Is a combined programme of manual therapy and exercise more effective than usual care in patients with non-specific chronic neck pain? A randomized controlled trial

2019 ◽  
Vol 33 (12) ◽  
pp. 1908-1918 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lucia Domingues ◽  
Fernando Manuel Pimentel-Santos ◽  
Eduardo Brazete Cruz ◽  
Ana Cristina Sousa ◽  
Ana Santos ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Randomized Controlled Trial ◽  
Neck Pain ◽  
Usual Care ◽  
Pain Intensity ◽  
Manual Therapy ◽  
Rating Scale ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Chronic Neck Pain ◽  
Randomized Controlled

Objective: The aim of this study was to compare the effectiveness of a combined intervention of manual therapy and exercise (MET) versus usual care (UC), on disability, pain intensity and global perceived recovery, in patients with non-specific chronic neck pain (CNP). Design: Randomized controlled trial. Setting: Outpatient care units. Subjects: Sixty-four non-specific CNP patients were randomly allocated to MET ( n = 32) or UC ( n = 32) groups. Interventions: Participants in the MET group received 12 sessions of mobilization and exercise, whereas the UC group received 15 sessions of usual care in physiotherapy. Main measures: The primary outcome was disability (Neck Disability Index). The secondary outcomes were pain intensity (Numeric Pain Rating Scale) and global perceived recovery (Patient Global Impression Change). Patients were assessed at baseline, three weeks, six weeks (end of treatment) and at a three-month follow-up. Results: Fifty-eight participants completed the study. No significant between-group difference was observed on disability and pain intensity at baseline. A significant between-group difference was observed on disability at three-week, six-week and three-month follow-up (median (P25–P75): 6 (3.25–9.81) vs. 15.5 (11.28–20.75); P < 0.001), favouring the MET group. Regarding pain intensity, a significant between-group difference was observed at six-week and three-month follow-up (median (P25–P75): 2 (1–2.51) vs. 5 (3.33–6); P < 0.001), with superiority of effect in MET group. Concerning the global perceived recovery, a significant between-group difference was observed only at the three-month follow-up ( P = 0.001), favouring the MET group. Conclusion: This study’s findings suggest that a combination of manual therapy and exercise is more effective than usual care on disability, pain intensity and global perceived recovery.

scholarly journals Manual therapy versus therapeutic exercise in non-specific chronic neck pain: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Trials ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Carlos Bernal-Utrera ◽  
Juan José González-Gerez ◽  
Manuel Saavedra-Hernandez ◽  
Miguel Ángel Lérida-Ortega ◽  
Cleofás Rodríguez-Blanco
Keyword(s):  
Randomized Controlled Trial ◽  
Neck Pain ◽  
Manual Therapy ◽  
Study Protocol ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Chronic Neck Pain ◽  
Therapeutic Exercise ◽  
Randomized Controlled

Scapular exercise combined with cognitive functional therapy is more effective at reducing chronic neck pain and kinesiophobia than scapular exercise alone: a randomized controlled trial

2020 ◽  
Vol 34 (12) ◽  
pp. 1485-1496 ◽  
Author(s):  
Norollah Javdaneh ◽  
Amir Letafatkar ◽  
Sadredin Shojaedin ◽  
Malihe Hadadnezhad
Keyword(s):  
Randomized Controlled Trial ◽  
Neck Pain ◽  
Pain Intensity ◽  
Effect Size ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Chronic Neck Pain ◽  
Secondary Outcome ◽  
Group Differences ◽  
Functional Therapy ◽  
Randomized Controlled

Objective: The aim of this study was to compare the effectiveness of scapular exercises alone and combined with cognitive functional therapy in treating patients with chronic neck pain and scapular downward rotation impairment. Design: Single-blind randomized controlled trial. Setting: Outpatient. Subjects: A total of 72 patients (20–45 years old) with chronic neck pain were studied. Intervention: Allocation was undertaken into three groups: scapular exercise ( n = 24), scapular exercise with cognitive functional therapy ( n = 24) and control ( n = 24) groups. Each programme lasted three times a week for six weeks. Main outcomes: The primary outcome measure was pain intensity measured by the visual analogue scale scores. The secondary outcome measures included kinesiophobia and muscles activity. Results: Statistically significant differences in pain intensity were found when multidisciplinary physiotherapy group including a cognitive functional approach was compared with the scapular exercise alone group at six weeks (effect size (95% CI) = −2.56 (−3.32 to −1.80); P = 0.019). Regarding kinesiophobia, a significant between-group difference was observed at six-week (effect size (95% CI) = −2.20 (−2.92 to −1.49); P = 0.005), with the superiority of effect in multidisciplinary physiotherapy group. A significant between-group differences was observed in muscle activity. Also, there were significant between-group differences favouring experimental groups versus control. Conclusion: A group-based multidisciplinary rehabilitation programme including scapular exercise plus cognitive functional therapy was superior to group-based scapular exercise alone for improving pain intensity, kinesiophobia and muscle activation in participants with chronic neck pain.

scholarly journals Manual therapy versus therapeutic exercise in non-specific chronic neck pain: a randomized controlled trial

Trials ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Carlos Bernal-Utrera ◽  
Juan Jose Gonzalez-Gerez ◽  
Ernesto Anarte-Lazo ◽  
Cleofas Rodriguez-Blanco
Keyword(s):  
Randomized Controlled Trial ◽  
Neck Pain ◽  
Manual Therapy ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Chronic Neck Pain ◽  
Therapeutic Exercise ◽  
Randomized Controlled

scholarly journals Can a Traditional Korean Manual Therapy Be a Complementary and Alternative Strategy for Cervicogenic Dizziness? A Study Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial

2018 ◽  
Vol 2018 ◽  
pp. 1-9
Author(s):  
Seungwon Shin ◽  
Jinyoung Kim ◽  
Ami Yu ◽  
Hyung-Sik Seo ◽  
Mi-Ran Shin ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Randomized Controlled Trial ◽  
Neck Pain ◽  
Usual Care ◽  
Manual Therapy ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Information Service ◽  
Research Information ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Link Type ◽  
Cervicogenic Dizziness

Cervicogenic dizziness is dizziness triggered by movement or positioning of the cervical spine and is often accompanied by neck pain or stiffness. This is a prospective, pragmatic, assessor-blind, randomized controlled trial aimed at testing the efficacy and safety of adjuvant Chuna Manual Therapy (CMT) in patients with cervicogenic dizziness under usual care treatments. Fifty patients with cervicogenic dizziness will be randomly allocated to CMT or usual care (UC) groups in a 1 : 1 ratio. Extensive screening procedures, including examinations for central nervous system problems and nystagmus, will be applied to exclude other dizziness-inducing disorders. The eligible participants will receive 12 sessions of CMT plus UC or only UC over 6 weeks. CMT includes mandatory and discretionary techniques, whereas UC includes electrotherapy, thermotherapy, and patient education. The efficacy will be evaluated primarily as Dizziness Handicap Inventory score. The severity and frequency of dizziness, the level of neck pain or stiffness, and the cervical range of motion will also be evaluated. Safety will be assessed by adverse events. The data will be statistically analyzed at p<0.05. Trial Registration. This trial was registered with Clinical Research Information Service (CRIS) in Korea, KCT0002565, on 29 November 2017, https://cris.nih.go.kr/cris/search/search_result_st01_kren.jsp?seq=9610&ltype=&rtype=.

scholarly journals A Comparative Study of the Effectiveness of Pharmacopuncture Therapy for Chronic Neck Pain: A Pragmatic, Randomized, Controlled Trial

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 12
Author(s):  
Kyoung-Sun Park ◽  
Suna Kim ◽  
Changnyun Kim ◽  
Ji-Yeon Seo ◽  
Hyunwoo Cho ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Randomized Controlled Trial ◽  
Physical Therapy ◽  
Neck Pain ◽  
Therapy Group ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Chronic Neck Pain ◽  
Arm Pain ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Vas Score

Background: This two-arm, parallel, pragmatic, multicenter, clinical randomized, controlled trial with a 12-week follow-up period aimed to compare the effectiveness of pharmacopuncture therapy and physical therapy strategies for chronic neck pain. Methods: Eight sessions of pharmacopuncture therapy or physical therapy were administered within 2 weeks. The primary outcome was the visual analogue scale (VAS) score for neck pain. The secondary outcomes were the scores of the Northwick Park questionnaire (NPQ), VAS score for radiating arm pain, numeric rating scale (NRS) for neck and arm bothersomeness, neck disability index (NDI), patient global impression of change (PGIC), 12-item short form health survey (SF-12), and EuroQoL 5-dimension 5-level (EQ-5D-5L) instrument. The protocol was registered with Clinicaltrials.gov (NCT04035018) and CRIS (KCT0004243). Results: We randomly allocated 101 participants with chronic neck pain to the pharmacopuncture therapy (n = 50) or physical therapy group (n = 51). At the primary endpoint (week 5) the pharmacopuncture therapy group showed significantly superior effects regarding VAS score for neck pain and arm bothersomeness, NRS for neck pain, NDI, NPQ, and PGIC compared with the physical therapy group. These effects were sustained up to 12 weeks after follow-up. Conclusion: Compared with physical therapy, pharmacopuncture therapy had superior effects on the pain and functional recovery of patients with chronic neck pain.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document