Short- and mid-term effects of adding upper cervical manual therapy to a conventional physical therapy program in patients with chronic mechanical neck pain. Randomized controlled clinical trial.

• Published in: Clinical rehabilitation 2021-03, Vol.35 (3), p.378-389
• Main Authors: González-Rueda, Vanessa, López-de-Celis, Carlos, Bueno-Gracia, Elena, Rodríguez-Sanz, Jacobo, Pérez-Bellmunt, Albert, Barra-López, Martín Eusebio, Hidalgo García, César
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Adult; Aged; Chronic pain; Chronic Pain - rehabilitation; Clinical outcomes; Clinical research; Clinical trials; Disability; Female; Humans; Male; Manipulative therapy; Middle Aged; Mobility; Mobilization; Musculoskeletal Manipulations; Neck pain; Neck Pain - rehabilitation; Pain Measurement; Physical therapy; Physiotherapy; Primary care; Primary Health Care; Range of Motion, Articular; Spain; Spinal manipulation; Spine; Time Factors; Treatment Outcome
• ISSN: 0269-2155; 1477-0873
• DOI: 10.1177/0269215520965054

Objective: To evaluate the effect of adding an Upper Cervical Translatoric Mobilization (UCTM) or an Inhibitory Suboccipital Technique (IST) to a physiotherapy treatment in the symptomatology and function of mechanical chronic neck pain patients. Design: Randomized controlled trial. Setting: Primary Care Center in Cornellà, Spain. Subjects: 78 patients (64 women), with mean age (SD) of 59.96 (13.30) years with mechanical chronic neck pain were divided in three groups: control, IST and UCTM groups. Interventions: All groups received 15 physiotherapy sessions for three weeks. The UCTM and IST groups added 5 minutes of the assigned technique during six sessions. Main measures: Neck disability index (NDI) and numeric pain rating scale (NPRS) for neck pain were measured baseline, three-weeks and 15-weeks follow-up. Results: NDI (SD) at baseline, three-weeks and 15-weeks were 11.62 (7.08), 9.65 (6.25), 7.58 (5.64) for the control group, 14.38 (6.92), 8.50 (6.11), 7.12 (4.98) for the IST group and 13.19(7.23), 5.35(6.10), 4.35(2.76) for the UCTM group. NPRS (SD) at baseline, three-weeks and 15-weeks were 58.69 (19.46), 45.19 (23.43), 44.58 (24.08) for the control group; 64.08 (19.26), 42.19 (19.69), 34 (21.14) for the IST group; and 67.65 (20.65), 36.23 (20.10), 39.85 (25.44) for the UCTM group. Conclusions: Compared with no treatment, both forms of mobilization were associated with reduced disability at three weeks, and UCTM remained better than control at 15 weeks; there were no significant differences between the two mobilization groups. Trial registration: This study was registered in Clinicaltrials.gov (NCT02832232).