The Effects of Muscle Energy Technique on Cervical Range of Motion

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to determine if a four week treatment period of muscle energy technique (MET) would significantly increase cervical flexion, extension, sidebending, and rotation in asymptomatic persons with limited range of motion (ROM). Eighteen volunteers qualified as subjects for the study following screening for neck ROM limitation. These subjects were then randomly assigned to either a control or MET group. A series of six, mixed, two-way analyses variance (ANOVA) were used to test for significant cervical ROM increases. The two factors examined were Group (MET vs. control) and Test (pre vs. post). Significant interactive effects for both left and right rotation were found (both F's > 4.8 and p's < 0.05) indicating a significantly greater ROM in the MET group. Trends toward significance were found for the remaining ranges of motion with the mean measures for each of the treatment groups showing an increase between pre-test and post-test. These results support MET as an effective technique for increasing cervical range of motion.     

Immediate effects of thoracic spine self-mobilization in patients with mechanical neck pain: A randomized controlled trial

ObjectivesTo investigate the immediate effects of thoracic spine self-mobilization in patients with mechanical neck pain.Study designRandomized, controlled trial.BackgroundThoracic spine self-mobilization is performed after thoracic spine thrust manipulation to augment and maintain its effects. To the best of our knowledge, no study has investigated the effects of thoracic spine self-mobilization alone in individuals with mechanical neck pain. The purpose of this randomized, controlled trial was to evaluate the immediate effects of thoracic spine self-mobilization alone without any other intervention on disability, pain, and cervical range of motion in patients with mechanical neck pain.MethodsFifty-two patients (39 females and 13 males) with mechanical neck pain were randomly allocated to either a thoracic spine self-mobilization group that was performing a thoracic spine active flexion and extension activity using two tennis balls fixed by athletic tape or a placebo thoracic spine self-mobilization group. Outcome measures were collected at pre-intervention and immediately after intervention, including the Neck Disability Index, visual analogue scale, and active cervical range of motion (ROM). The immediate effect of the intervention was analyzed using two-way repeated measures analysis of variance (ANOVA). If interactions were found, a simple main effect test was performed to compare the pre-post intra-group results.ResultsThe results of two-way repeated measures ANOVA indicated that the main effect of time was significant (p < 0.05) for all measurement outcomes. The main effect of group was not significant for all measurement outcomes (p > 0.05). The group × time interactions for cervical flexion active ROM (p = 0.005) and cervical extension active ROM (p = 0.036) were significant. The tests of simple main effect in cervical flexion active ROM (p < 0.0001) and cervical extension active ROM (p < 0.0001) showed a significant difference before and after intervention in the thoracic spine self-mobilization group.ConclusionPatients with mechanical neck pain who carried out thoracic spine self-mobilization showed increases in active cervical flexion and extension ROM.     

An immediate effect of axial neck rotation training with real time visual feedback using a smartphone inclinometer on improvement in axial neck rotation function

Objectives: The purpose of this study was to compare the immediate effects of axial neck rotation training (Axi-NRT) with and without real-time visual feedback (VF) using a smartphone inclinometer on the range of motion (ROM) for axial neck rotation and the onset of compensatory neck lateral bending and extension during active neck rotation.Methods: Twenty participants with restricted ROM for neck rotation but no neck pain (21.1 ± 1.6 years and 8 males, 12 females) were recruited for Axi-NRT with VF, and twenty age- and gender-matched participants with restricted ROM for neck rotation were recruited for Axi-NRT without VF. Changes in ROM for neck rotation and the onset time of compensatory neck movement during active neck rotation were measured using an electromagnetic tracking system. Results: Axi-NRT with VF was more effective in increasing ROM for neck rotation and decreasing and delaying the onset of compensatory neck movements during active neck rotation compared with Axi-NRT without VF. Conclusions: Repeated Axi-NRT using VF is useful to educate participants in maintaining the axis of the cervical spine and to increase ROM for axial neck rotation with less compensatory neck motion in participants with a restricted range of neck rotations.     

Mode of administration bias

Abstract

Limitation in cervical spine range of motion (ROM) is one criterion for diagnosis of cervicogenic headaches (CHs). The flexion–rotation test, when performed passively (FRT-P), has been shown to be a useful test in diagnosis of CH. Few investigations have examined the flexion-rotation test when performed actively (FRT-A) by the individual, and no studies have examined the FRT-A in a symptomatic population. The purpose of this study was to compare ROM during the FRT-A and FRT-P in patients with CH and asymptomatic individuals and to compare ROM between sides for these two versions of the test. Twelve patients with CH and 10 asymptomatic participants were included in the study. An eight-camera Motion Analysis system was used to measure head motion relative to the trunk during the FRT-P and the FRT-A. Cervical rotation ROM was measured in a position of full cervical flexion for both tests. No significant difference was observed between right and left sides for cervical rotation ROM during the FRT-P nor the FRT-A when performed by asymptomatic participants. In patients with CH, a significant difference was observed between sides for the FRT-P (P?=?0·014); however, the FRT-A failed to reveal bilateral descrepancy in rotation ROM.     

A normative study of cervical range of motion measures including the flexion–rotation test in asymptomatic children: side-to-side variability and pain provocation

Objectives: Cervical movement impairment has been identified as a core component of cervicogenic headache evaluation. However, normal range of motion values in children has been investigated rarely and no study has reported such values for the flexion–rotation test (FRT). The purpose of this study was to identify normal values and side-to-side variation for cervical spine range of motion (ROM) and the FRT, in asymptomatic children aged 6–12 years. Another important purpose was to identify the presence of pain during the FRT.

Methods: Thirty-four asymptomatic children without history of neck pain or headache (26 females and 8 males, mean age 125.38 months [SD 13.14]) were evaluated. Cervical spine cardinal plane ROM and the FRT were evaluated by a single examiner using a cervical ROM device.

Results: Values for cardinal plane ROM measures are presented. No significant gender difference was found for any ROM measure. Mean difference in ROM for rotation, side flexion, and the FRT were less than one degree. However, intra-individual variation was greater, with lower bound scores of 9.32° for rotation, 5.30° for side flexion, and 10.89° for the FRT. Multiple linear regression analysis indicates that movement in the cardinal planes only explains 19% of the variance in the FRT. Pain scores reported following the FRT were less than 2/10.

Discussion: Children have consistently greater cervical spine ROM than adults. In children, side-to-side variation in rotation and side flexion ROM and range recorded during the FRT indicates that the clinician should be cautious when using range in one direction to determine impairment in another. Range recorded during the FRT is independent of cardinal movement variables, which further adds to the importance of the FRT, as a test that mainly evaluates range of movement of the upper cervical spine.     

The Immediate Effects of Upper Thoracic Translatoric Spinal Manipulation on Cervical Pain and Range of Motion: A Randomized Clinical Trial

This study examined the effect of translatoric spinal manipulation (TSM) on cervical pain and cervical active motion restriction when applied to upper thoracic (T1-T4) segments. Active cervical rotation range of motion was measured re- and post-intervention with a cervical inclinometer (CROM), and cervical pain status was monitored before and after manipulation with a Faces Pain Scale. Study participants included a sample of convenience that included 32 patients referred to physical therapy with complaints of pain in the mid-cervical region and restricted active cervical rotation. Twenty-two patients were randomly assigned to the experimental group and ten were assigned to the control group. Pre- and post-intervention cervical range of motion and pain scale measurements were taken by a physical therapist assistant who was blinded to group assignment. The experimental group received TSM to hypomobile upper thoracic segments. The control group received no intervention. Paired t-tests were used to analyze within-group changes in cervical rotation and pain, and a 2-way repeated-measure ANOVA was used to analyze between-group differences in cervical rotation and pain. Significance was accepted at p = 0.05. Significant changes that exceeded the MDC₉₅ were detected for cervical rotation both within group and between groups with the TSM group demonstrating increased mean (SD) in right rotation of 8.23° (7.41°) and left rotation of 7.09° (5.83°). Pain levels perceived during post-intervention cervical rotation showed significant improvement during right rotation for patients experiencing pain during bilateral rotation only (p=.05). This study supports the hypothesis that spinal manipulation applied to the upper thoracic spine (T1-T4 motion segments) significantly increases cervical rotation ROM and may reduce cervical pain at end range rotation for patients experiencing pain during bilateral cervical rotation.     

Assessment of shoulder external rotation range-of-motion on throwing athletes: the effects of testing end-range determination (active versus passive)

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to compare the effects of active or passive end-range determination (supine position) for external rotation range of motion (ROM) in overhead throwing athletes and verify if athletes’ ROM is similar to non-athletes. Kinematic data from the dominant shoulder of 24 healthy male subjects, divided into two groups (12 athletes and 12 non-athletes) were recorded at end-range external rotation, thoracohumeral and glenohumeral external rotation angles were compared and a 2-way repeated-measures ANOVA was used to calculate the effects of end-range determination (passive versus active) across groups (athlete and non-athlete). A significant main effect (p?<?0.001) on both thoracohumeral and glenohumeral external end-range angles was observed while the highest end-range determination values were associated with passive motion. No differences were observed between the athletic or non-athletic groups for either thoracohumeral (p?=?0.784) or glenohumeral (p?=?0.364) motion.     

The effect of dry needling & muscle energy technique separately and in combination in patients suffering shoulder impingement syndrome and active trigger points of infraspinatus

ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to investigate the effects of a combination of dry needling (DN) and muscle energy technique (MET) on pain intensity (PI), pressure pain threshold (PPT) and shoulder active range of motion (ROM) in patients with shoulder impingement syndrome and active trigger points in the infraspinatus muscle.Methods39 patients, aged 20–50 participated in this study. All the cases were randomly assigned into three groups: group 1 (n = 13) received DN, group 2 (n = 13) received MET, and group 3 (n = 13) received DN & MET. The patients were treated for three sessions in a one-week period with at least a two-day break between sessions.ResultsThe results showed a significant improvement in visual analog scale (VAS), PPT and shoulder ROM over time (P < 0.001) in all three groups. There were no significant differences BETWEEN VAS (P = 0.406) PPT (P = 0.293), external rotation(EXT.ROT) (0.476), internal rotation (INT.ROT)(P = 0.476) and extension(EXT) (P = 0.574) ROMs in the three groups; however, DN group was significantly more effective on abduction(ABD) (P = 0.003) and flexion(FLEX) (0.012) ROM compared with other two groups.ConclusionIn line with previous studies, the present study found that the application of DN, MET and combined of these treatment on active trigger points in the infraspinatus muscle of patients with shoulder impingement syndrome helps reduce pain, increase PPT and enhance the shoulder ROM. Both techniques are effective in the treatment of trigger points. Nevertheless, DN is more effective in enhancing the ROM of flexion & abduction.     

Thoracic Manual Therapy Improves Pain and Disability in Individuals With Shoulder Impingement Syndrome Compared With Placebo: A Randomized Controlled Trial With 1-Year Follow-up

ObjectiveTo investigate whether muscle energy technique (MET) to the thoracic spine decreases the pain and disability associated with shoulder impingement syndrome (SIS).DesignSingle-center, 3-arm, randomized controlled trial, single-blind, placebo control with concealed allocation and a 12-month follow-up.SettingPrivate osteopathic practice.ParticipantsThree groups of 25 participants (N=75) 40 years or older with SIS received allocated intervention once a week for 15 minutes, 4 consecutive weeks.InterventionsParticipants were randomly allocated to MET to the thoracic spine (MET-only), MET plus soft tissue massage (MET+STM), or placebo.Main Outcome MeasuresPrimary outcome measure: Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (DASH) questionnaire. Secondary outcome measures: Shoulder Pain and Disability Index (SPADI) questionnaire; visual analog scale (VAS) (mm/100): current, 7-day average, and 4-week average; Patient-Specific Functional Scale (PSFS); and Global Rating of Change (GROC). Measures recorded at baseline, discharge, 4-week follow-up, 6 months, and 12 months. Also baseline and discharge thoracic posture and range of motion (ROM) measured using an inclinometer. Statistical analysis included mixed-effects linear regression model for DASH, SPADI, VAS, PSFS, GROC, and thoracic posture and ROM.ResultsMET-only group demonstrated significantly greater improvement in pain and disability (DASH, SPADI, VAS 7-day average) than placebo at discharge (mean difference, DASH=?8.4; 95% CI, ?14.0 to ?2.8; SPADI=?14.7; 95% CI, ?23.0 to ?6.3; VAS=?15.5; 95% CI, ?24.5 to ?6.5), 6 months (?11.1; 95% CI, ?18.6 to ?3.7; ?14.9; 95% CI, ?26.3 to ?3.5; ?14.1; 95% CI, ?26.0 to ?2.2), and 12 months (?13.4; 95% CI, ?23.9 to?2.9; ?19.0; 95% CI, ?32.4 to ?5.7; ?17.3; 95% CI, ?30.9 to ?3.8). MET+STM group also demonstrated greater improvement in disability but not pain compared with placebo at discharge (DASH=?8.2; 95% CI, ?14.0 to ?2.3; SPADI=?13.5; 95% CI, ?22.3 to ?4.8) and 6 months (?9.0; 95% CI, ?16.9 to ?1.2; ?12.4; 95% CI, ?24.3 to ?0.5). For the PSFS, MET-only group improved compared with placebo at discharge (1.3; 95% CI, 0.1-2.5) and 12 months (1.8; 95% CI, 0.5-3.2); MET+STM at 12 months (1.7; 95% CI, 0.3-3.0). GROC: MET-only group improved compared with placebo at discharge (1.5; 95% CI, 0.9-2.2) and 4 weeks (1.0; 95% CI, 0.1-1.9); MET+STM at discharge (1.2; 95% CI, 0.5-1.9) and 6 months (1.2; 95% CI, 0.1-1.3). There were no differences between MET-only group and MET+STM, and no between-group differences in thoracic posture or ROM.ConclusionsMET of the thoracic spine with or without STM improved the pain and disability in individuals 40 years or older with SIS and may be recommended as a treatment approach for SIS.     

Osteopathic manipulative treatment combined with exercise improves pain and disability in individuals with non-specific chronic neck pain: A pragmatic randomized controlled trial

PurposeTo determine effectiveness of osteopathic manipulative treatment combined with stretching and strengthening exercises in the cervical region on pain and disability in individuals with non-specific chronic neck pain.Methods90 adults with non-specific chronic neck pain were randomized to either exercises group (EG, n = 45) or osteopathic manipulative treatment associated with exercises group (OMT/EG, n = 45). The primary outcomes were obtained by the use of Numeric Pain-Rating Scale (NPRS), Pressure Pain Threshold (PPT) and Neck Disability Index (NDI). Secondary outcomes included range of motion (ROM) for cervical spine rotation, Fear-Avoidance Beliefs Questionnaire Work/Physical Activity (FABQ-W/PA) and Pain-self efficacy at two different moments: baseline and 4 weeks after the first treatment. Techniques and dosages of OMT were selected pragmatically by a registered osteopath. Generalized Estimating Equations model (GEE), complemented by the Least Significant Difference (LSD) and the intention-to-treat analysis, was used to assess the clinical outcomes.ResultsAnalysis with GEE indicated that OMT/EG reduced pain and disability more than the EG alone after 4 weeks of treatment with statistically significant difference (p < 0,05), as well as cervical active rotation was significantly improved (p = 0.03). There were no between-group differences observed in Pressure Pain Threshold (PPT) measure, Fear-Avoidance Beliefs Questionnaire and Pain-self efficacy.ConclusionThe association between OMT and exercises reduces pain and improves functional disability more than only exercise for individuals with non-specific chronic neck pain.     

Clinical assessment of factors associated with subacromial shoulder impingement: a systematic review

Background: Physiotherapists commonly use orthopaedic special tests to reproduce subacromial shoulder impingement (SIS) pain by increasing compression or tension within the subacromial space. However, these tests do not differentiate between purported extrinsic and intrinsic mechanisms associated with SIS.

Objective: To identify, and determine the reliability and validity of clinical tests used to assess extrinsic factors associated with SIS.

Method: A scoping review identified tests for extrinsic SIS. A systematic approach was then used to search six electronic databases in July 2016 to identify clinical tests used to measure (1) posterior shoulder range, (2) cervical and/or thoracic posture, (3) 2D scapula movement, (4) rotator cuff strength. The 14 articles included in the review were assessed using a modified Downs and Black quality assessment tool.

Results: Moderate quality studies investigated 2D scapula measurements (N = 2), resting pectoralis minor length (N = 2) and rotator cuff strength (N = 5). High quality studies measured forward head position and/or thoracic posture (N = 2) and rotator cuff strength (N = 1).

Conclusion: A good level of assessment reliability and significantly less range and strength was identified in those with SIS for: posterior shoulder range (passive shoulder adduction and internal rotation and passive internal rotation in supine); isokinetic peak torque values for internal and external shoulder rotation (isokinetic testing); forward head position (lateral photograph) and thoracic range of motion (tape measure or ultrasound tomography). Good to excellent reliability was reported for lateral scapular slide test positions and resting pectoralis minor muscle length. These clinical tests should be considered for use in SIS assessment.     

A Pilot Longitudinal Study of 3-Dimensional Head and Neck Kinematics During Functional Tasks in Individuals With Chronic Idiopathic Neck Pain Either Wait-Listed for or Receiving Chiropractic Spinal Manipulative Therapy With Exercise

ObjectiveThe purpose of this study was to determine if there is a relationship between pain and movement kinematics during functional tasks, evaluated over time, in individuals with chronic idiopathic neck pain.MethodsTen participants with chronic idiopathic neck pain performed 2 functional tasks (overhead reach to the right and putting on a seatbelt) while evaluated using 8 Oqus 300+ cameras. Kinematic variables included joint angles and range of motion (ROM) (°), head segment relative to neck segment (head-neck [HN]); and head/neck segment relative to upper thoracic segment (head/neck-trunk), velocity (m/s), and time (% of movement phase). Pain was quantified using a 100-mm visual analog scale. Linear mixed effects regression models were used to analyze associations between pain and kinematic variables adjusting for treatment group.ResultsFor overhead reach, higher pain was associated with less HN peak rotation at baseline (β = –0.33; 95% CI −0.52 to –0.14, P = .003) and less HN total rotation ROM at 6 months (β = –0.19; 95% CI –0.38 to –0.003, P = .048). For the seatbelt task, higher pain was associated with less HN peak rotation (β = –0.52; 95% CI −0.74 to –0.30 to –0.74, P < .001) and less HN total rotation ROM at baseline (β = –0.32; 95% CI –0.53 to –0.10, P = .006). No other movement variables demonstrated meaningful relationships with pain for the reach or seatbelt tasks.ConclusionHigher pain is associated with less HN peak and total rotation during functional reaching tasks requiring head rotation. Recognizing altered functional kinematics in individuals with chronic neck pain may assist patient management.     

Shoulder external rotation range of motion and pectoralis minor length in individuals with and without shoulder pain

ABSTRACT

Background: There is evidence that pectoralis minor (PM) length influences scapula position and that scapula position relates to glenohumeral joint (GHJ) external rotation (ER) range of motion (ROM). Objectives: To explore the association between PM resting length and GHJ ER ROM in individuals with and without shoulder pain. The influence of GHJ ER ROM measurement position on this association was also evaluated. Design: Cross-Sectional. Methods: Fifty individuals (25 asymptomatic and 25 with shoulder pain) participated. PM resting length was measured using a tape measure with subjects standing, while GHJ ER ROM was quantified using a digital inclinometer with participants in both supine and seated positions. The same blinded investigator took all measurements. Results/Findings: A significant negative correlation between PM resting length and GHJ ER ROM in the seated position was noted in the asymptomatic group (r = ?0.41; p = 0.04), but not in the symptomatic group (r = ?0.33; p = 0.11). A nonsignificant negative correlation was also demonstrated in the supine position for both groups (r ranged from ?0.35 to ?0.17; p > 0.05). There was a significant group x position interaction (F = 4.06; p = 0.04) with more GHJ ER ROM (6.80°) for asymptomatic group in the seated position. Conclusions: PM length is not strongly correlated with GHJ ER ROM in individuals with or without shoulder pain. However, the position in which GHJ ER ROM is measured influenced the motion in asymptomatic individuals.     

Effect of adding stretching to standardized procedures on cervical range of motion,pain, and disability in patients with non-specific mechanical neck pain: A randomized clinical trial

Objectiveto investigate the benefit of adding stretching exercises to cervical joint mobilization and active rotation exercises for patients with non-specific mechanical neck pain.MethodsThirty-eight subjects with non-specific mechanical neck pain were randomly assigned to a standard procedure group (passive cervical mobilization and active cervical rotation range of motion exercise) or a combined procedure (passive cervical mobilization, active cervical rotation range of motion exercises, and stretching procedures). Mixed factorial analysis of variance was used to compare changes between groups over time in active cervical range of motion, Numeric Pain Rating Scale, Neck Disability Index, Global Rating of Change, and Pressure Pain Threshold.ResultsThere was a significant change in mean active range of motion in all directions, Pressure Pain Threshold, perceived pain, disability levels, and global rating of change over time (p < 0.001). There was a significant group by time interaction in mean active range of motion during extension (p = 0.01), right rotation (p = 0.004), right and left lateral flexion (p = 0.05, and p = 0.02 respectively). However, there was no significant group by time interaction in mean active range of motion during flexion, left rotation, pain intensity (p = 0.09), right and left pressure pain threshold (p = 0.30, 0.47, respectively), and disability (p = 0.07).ConclusionsBoth study groups improved significantly in all subjective and objective outcome measures. However, data from this study suggest that adding stretching to the standard procedures may be more effective than the standard procedure alone at improving cervical extension, right rotation, and lateral flexion active range of motion, but not pain and disability.     

Effectiveness of trigger point dry needling for multiple body regions: a systematic review

Background: Trigger point dry needling (TDN) is commonly used to treat musculoskeletal pain related to myofascial trigger points (MTrPs). To date, no systematic review of high-quality randomised controlled trials (RCTs) investigating TDN to multiple body regions exists.

Purpose: The aim of this review is to determine the effectiveness of TDN based on high-quality RCTs for all body regions.

Methods: To ensure thorough reporting, Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were followed as the methodological basis for this systematic review. PubMed, Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro), Cinahl, Cochrane and reference lists were searched for the years 2000–2014 and the terms ‘TDN’, ‘dry needling NOT trigger point’, ‘functional dry needling’ and ‘intramuscular manual therapy’. Inclusion criteria: RCTs with PEDro scores 6–10 investigating TDN. Exclusion criteria: duplicates, non-human participants, non-English language, exclusive focus on acupuncture or medicinal injections. Three investigators searched databases, applied criteria, read and assigned PEDro scores to every RCT. Nineteen studies met the criteria. As compared to either baseline or control groups, significant differences were found for pain (14 studies), range of motion (ROM) (five studies) and at least one item on function and quality of life measures (six studies).

Limitations: This review was limited by inclusion criteria, timeframe, language and databases searched.

Conclusion: The majority of high-quality studies included in this review show measured benefit from TDN for MTrPs in multiple body areas, suggesting broad applicability of TDN treatment for multiple muscle groups. Further high-quality research is warranted to standardise TDN methods to determine clinical applicability.     

Validity and Reliability of Smartphones in Assessing Spinal Kinematics: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

ObjectiveAdvances in mobile technology have led to the development of smartphones, whose applications present numerous utilities, such as the analysis of human movement based on inertial sensors. The purpose of this review was to investigate validity and reliability of smartphones in assessing the kinematics of the human spine.MethodsA systematic search was performed on MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, and LILACS databases, as well as manual searches. The included studies evaluated psychometric properties of smartphones in assessing kinematic variables of the spine (range of motion [ROM], speed, and acceleration). Two independent reviewers performed the selection, reading, data extraction, and risk of bias assessment of the studies.ResultsOf the 2651 articles initially found, 9 were included and had their results for ROM analyzed. The meta-analyses for validity showed very high correlation coefficients in the evaluation of cervical flexion, extension, and lateral flexion; high ones in the evaluation of cervical rotation; and also high ones for intrarater and interrater reproducibility of all cervical movements. The meta-analyses for interrater reproducibility showed high correlation coefficients in the evaluation of lumbar flexion and very high ones for intrarater reproducibility.ConclusionThe use of smartphones for assessing the ROM of cervical flexion, extension, and lateral flexion and lumbar flexion is feasible. Their use for assessing thoracic rotation is potentially viable, but further validation studies are still needed to ensure a safe use. There is a lack of validation studies that evaluate the applicability of this device in assessing other kinematic characteristics, such as speed and acceleration.     

The effectiveness of cervical versus thoracic thrust manipulation for the improvement of pain,disability, and range of motion in patients with mechanical neck pain

Background:

Many patients present to physical therapy with mechanical neck pain. Cervical and thoracic manipulations are being utilized in treating this impairment, but minimal evidence as to which technique is superior exists in the literature.

Objective:

The purpose of this systematic review is to identify whether cervical or thoracic manipulation is more effective at improving pain, range of motion (ROM), and disability in patients with mechanical neck pain.

Methods:

A comprehensive search of published literature from seven search engines (PubMed, ProQuest, PEDro, CINAHL, Healthsource, Cochrane Library, SPORTDiscus) yielded 13 studies that examined the effectiveness of either cervical manipulations, thoracic manipulations, or cervical and thoracic manipulations to relieve the effects of mechanical neck pain. Eleven of the studies included were randomized controlled trials (RCTs), while two were secondary analyses of RCTs. Each study was assessed using the PEDro scale and found to be of fair to high research quality.

Results:

The studies included in this systematic review produced both positive clinical and statistical differences in pain, disability, and ROM following manipulations of the cervical or thoracic spine.

Conclusion:

There is limited high-quality research directly comparing the two interventions, so determining whether cervical or thoracic thrust manipulation is superior cannot be concluded from this systematic review alone. However, based on the results found in this review, cervical and thoracic thrust manipulations are equally valuable in relieving pain, disability, and improving ROM for a patient with mechanical neck pain in the short term.     

Ranges of active joint motion for the shoulder,elbow, and wrist in healthy adults

Purpose: The aim of this study was to show highly reliable normal values and three-dimensional characteristics for final range of motion during active movements of the upper extremity joints, and to develop a database from healthy participants, with the advantage of this database lying in the methods of defining shoulder axial rotation angle and of compensating for soft tissue artifacts. Methods: We used an electromagnetic tracking system (FASTRAK) to measure three-dimensional motions of the shoulder (thoracohumeral), elbow/forearm, and wrist in 20 healthy adults (age range: 18–34 years) during active joint motion tasks of the upper extremity. Results: Joint angles of the upper extremity at the final position of joint motion tasks were determined. Highly reliable data for shoulder axial rotation angle were obtained, using a new definition of joint angle and regression analysis to compensate for estimation errors. Conclusions: These results should be useful in setting goals for the treatment of upper extremity joint functions in the fields of rehabilitation, orthopedics, and sports medicine.

Implications for Rehabilitation

• Complex joint motions that occur naturally (unconsciously) about some axes should be taken into account in interventions for range of joint motion (ROM).

• The data obtained through this study simultaneously indicating multiple interrelated angles can be used as reference values for maximum active ROM.

• ROM in the directions of motion involved in the various tasks (for example, elevation angle during shoulder flexion) may have a role to play in evaluating and setting goals for patients with impaired ROM of the arm joints.

     

A randomized clinical trial to compare the immediate effects of seated thoracic manipulation and targeted supine thoracic manipulation on cervical spine flexion range of motion and pain

Design:

Randomized clinical trial.

Objectives:

To determine the effectiveness of seated thoracic manipulation versus targeted supine thoracic manipulation on cervical spine pain and flexion range of motion (ROM). There is evidence that thoracic spine manipulation is an effective treatment for patients with cervical spine pain. This evidence includes a variety of techniques to manipulate the thoracic spine. Although each of them is effective, no research has compared techniques to determine which produces the best outcomes.

Methods:

A total of 39 patients with cervical spine pain were randomly assigned to either a seated thoracic manipulation or targeted supine thoracic manipulation group. Pain and flexion ROM measures were taken before and after the intervention.

Results:

Pain reduction (post-treatment–pre-treatment) was significantly greater in those patients receiving the targeted supine thoracic manipulation compared to the seated thoracic manipulation (P<0·05). Although not significant, we did observe greater improvement in flexion ROM in the targeted supine thoracic manipulation group. The results of this study indicate that a targeted supine thoracic manipulation may be more effective in reducing cervical spine pain and improving cervical flexion ROM than a seated thoracic manipulation. Future studies should include a variety of patients and physical therapists (PTs) to validate our findings.     

The Effect of Joint Manipulation Techniques on Active Range of Motion in the Mid-Thoracic Spine of Asymptomatic Subjects

Abstract

This study assesses the effect of the manipulation of restricted thoracic spine segments on thoracic active range of motion (AROM). Range of motion (ROM) is measured routinely to assess joint mobility, tissue extensibility, and function of the spine and the extremities. Manipulation has been used to restore normal joint mechanics and increase ROM. However, no research specifically shows that ROM in the thoracic spine increases after spinal manipulation. Seventy-eight healthy subjects (29 male, 49 female), ages 18-44, were divided into three categories. Group 1 was the control, group 2 received mobility testing only, and group 3 received mobility testing and joint manipulation to a restricted segment. All subjects were pre-tested for AROM of T3-T8; then either rested, received mobility tests, or were manipulated, after which post-test measurements were performed. Forward bending and side bending right and left were measured. In a comparison of pre-treatment versus post-treatment AROM, a significant difference was seen in side bending to the left only. This demonstrates that one session of manipulation techniques can influence AROM in the mid-thoracic spine.