Skip to content

GPR vs Manual PT for Chronic Neck Pain

Randomized Controlled Trial of Global Postural Re-education vs. Standard Manual Physical Therapy for Non-specific Chronic Neck Pain With Cross-over

Status
Completed
Phases
NA
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT01947231
Enrollment
100
Registered
2013-09-20
Start date
2013-09-30
Completion date
2014-11-30
Last updated
2017-01-31

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Nonspecific Chronic Neck Pain

Keywords

neck pain, chronic, Global Postural Re-education, manual therapy, physical therapy

Brief summary

Effective treatment for nonspecific chronic neck pain is a clinical challenge. Patients will be randomized into two groups to compare the outcomes of Global Postural Re-education (GPR) with standard manual physical therapy on with respect to pain, function, kinesiophobia, range of motion, perceived effect, and satisfaction.

Detailed description

These study will use two groups: one to receive GPR which is a systematic method of addressing musculoskeletal pain and related functional deficits and the other to receive usual care manual PT which will be individualized to the patient's condition. Usual care will include techniques commonly used in clinical practice selected by the physical therapist after initial examination. After nine weeks of treatment, baseline measures will be re-evaluated. After conclusion of the first phase of the study, patients who were randomized to the usual care group will cross-over and receive GPR.

Interventions

Global Postural Re-education is a physical therapy method comprising a series of gentle active movements, implemented by the therapist using manual contacts and verbal commands, to promote postural symmetry.

OTHERStandard manual physical therapy

Standard manual physical therapy in this study involves a combination of exercises, pompage (gentle manual techniques of distraction and articulation of a joint), anterior-posterior mobilizations as described by Maitland, and massage that have been selected to meet the needs of each individual patient.

Sponsors

University of Bologna
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
CROSSOVER
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
SINGLE (Investigator)

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to 80 Years
Healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

-nonspecific neck pain lasting at least 3 months

Exclusion criteria

* acute or subacute cervical pain * specific or known cause of pain * central or peripheral neurological signs * systemic pathology * rheumatologic pathology * neuromuscular pathology * cognitive impairment * surgical intervention in the last 6 months prior to study * physical therapy treatment in the last 6 months prior to study

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Pain9 weeks after start of interventionThe investigators assessed this outcome with a Visual Analogue Scale (VAS).
Cervical Functional Limitations9 weeks after start of interventionThe investigators assessed this outcome with the Neck Disability Index.

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Kinesiophobia9 weeks after start of interventionThe investigators assessed this outcome with the Tampa Scale of Kinesiophobia.
Cervical Range of Motion9 weeks after start of interventionThe investigators assessed this outcome with the CROM-Deluxe which is an inclinometer that is placed on the subject's head to measure cervical range of motion.
Self-reported Global Effect of the Intervention9 weeks after start of interventionThe investigators assessed this outcome with a Global Perceived Effect scale which measures the subject's self-reported improvement or deterioration following the intervention.
Patient Satisfaction9 weeks after start of interventionThe investigators assessed this outcome with the Physical Therapy Patient Satisfaction Questionnaire - Italian Version which has established psychometric properties.

Countries

Italy

Outcome results

None listed

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026