Article

Manipulation or mobilisation for neck pain: a Cochrane Review.

School of Rehabilitation Science, McMaster University, 1400 Main Street West, Hamilton, Ontario L8S 1C7, Canada.
Manual therapy (Impact Factor: 1.76). 08/2010; 15(4):315-33. DOI: 10.1016/j.math.2010.04.002
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Manipulation and mobilisation are often used, either alone or combined with other treatment approaches, to treat neck pain. This review assesses if manipulation or mobilisation improves pain, function/disability, patient satisfaction, quality of life (QoL), and global perceived effect (GPE) in adults experiencing neck pain with or without cervicogenic headache or radicular findings. A computerised search was performed in July 2009. Randomised trials investigating manipulation or mobilisation for neck pain were included. Two or more authors independently selected studies, abstracted data, and assessed methodological quality. Pooled relative risk (pRR) and standardised mean differences (pSMD) were calculated. 33% of 27 trials had a low risk of bias. Moderate quality evidence showed cervical manipulation and mobilisation produced similar effects on pain, function and patient satisfaction at intermediate-term follow-up. Low quality evidence suggested cervical manipulation may provide greater short-term pain relief than a control (pSMD -0.90 (95%CI: -1.78 to -0.02)). Low quality evidence also supported thoracic manipulation for pain reduction (NNT 7; 46.6% treatment advantage) and increased function (NNT 5; 40.6% treatment advantage) in acute pain and immediate pain reduction in chronic neck pain (NNT 5; 29% treatment advantage). Optimal technique and dose need to be determined.

Download full-text

Full-text

Available from: Anita R Gross, Jul 03, 2014
5 Followers
 · 
476 Views
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: Although the antinociceptive effect of high-velocity, low amplitude thrust manipulation (HVLAM) has been recognized by numerous systematic reviews, the underlying mechanism for manipulation-related pain relief remains poorly understood. An increasing number of studies have explored its analgesic mechanism suggesting that the excitation of the descending inhibitory pain mechanism (DIPM) might play the most important role for musculoskeletal pain relief. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this review is to investigate the role of the DIPM in musculoskeletal pain following HVLAM as well as to identify the pain-relieving importance of this technique within clinical practice. METHODOLOGY: English literature databases were searched to find studies related to the objective of the present review. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: Findings from current literature support that HVLAM has a profound influence on nociceptive stimulus via the possible activation of the DIPM. It seems that the application of this technique activates the periaqueductal gray region area of the midbrain, stimulates the noradrenergic descending system and at the level of the spinal cord, the nociceptive afferent barrage is reduced and mechanical hypoalgesia is induced. However, the literature on HVLAM induced-analgesia is still problematic regarding the methodological design of the existing research. Despite these limitations, the clinical importance of the activation of the DIPM should not be ignored since the resulted analgesic effect of this technique can provide a window of opportunity to restore impaired physical performance and disability.
    Journal of Back and Musculoskeletal Rehabilitation 05/2014; 27(4). DOI:10.3233/BMR-140472 · 1.04 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: In view of a didactical approach for teaching cervical mobilization and manipulation techniques to students as well as their use in daily practice, it is mandatory to acquire sound clinical reasoning to optimally apply advanced technical skills. The aim of this Masterclass is to present a clinical algorithm to guide (novice) therapists in their clinical reasoning to identify patients who are likely to respond to mobilization and/or manipulation. The presented clinical reasoning process is situated within the context of pain mechanisms and is narrowed to and applicable in patients with a dominant input pain mechanism. Based on key features in subjective and clinical examination, patients with mechanical nociceptive pain probably arising from articular structures can be categorized into specific articular dysfunction patterns. Pending on these patterns, specific mobilization and manipulation techniques are warranted. The proposed patterns are illustrated in 3 case studies. This clinical algorithm is the corollary of empirical expertise and is complemented by in-depth discussions and knowledge exchange with international colleagues. Consequently, it is intended that a carefully targeted approach contributes to an increase in specificity and safety in the use of cervical mobilizations and manipulation techniques as valuable adjuncts to other manual therapy modalities.
    Manual therapy 10/2013; 20(3). DOI:10.1016/j.math.2013.09.007 · 1.76 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: This study compared the immediate effects of an assisted plus active cranio-cervical flexion exercise (exercise group) versus a passive mobilisation plus assisted cranio-cervical flexion (mobilisation group) on performance of the cranio-cervical flexion test (CCFT), cervical range of motion (ROM) and pain in patients with chronic neck pain. Eighteen volunteers with chronic idiopathic neck pain participated in the study and were randomised to one of the two intervention groups. Current level of pain, cervical ROM and pain perceived during movement, pressure pain threshold (PPT) and surface electromyography (EMG) during performance of the CCFT were measured before and immediately after the intervention. A significant reduction in resting pain and PPT measured over cervical sites was observed immediately following both interventions, although a greater change was observed for the exercise group. No change in cervical ROM was observed after either intervention. Reduced sternocleidomastoid and anterior scalene EMG amplitude were observed during stages of the CCFT but only for the participants in the active exercise group. Although both active and passive interventions offered pain relief, only the exercise group improved on a task of motor function highlighting the importance of specific active treatment for improved motor control of the cervical spine.
    Manual therapy 06/2013; DOI:10.1016/j.math.2013.05.011 · 1.76 Impact Factor