interventions, including nonpharmacological approaches. Physical therapy plays a crucial role in CGH management, with numerous studies supporting its effectiveness. This systematic review aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of specific nonpharmacological physical therapy interventions for CGH. A comprehensive search was conducted across various databases (PubMed, Medline, PEDro, and Cochrane Library) for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published between January 2017 and January 2023 investigating the effectiveness of specific nonpharmacological physical therapy interventions for CGH. We employed manual searches to capture potentially missed studies. Independent reviewers screened all studies based on predefined eligibility criteria. Extracted data included methodology, specific interventions, outcome measures (headache score, strength, pain, and quality of life (QOL)), and study conclusions. Eight RCTs were identified as meeting all inclusion criteria and were thus included in the data synthesis. The findings from these trials revealed a diverse range of nonpharmacological physical therapy interventions, including but not limited to manual therapy, exercise therapy, and multimodal approaches. Specifically, the interventions demonstrated significant improvements in headache scores, strength, pain levels, and overall QOL among individuals with CGH. These results underscore the multifaceted benefits of physical therapy in managing CGH and highlight its potential as a comprehensive treatment option. This review identified eight relevant RCTs investigating nonpharmacological interventions for CGH. Despite the promising findings, this review acknowledges several limitations, including the limited sample size and the heterogeneity of interventions across studies. These limitations emphasize the necessity for further research to elucidate optimal intervention strategies and refine treatment protocols. Nevertheless, the comprehensive analysis presented herein reinforces the pivotal role of physical therapy in not only alleviating pain but also enhancing function and improving the QOL for individuals suffering from CGH.