Neck Pain
Conditions
Keywords
Chiropractic; osteopathic physicians; manipulation; neck pain; adverse effects; randomized clinical trial, Subacute non-specific neck pain
Brief summary
The primary purpose of this study was to compare the relative effectiveness of cervical manipulation, mobilisation and the Activator instrument in the treatment of subacute non-specific neck pain. The secondary purpose was to describe any adverse effects of these treatments.
Detailed description
Neck pain is a common disorder. About 70% of adults will experience neck pain during their lifetime. After low back pain, neck pain is the most common reason patients give for seeking chiropractic care, and the second most common reason for the use of spinal manipulation. Usually, the underlying cause of neck pain is non-specific and cannot be related to a particular pathology as a cause of the presenting symptoms. Due to the uncertainty of the results obtained in the limited number of studies of manipulation and mobilisation for neck pain, further studies are needed to compare the different therapies available for neck pain. Participants in the study were treated as they would normally be with the exception of the type of spinal manipulation. There were three groups: a manipulation group, a mobilisation group, and an Activator instrument group.
Interventions
Sponsors
European Chiropractors Union
National Institute for Chiropractic Research
Anglo-European College of Chiropractic
Study design
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
NONE
Eligibility
Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to 64 Years
Healthy volunteers
No
Inclusion criteria
* age 18-64 years; a new or recurrent episode of neck pain present for more than 4 weeks, but no longer than 12 weeks; * neck pain that could extend to the shoulder region or upper extremities, and be accompanied by headache, but neck pain was more painful; * the patient agreed not to take medication or receive other treatment for neck pain during the course of the study (paracetamol 500 mg 4 times a day was allowed as rescue medication); * and a baseline pain level of at least 4 on the 11-point numerical rating scale.
Exclusion criteria
*
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame |
|---|---|
| Patient Global Impression of Change | end of treatment, 3 months, 6 months and 12 months |
Secondary
| Measure | Time frame |
|---|---|
| Numerical rating scale for pain | end of treatment, 3 months, 6 months, and 12 months |
| Bournemouth Questionnaire | end of treatment, 3 months, 6 months, and 12 months |
| Adverse effects to treatment | end of treatment |
| SF-36 version 2 | end of treatment, 3 months, 6 months and 12 months |
Countries
United Kingdom
Outcome results
None listed