The effect of a neck-specific exercise program on cervical kinesthesia for patients with chronic whiplash-associated disorders: a case-control study.

INTRODUCTION: Cervical kinesthesia is an important part of movement control and of great importance for daily function. Previous research on kinesthesia in whiplash-associated disorders (WAD) has focused on grades I-II. More research is needed on WAD grade III. The aim of this study was to investigate cervical kinesthesia in individuals with WAD grades II-III before and after a neck-specific exercise intervention and compare them to healthy controls. METHODS: A prospective, case-control study with a treatment arm (n = 30) and a healthy control arm (n = 30) was conducted in Sweden. The WAD group received a neck-specific exercise program for 12 weeks. The primary outcome to evaluate kinesthesia was neck movement control (the Fly test). Secondary outcomes were neck disability, dizziness and neck pain intensity before and after the Fly test. Outcomes were measured at baseline and post-treatment. The control arm underwent measurements at baseline except for the dizziness questionnaire. A linear mixed model was used to evaluate difference between groups (WAD and control) and over time, with difficulty level in the Fly test and gender as factors. RESULTS: Between-group analysis showed statistically significant differences in three out of five kinesthetic metrics (p = 0.002 to 0.008), but not for the WAD-group follow-up versus healthy control baseline measurements. Results showed significant improvements for the WAD-group over time for three out of five kinaesthesia metrics (p < 0.001 to 0.008) and for neck disability (p < 0.001) and pain (p = 0.005), but not for dizziness (p = 0.70). CONCLUSIONS: The exercise program shows promising results in improving kinesthesia and reducing neck pain and disability in the chronic WAD phase. Future research might benefit from focusing on adding kinesthetic exercises to the exercise protocol and evaluating its beneficial effects on dizziness or further improvement in kinesthesia. IMPACT STATEMENT: Kinesthesia can be improved in chronic WAD patients without the use of specific kinesthetic exercises. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03664934), first registration approved 11/09/2018.

A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials on the effectiveness of high-intensity laser therapy in the management of neck pain.

The purpose of this systematic review was to evaluate the effects of high-intensity laser therapy (HILT) on pain, disability, and range of movement in patients with neck pain. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of HILT for neck pain disorders were searched across databases such as PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, CINAHL, Science Direct, Cochrane Library, the PEDro database, and Google Scholar (updated January 7, 2024). The main outcome was pain intensity, with neck disability and cervical range of motion as secondary outcomes. Researchers reviewed article titles and abstracts from different databases using the Rayyan web app. Study quality was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool, and evidence-based recommendations were developed using the GRADE approach. A meta-analysis was conducted to calculate the pooled effect in terms of mean differences (MD) for the outcomes of interest, along with a 95% confidence interval (95% CI). Twenty studies met the selection criteria and were potentially eligible for inclusion in the meta-analysis. At the end of the treatment, there was a statistically significant (p < 0.01) pooled MD of -14.1 mm for pain intensity (17 RCTs) with the VAS (95% CI:-18.4,-9.7), 3.9° (95% CI:1.9,6.7) for cervical extension (9 RCTs), and -8.3% (95% CI:-14.1,-4.1) for disability diminish (12 RCTs) with the neck disability index in favor of HILT. Only the results for pain intensity are in line with the minimal clinically important differences (MCID) reported in the literature. Overall, the evidence was deemed significant but with low certainty, attributed to observed heterogeneity and some risk of bias among the RCTs. HILT demonstrates effectiveness in reducing neck pain and disability while enhancing cervical extension when added to other physical therapy interventions, especially therapeutic exercise, based on a moderate level of evidence. This review highlights that the most favorable results are obtained when HILT is employed to address myofascial pain, cervical radiculopathy and chronic neck pain.PROSPERO registration number: CRD42023387394 (Registration date, 14/01/2023).

Importance of heat therapy in the treatment of pain in the daily clinical practice.

BACKGROUND: Musculoskeletal (MSK) pain includes a wide variety of causes and conditions. Despite the heterogeneity of MSK pain, it is possible to identify some common clinical features and treatments. Heat therapy (HT) is one of the most common and could be a suitable non-pharmacological approach. OBJECTIVE: To obtain a European overview on the use of non-pharmacological approaches and the role of heat therapy in the treatment of MSK pain. METHODS: Through a two-cycle Delphi-like method, an international board of experts reached a consensus on 13 questions for a survey to healthcare professionals who provide direct patient care. Between November 2021 and January 2022, the resulting web survey was distributed to professionals with the collaboration of ten European scientific societies and associations. Univariate and bivariate analyses were performed on collected data. RESULTS: Two hundred eighty-two answers were validated. Most of the respondents had extensive professional experience. Participants were widely distributed throughout Europe. HT is administered to about 50% of patients, with a higher percentage administered to those affected by low back pain (92%) and neck pain (84%). The choice of exogenous HT is based on both personal clinical experience and scientific evidence. HT is primarily chosen due to its relaxation effect, high safety profile and enhancement of tissue perfusion. The use of HT is recommended by 86.5% of respondents. CONCLUSION: Experts indicate that exogenous HT represents a valid therapeutic choice and is widely used in Europe. Patients should be informed about the use of heat therapy as a valuable self-management therapy option.

Effectiveness of diagnosis and treatment based on movement system impairment in individuals with cervical pain: A randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Movement System Impairment (MSI) classification and treatment effectively diagnose and treat the individual with neck pain. There is a lacuna in the current neck pain management guidelines addressing movement-specific mechanical diagnosis. MSI is based on the movement-specific mechanical diagnosis and kinesiopathologic model. PURPOSE: The present study aimed to investigate the effectiveness of the movement system impairment model among neck pain individuals. METHODS: This study was designed as a randomized controlled trial. Eighty-two participants were screened for eligibility; Sixty individuals fulfilling the inclusion criteria were randomized into the experimental group (n = 30) and control group (n = 30). A total of 52 individuals completed the study, 26 in both groups. The experimental and the control group received treatment as recommended by the MSI model and clinical practice guideline (CPG) for neck pain with mobility deficits. All participants were assessed for pain intensity, cervical range of motion, deep cervical muscle strength, endurance, and disability at baseline and the end of 3rd week of treatment. RESULTS: Significant differences were found in pain intensity, cervical range of motion, cervical muscle strength, endurance, and disability with both groups at the end of 10 sessions of treatment spread over three weeks (p < 0.05). However, the experimental group (MSI) demonstrated more clinical benefits than CPG based neck mobility deficits treatment. CONCLUSION: The movement system impairment model may effectively diagnose and treat neck pain in individuals with mobility deficits. Future research is warranted to establish its long-term effect.

The effects of neck exercise in comparison to passive or no intervention on quantitative sensory testing measurements in adults with chronic neck pain: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Previous systematic reviews have identified the benefits of exercise for chronic neck pain on subjective reports of pain, but not with objective measures such as quantitative sensory testing (QST). A systematic review was conducted to identify the effects of neck specific exercise on QST measures in adults with chronic neck pain to synthesise existing literature and provide clinical recommendations. METHODS: The study protocol was registered prospectively with PROSPERO (PROSPERO CRD42021297383). For both randomised and non-randomised trials, the following databases and trial registries were searched: AMED, CINAHL, Embase, Google Scholar, Medline, PEDro, PubMed, Scopus, SPORTDiscus, Science Citation Index and Social Science Citation Index from Web of Science Core Collection, clinicaltrials.gov, GreyOpen, and ISRCTN registry. These searches were conducted from inception to February 2022 and were updated until September 2023. Reference lists of eligible studies were screened. Study selection was performed independently by two reviewers, with data extraction and quality appraisal completed by one reviewer and independently ratified by a second reviewer. Due to high heterogeneity, narrative synthesis was performed with results grouped by exercise type. FINDINGS: Three trials were included. Risk of bias was rated as moderate and the certainty of evidence as low or moderate for all studies. All exercise groups demonstrated statistically significant improvement at an intermediate-term follow-up, with progressive resistance training combined with graded physical training demonstrating the highest certainty of evidence. Fixed resistance training demonstrated statistically significant improvement in QST measures at a short-term assessment. INTERPRETATION: Fixed resistance training is effective for short-term changes in pain sensitivity based on low-quality evidence, whilst moderate-quality evidence supports progressive resistance training combined with graded physical training for intermediate-term changes in pain sensitivity.

Responsiveness of the cervical joint position error test to detect changes in neck proprioception following four weeks of home-based proprioceptive training.

INTRODUCTION: People with chronic neck pain (CNP) commonly exhibit a range of physical impairments including cervical proprioceptive deficits. Assessing proprioception using a head mounted laser to assess joint position error (JPE) is a reliable and valid measure. However, the responsiveness of this measure has not been assessed. OBJECTIVE: To assess the responsiveness of the measure of cervical JPE after a 4-week home-based neck proprioceptive training intervention in people with CNP. DESIGN: An observational study to assess the responsiveness of the measure of cervical JPE. METHODS: The JPE test was assessed in people with CNP before and after 4 weeks of neck proprioception training. JPE was assessed as participants performed neck joint position sense tests for flexion, extension, right rotation, and left rotation in sitting and standing which were performed in a random order. Both the absolute and constant JPE were assessed. The intervention consisted of neck repositioning exercises as well as movement sense exercises. Cohen's d effect size was used to assess the internal responsiveness of the JPE test. The Pearson's correlation was used to assess the change of scores of the laser pointer and measures from inertial measurement units (IMUs) (external responsiveness). RESULTS: After 4 weeks of proprioception training, JPE assessed in sitting reduced from 2.69◦-3.57◦ to 1.88◦-1.98◦ for flexion, extension, and right rotation with large effect sizes (Cohen's d range: 1.25-2.00). For left rotation, JPE reduced from 3.23◦ to 1.9◦, and the effect size was close to being large (Cohen's d: 0.79). When assessed in standing, JPE reduced from 3.49◦-4.52◦ to 1.5◦-2.33◦ with large effect sizes (Cohen's d range: 0.89-1.25) for flexion, extension, right rotation, and left rotation. Large effect sizes were not observed for the constant JPE when assessed in either sitting or standing. The assessment of the external responsiveness revealed weak correlations between the change of scores obtained from the laser pointer and the IMUs for all movements, apart from the constant JPE in sitting for left rotation, which showed a strong correlation (r = 0.7). CONCLUSION: The results of this study showed that the measure of the JPE has sufficient internal responsiveness, however, the external responsiveness was inadequate. Further research is advised.

Neurologic Approach to Radiculopathy, Back Pain, and Neck Pain.

Back pain and neck pain are common in clinical practice, but significant challenges and pitfalls exist in their diagnosis, treatment, and management. From the neurologic standpoint, cervical radiculopathy and lumbosacral radiculopathy are characterized by neck pain or back pain accompanied by sensory and motor symptoms in an arm or leg. The basic neurologic examination is vital, but testing like electromyography and MRI is often needed especially in cases that fail conservative management. Oral medications, injection-based therapies, physical therapy, and surgical evaluation all have a place in the comprehensive neurologic management of back and neck pain and associated radiculopathy.

Utilizing machine learning to predict post-treatment outcomes in chronic non-specific neck pain patients undergoing cervical extension traction.

This study explored the application of machine learning in predicting post-treatment outcomes for chronic neck pain patients undergoing a multimodal program featuring cervical extension traction (CET). Pre-treatment demographic and clinical variables were used to develop predictive models capable of anticipating modifications in cervical lordotic angle (CLA), pain and disability of 570 patients treated between 2014 and 2020. Linear regression models used pre-treatment variables of age, body mass index, CLA, anterior head translation, disability index, pain score, treatment frequency, duration and compliance. These models used the sci-kit-learn machine learning library within Python for implementing linear regression algorithms. The linear regression models demonstrated high precision and accuracy, and effectively explained 30-55% of the variability in post-treatment outcomes, the highest for the CLA. This pioneering study integrates machine learning into spinal rehabilitation. The developed models offer valuable information to customize interventions, set realistic expectations, and optimize treatment strategies based on individual patient characteristics as treated conservatively with rehabilitation programs using CET as part of multimodal care.

Restoration of normal central pain processing following manual therapy in nonspecific chronic neck pain.

OBJECTIVE: To determine if a 4-week manual therapy treatment restores normal functioning of central pain processing mechanisms in non-specific chronic neck pain (NSCNP), as well as the existence of a possible relationship between changes in pain processing mechanisms and clinical outcome. DESIGN: Cohort study. METHODS: Sixty-three patients with NSCNP, comprising 79% female, with a mean age of 45.8 years (standard deviation: 14.3), received four treatment sessions (once a week) of manual therapy including articular passive mobilizations, soft tissue mobilization and trigger point treatment. Pressure pain thresholds (PPTs), conditioned pain modulation (CPM) and temporal summation of pain (TSP) were evaluated at baseline and after treatment completion. Therapy outcome was measured using the Global Rating of Change Scale (GROC), the Neck disability Index (NDI), intensity of pain during the last 24 hours, Tampa Scale of Kinesiophobia (TSK) and Pain Catastrophizing Scale (PCS). Two sets of generalized linear mixed models with Gaussian response and the identity link were employed to evaluate the effect of the intervention on clinical, psychological and psychophysical measures and the association between psychophysical and clinical outcomes. RESULTS: Following treatment, an increased CPM response (Coefficient: 0.89; 95% credibility interval = 0.14 to 1.65; P = .99) and attenuated TSP (Coefficient: -0.63; 95% credibility interval = -0.82 to -0.43; P = 1.00) were found, along with amelioration of pain and improved clinical status. PPTs at trapezius muscle on the side of neck pain were increased after therapy (Coefficient: 0.22; 95% credibility interval = 0.03 to 0.42; P = .98), but not those on the contralateral trapezius and tibialis anterior muscles. Only minor associations were found between normalization of TSP/CPM and measures of clinical outcome. CONCLUSION: Clinical improvement after manual therapy is accompanied by restoration of CPM and TSP responses to normal levels in NSCNP patients. The existence of only minor associations between changes in central pain processing and clinical outcome suggests multiple mechanisms of action of manual therapy in NSCNP.

Adverse Events After Cervical Spinal Manipulation - A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials.

BACKGROUND: Cervical manipulations are widely used by physiotherapists, chiropractors, osteopaths, and medical doctors for musculoskeletal dysfunctions like neck pain and cervicogenic headache. The use of cervical manipulation remains controversial, since it is often considered to pose a risk for not only benign adverse events (AEs), such as aggravation of pain or muscle soreness, but also severe AEs such as strokes in the vertebrobasilar or carotid artery following dissections. Studies finding an association between cervical manipulation and serious AEs such as artery dissections are mainly case control studies or case reports. These study designs are not appropriate for investigating incidences and therefore do not imply causal relationships. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are considered the gold standard study designs for assessing the unconfounded effects of benefits and harms, such as AEs, associated with therapies. OBJECTIVE: Due to the unclear risk level of AEs associated with high-velocity, low-amplitude (HVLA) cervical manipulation, the aim of this study was to extract available information from RCTs and thereby synthesize the comparative risk of AEs following cervical manipulation to that of various control interventions. STUDY DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis. METHODS: A systematic literature search was conducted in the PubMed and Cochrane databases. This search included RCTs in which cervical HVLA manipulations were applied and AEs were reported. Two independent reviewers performed the study selection, the methodological quality assessment, and the GRADE approach. Incidence rate ratios (IRR) were calculated. The study quality was assessed by using the risk of bias 2 (RoB-2) tool, and the certainty of evidence was determined by using the GRADE approach. RESULTS: Fourteen articles were included in the systematic review and meta-analysis. The pooled IRR indicates no statistically significant differences between the manipulation and control groups. All the reported AEs were classified as mild, and none of the AEs reported were serious or moderate. LIMITATIONS: The search strategy was limited to literature in English or German. Furthermore, selection bias may have occurred, since only PubMed and Cochrane were used as databases, and searching was done by hand. RCTs had to be excluded if the results did not indicate the group in which the AEs occurred. A mandatory criterion for inclusion in the meta-analysis was a quantitative reproduction of the frequencies of AEs that could be attributed to specific interventions. CONCLUSION: In summary, HVLA manipulation does not impose an increased risk of mild or moderate AEs compared to various control interventions. However, these results must be interpreted with caution, since RCTs are not appropriate for detecting the rare serious AEs. In addition, future RCTs should follow a standardized protocol for reporting AEs in clinical trials.

How well do participants in clinical trials represent the U.S. population with chronic neck or back pain?

BACKGROUND: Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) are the gold standard for assessing treatment effectiveness; however, they have been criticized for generalizability issues such as how well trial participants represent those who receive the treatments in clinical practice. We assessed the representativeness of participants from eight RCTs for chronic spine pain in the U.S., which were used for an individual participant data meta-analysis on the cost-effectiveness of spinal manipulation for spine pain. In these clinical trials, spinal manipulation was performed by chiropractors. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective secondary analysis of RCT data to compare trial participants' socio-demographic characteristics, clinical features, and health outcomes to a representative sample of (a) U.S. adults with chronic spine pain and (b) U.S. adults with chronic spine pain receiving chiropractic care, using secondary data from the National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) and Medical Expenditure Panel Survey (MEPS). We assessed differences between trial and U.S. spine populations using independent t-tests for means and z-tests for proportions, accounting for the complex multi-stage survey design of the NHIS and MEPS. RESULTS: We found the clinical trials had an under-representation of individuals from health disparity populations with lower percentages of racial and ethnic minority groups (Black/African American 7% lower, Hispanic 8% lower), less educated (No high school degree 19% lower, high school degree 11% lower), and unemployed adults (25% lower) with worse health outcomes (physical health scores 2.5 lower and mental health scores 5.3 lower using the SF-12/36) relative to the U.S. population with spine pain. While the odds of chiropractic use in the U.S. are lower for individuals from health disparity populations, the trials also under-represented these populations relative to U.S. adults with chronic spine pain who visit a chiropractor. CONCLUSIONS: Health disparity populations are not well represented in spine pain clinical trials. Embracing key community-based approaches, which have shown promise for increasing participation of underserved communities, is needed.

Effectiveness and safety of thoracic manipulation in the treatment of neck pain: An updated systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this meta-analysis was to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of thoracic manipulation (TM) in patients with neck pain (NP). OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this meta-analysis was to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of thoracic manipulation (TM) in patients with neck pain (NP). METHODS: Seven electronic databases were searched from their inception through October 2023 by two authors. The methodological quality assessments were performed with the Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro) scale. Pain, cervical range of motion (ROM), disability, and quality of life (QOL) were estimated for TM treatment in patients with NP. RESULTS: Eighteen randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with 914 patients were included with a PEDro score of 6.923 ± 3.120. Pooled effect sizes of pain (SMD =-0.481, 95% CI -0.653 to -0.309, P= 0.000), disability (SMD =-1.435, 95% CI -2.480 to -0.390, P= 0.007), QOL-physical component score (PCS) (SMD = 0.658, 95% CI 0.290 to 1.025, P= 0.000), ROM of flexion (SMD = 0.921, 95% CI 0.287 to 1.555, P= 0.000), ROM of extension (SMD = 0.572, 95% CI 0.321 to 0.822, P= 0.000), ROM of left lateral flexion (SMD = 0.593, 95% CI 0.075 to 1.112, P= 0.025) and ROM of left rotation (SMD = 0.230, 95% CI 0.010 to 0.450, P= 0.04) were favored by the TM group. CONCLUSIONS: TM provides short-term effect on relieving neck pain, increasing cervical ROM, and disability in patients with NP without serious side effects. Continuous therapy and distraction therapy are recommended as optimal choice on reducing pain and improving cervical ROM, especially in patients with chronic NP (> 3 months). The TM-induced improvements in the QOL of patients with NP should be verified by more further high-quality RCTs.

Contextual Factors-Enriched Standard Care on mechanical neck pain (ContextualizAR trial): Protocol for a randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Understanding the influence of contextual factors (CFs) on interventions for mechanical neck pain (MNP) is essential for evidence-based practice in physical therapy. However, the specific effects and synergies of combining different CFs remain unclear. OBJECTIVE: The primary purpose of this study will be to determine if a CFs-Enriched Standard Care (SC) approach is an effective treatment for MNP in terms of reducing pain and improving function. METHODS: This will be an assessor-blinded, 2-group (1:1) randomised clinical trial (RCT) aiming to enrol 94 participants with neck pain persisting for more than 4 weeks. Both groups will undergo 4 weeks of SC twice weekly, following established clinical practice guidelines. In the intervention group, CFs will be enhanced, encompassing the physical, psychological, and social elements inherent in the clinical encounter, based on existing evidence. The primary outcomes will encompass changes in pain and disability after 4 weeks of treatment, with a follow-up reassessment at week 12 post-treatment. Secondary outcomes will include changes in Active Range of Motion, Global Rating of Change, and Satisfaction with treatment. The change between groups after treatment and at the 12-week follow-up will be reported for all outcomes, considering the difference from scores recorded at baseline. RESULTS: We hypothesise that a 4-week CFs-Enriched SC approach will be superior to SC alone in terms of patient-reported disability and pain, with measurements conducted using the Northwick Park Neck Pain Questionnaire and the Numeric Pain Rating Scale, respectively. CONCLUSION: This RCT rigorously assesses the effect of purposeful manipulation of CFs during MNP treatment. By elucidating the role of these factors, our findings have the potential to significantly refine clinical practice in managing MNP, thereby enhancing patient care, and advancing the fields of physical therapy and rehabilitation.

Evaluation of the effect of different kinds of treatment modalities for temporomandibular joint pain and its relevance to chronic cervical pain: A randomized controlled trial.

AIM: The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of different treatment modalities for temporomandibular joint (TMJ) pain and their relevance to chronic cervical pain after 12 months. SETTINGS AND DESIGN: This was a randomized controlled trial. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Forty-eight participants with chronic cervical and TMJ pain were selected using research diagnostic criteria and randomized into four groups (n = 12), which included control, soft splints, transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS), and low-level laser (LLL). The cervical and TMJ pain was recorded using visual analog scale (VAS) scores at baseline, 3 months, 6 months, and 12 months. Occlusal equilibration was done for all groups except for the control. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS USED: The mean pain scores were statistically analyzed using one-way analysis of variance and posthoc test. RESULTS: The mean VAS scores in TMJ pain patients between the four groups at baseline and at final follow-up were 7.27 ± 1.29 in Group 1, 7.53 ± 0.70 in Group 2, 7.76 ± 0.80 in Group 3, and 7.61 ± 0.61 in Group 4. The mean difference between Groups 1 and 3, Groups 1 and 4, and Groups 2 and 3 was statistically significant (P < 0.00). Pearson correlation test yielded a mild and negative correlation between TMJ and cervical pain. CONCLUSION: TENS and LLL were found to be equally effective in reducing pain in the jaw joint region, followed by soft splints, and there was no correlation between TMJ and cervical pain.

Cervical manipulation versus thoracic or cervicothoracic manipulations for the management of neck pain. A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Cervical and thoracic thrust or non-thrust manipulations have shown to be effective in patients with neck pain, but there is a lack of studies comparing both interventions in patients with neck pain. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the effects of cervical thrust or non-thrust manipulations compared to thoracic or cervicothoracic manipulations for improving pain, disability, and range of motion in patients with neck pain. DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis. METHOD: Searches were performed in PubMed, PEDro, Cochrane Library, CINHAL, and Web of Science databases from inception to May 22, 2023. Randomized clinical trials comparing cervical thrust or non-thrust manipulations to thoracic or cervicothoracic manipulations were included. Methodological quality was assessed with PEDro scale, and the certainty of evidence was evaluated using GRADE guidelines. RESULTS: Six studies were included. Meta-analyses revealed no differences between cervical thrust or non-thrust manipulations and thoracic or cervicothoracic manipulations in pain intensity, disability, or cervical range of motion in any plane. The certainty of evidence was downgraded to very low for pain intensity, to moderate or very low for disability and to low or very low for cervical range of motion. CONCLUSION: There is moderate to very low certainty evidence that there is no difference in effectiveness between cervical thrust or non-thrust manipulations and thoracic or cervicothoracic manipulations for improving pain, disability, and range of motion in patients with neck pain. PROSPERO REGISTRATION: CRD42023429933.

Does having an external focus in immersive virtual reality increase range of motion in people with neck pain?

BACKGROUND: When instructing exercises to improve Range of Motion (ROM), clinicians often create an internal focus of attention, while motor performance may improve more when using an external focus. OBJECTIVES: Using Virtual Reality (VR), we investigated the effect of tasks with an internal and external focus on maximal ROM in people with neck pain and explored whether this effect was associated with fear of movement. METHOD: In this cross-over experimental design study, the cervical ROM of 54 participants was measured while performing a target-seeking exercise in a VR-environment (external focus task) and during three maximal rotation and flexion-extension movements with the VR-headset on, without signal (internal focus task). The main statistical analysis included two dependent T-tests. Pearson correlation coefficients were calculated to investigate whether the differences in ROM in both conditions were correlated to fear of movement. RESULTS: Maximal neck rotation was larger in the external focus condition than in the internal focus condition (mean difference: 26.4°, 95% CI [20.6, 32.3]; p < 0.001, d = 1.24). However, there was a difference favouring the internal focus condition for flexion-extension (mean difference: 8.2°, 95% CI [-14.9, -1.5]; p = 0.018, d = 0.33). The variability in ROM was not explained by variability in fear of movement (for all correlations p ≥ 0.197). CONCLUSION: An external focus resulted in a larger range of rotation, but our flexion-extension findings suggest that the task has to be specific to elicit such an effect. Further research, using a task that sufficiently elicits movement in all directions, is needed to determine the value of an external focus during exercise.

Comparative Efficacy of Mind-Body Exercise for Treating Chronic Non-Specific Neck Pain: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: This systematic review and network meta-analysis aims to compare the efficacy of different mind-body exercise (MBE) interventions, including Yoga, Pilates, Qigong, and Tai Chi, in managing chronic non-specific neck pain (CNNP). We searched randomized controlled trials in PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and Cochrane Library. After screening eligible studies and extracting relevant data, risk of bias of included studies was assessed by the Cochrane Risk of Bias assessment tool, and network meta-analysis was performed by the Stata software version 16.0. RECENT FINDINGS: Of the 1019 studies retrieved, 18 studies with 1442 subjects were included. Fourteen studies were graded as high quality. Yoga plus hot sand fomentation was the most effective in reducing pain intensity and functional disability, and improving the quality of physical life in patients with CNNP. Yoga achieved the most improvement in cervical mobility. And Pilates was the best MBE intervention for improving the quality of mental life. Overall, Yoga, Pilates, Qigong, and Tai Chi demonstrated considerable effectiveness in improving pain intensity, functional disability, cervical mobility, and quality of life in patients with CNNP. Yoga or Yoga plus heat therapy was the most effective method for patients with CNNP. Additional high-quality, large-scale, multi-center, long-term follow-up studies are necessary to fully understand the comparative effectiveness of different MBE interventions for CNNP, and to recognize the potential benefits of each MBE intervention and the need for individualized treatment approaches.

Comparative effectiveness of cervical vs thoracic spinal-thrust manipulation for care of cervicogenic headache: A randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: There is ample evidence supporting the use of different manipulative therapy techniques for Cervicogenic Headache (CgH). However, no technique can be singled as the best available treatment for patients with CgH. Therefore, the objective of the study is to find and compare the clinical effects of cervical spine over thoracic spine manipulation and conventional physiotherapy in patients with CgH. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: It is a prospective, randomized controlled study conducted between July 2020 and January 2023 at the University hospital. N = 96 eligible patients with CgH were selected based on selection criteria and they were divided into cervical spine manipulation (CSM; n = 32), thoracic spine manipulation (TSM; n = 32) and conventional physiotherapy (CPT; n = 32) groups, and received the respective treatment for four weeks. Primary (CgH frequency) and secondary CgH pain intensity, CgH disability, neck pain frequency, neck pain intensity, neck pain threshold, cervical flexion rotation test (CFRT), neck disability index (NDI) and quality of life (QoL) scores were measured. The effects of treatment at various intervals were analyzed using a 3 × 4 linear mixed model analysis (LMM), with treatment group (cervical spine manipulation, thoracic spine manipulation, and conventional physiotherapy) and time intervals (baseline, 4 weeks, 8 weeks, and 6 months), and the statistical significance level was set at P < 0.05. RESULTS: The reports of the CSM, TSM and CPT groups were compared between the groups. Four weeks following treatment CSM group showed more significant changes in primary (CgH frequency) and secondary (CgH pain intensity, CgH disability, neck pain frequency, pain intensity, pain threshold, CFRT, NDI and QoL) than the TSM and CPT groups (p = 0.001). The same gradual improvement was seen in the CSM group when compared to TSM and CPT groups (p = 0.001) in the above variables at 8 weeks and 6 months follow-up. CONCLUSION: The reports of the current randomized clinical study found that CSM resulted in significantly better improvements in pain parameters (intensity, frequency and threshold) functional disability and quality of life in patients with CgH than thoracic spine manipulation and conventional physiotherapy. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinical trial registration: CTRI/2020/06/026092 trial was registered prospectively on 24/06/2020.