Article

Physiological and clinical changes after therapeutic massage of the neck and shoulders.

Neuromechanics Research Laboratory, Department of Kinesiology, Auburn University, Auburn, AL 36849-5323, USA.
Manual therapy (Impact Factor: 2.32). 05/2011; 16(5):487-94. DOI: 10.1016/j.math.2011.04.002
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Little is known regarding the physiological and clinical effects of therapeutic massage (TM) even though it is often prescribed for musculoskeletal complaints such as chronic neck pain. This study investigated the influence of a standardized clinical neck/shoulder TM intervention on physiological measures assessing α-motoneurone pool excitability, muscle activity; and the clinical measure of range of motion (ROM) compared to a light touch and control intervention. Flexor carpi radialis (FCR) α-motoneurone pool excitability (Hoffmann reflex), electromyography (EMG) signal amplitude of the upper trapezius during maximal muscle activity, and cervical ROM were used to assess possible physiological changes and clinical effects of TM. Sixteen healthy adults participated in three, 20 min interventions: control (C), light touch (LT) and therapeutic massage (TM). Analysis of Covariance indicated a decrease in FCR α-motoneurone pool excitability after TM, compared to both the LT (p = 0.0003) or C (p = 0.0007) interventions. EMG signal amplitude decreased after TM by 13% (p < 0.0001), when compared to the control, and 12% (p < 0.0001) as compared to LT intervention. The TM intervention produced increases in cervical ROM in all directions assessed: flexion (p < 0.0001), lateral flexion (p < 0.0001), extension (p < 0.0001), and rotation (p < 0.0001). TM of the neck/shoulders reduced the α-motoneurone pool excitability of the flexor carpi radialis after TM, but not after the LT or C interventions. Moreover, decreases in the normalized EMG amplitude during MVIC of the upper trapezius muscle; and increases in cervical ROM in all directions assessed occurred after TM, but not after the LT or C interventions.

0 Bookmarks
 · 
229 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Chronic pain is a widely recognised problem in humans and is being increasingly recognised as a significant problem in dogs. Whilst a large number of therapies are described and utilised to treat chronic pain in dogs, there is a severe shortage of evidence to guide practitioners in selection of treatments. Until more evidence becomes available, practitioners should adopt a cautious approach, utilising licensed treatments first when possible. Non-pharmacological therapies should be incorporated into the chronic pain management plan whenever possible. Given the probable prevalence of chronic pain in dogs there is an urgent need for research to identify effective treatments.
    Journal of Small Animal Practice 01/2014; · 1.18 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Objective. To systematically evaluate the evidence of whether massage therapy (MT) is effective for neck pain. Methods. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were identified through searches of 5 English and Chinese databases (to December 2012). The search terms included neck pain, neck disorders, cervical vertebrae, massage, manual therapy, Tuina, and random. In addition, we performed hand searches at the library of Nanjing University of Traditional Chinese Medicine. Two reviewers independently abstracted data and assessed the methodological quality of RCTs by PEDro scale. And the meta-analyses of improvements on pain and neck-related function were conducted. Results. Fifteen RCTs met inclusion criteria. The meta-analysis showed that MT experienced better immediate effects on pain relief compared with inactive therapies (n = 153; standardised mean difference (SMD), 1.30; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.09 to 2.50; P = 0.03) and traditional Chinese medicine (n = 125; SMD, 0.73; 95% CI 0.13 to 1.33; P = 0.02). There was no valid evidence of MT on improving dysfunction. With regard to follow-up effects, there was not enough evidence of MT for neck pain. Conclusions. This systematic review found moderate evidence of MT on improving pain in patients with neck pain compared with inactive therapies and limited evidence compared with traditional Chinese medicine. There were no valid lines of evidence of MT on improving dysfunction. High quality RCTs are urgently needed to confirm these results and continue to compare MT with other active therapies for neck pain.
    Evidence-based Complementary and Alternative Medicine 01/2014; 2014:204360. · 1.72 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Neck pain is an extremely common symptom with many possible etiologies. A substantial number of patients are turning to complementary and alternative medicine (CAM). Low-quality evidence supports the beneficial effects of CAM. Feldenkrais, massage therapy, and spinal manipulation are discussed in detail. Complications are generally benign and self-limited, although occasional catastrophic consequences have been documented. Despite the favorable opinion many rheumatologists have of some CAM therapy, many patients are not disclosing CAM use to their medical providers. By expressing interest, asking questions, and taking a shared-decision-making approach, providers can encourage disclosure and provide valuable input.
    Current Rheumatology Reports 07/2013; 15(7):339.

Full-text (2 Sources)

View
66 Downloads
Available from
Jun 4, 2014