The value of intermittent cervical traction in recent cervical radiculopathy

ObjectiveOur objective is to assess the effect of mechanical and manual intermittent cervical traction on pain, use of analgesics and disability during the recent cervical radiculopathy (CR).MethodsWe made a prospective randomized study including patients sent for rehabilitation between April 2005 and October 2006. Thirty-nine patients were divided into three groups of 13 patients each. A group (A) treated by conventional rehabilitation with manual traction, a group (B) treated with conventional rehabilitation with intermittent mechanical traction and a third group (C) treated with conventional rehabilitation alone. We evaluated cervical pain, radicular pain, disability and the use of analgesics at baseline, at the end and at 1, 3 and 6 months after treatment.ResultsAt the end of treatment improving of cervical pain, radicular pain and disability is significantly better in groups A and B compared to group C. The decrease in consumption of analgesics is comparable in the three groups. At 6 months improving of cervical and radicular pain and disability is still significant compared to baseline in both groups A and B. The gain in consumption of analgesics is significant in the three groups: A, B and C.ConclusionManual or mechanical cervical traction appears to be a major contribution in the rehabilitation of CR particularly if it is included in a multimodal approach of rehabilitation.     

A Multi-Structural Approach to Treatment of a Patient With Sub-Acromial Impingement: A Case Report

Abstract

Sub-acromial impingement is a condition commonly seen by physical therapists, however little evidence is available regarding the efficacy of this treatment. This case report describes the use of manual therapy and exercise, using a multi-structural approach to manage this condition. The subject was a 48-year-old retired physiotherapist complaining of recurrent shoulder pain during daily activities, although her daily function was not limited. Passive joint mobilization techniques of the cervical spine, costovertebral joints, and the glenohumeral joint as well as soft tissue mobilization techniques of the rotator cuff muscles were used. Exercises were prescribed to “set” the scapula in an optimal position and to facilitate and strengthen the rotator cuff muscles. After two treatments, the patient consulted an orthopaedic surgeon due to imminent decrease in funding for her treatment and a cortisone injection was administered. This decreased her pain immediately by 90%. However, two months later she attended three further physical therapy treatments because of recurrence of the pain. Six months after these treatments she was still pain-free. This case illustrates that physical therapy can be effective in the treatment of sub-acromial impingement, using a multi-structural approach to treatment.     

2. Cervical radicular pain

Introduction

Cervical radicular pain is pain perceived in the upper limb, caused by irritation or compression of a cervical spine nerve, the roots of the nerve, or both.

Methods

The literature on the diagnosis and treatment of cervical radicular pain was retrieved and summarized.

Results

The diagnosis is made by combining elements from the patient's history, physical examination, and supplementary tests. The Spurling and shoulder abduction tests are the two most common examinations used to identify cervical radicular pain. MRI without contrast, CT scanning, and in some cases plain radiography can all be appropriate imaging techniques for nontraumatic cervical radiculopathy. MRI is recommended prior to interventional treatments. Exercise with or without other treatments can be beneficial. There is scant evidence for the use of paracetamol, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, and neuropathic pain medications such as gabapentin, pregabalin, tricyclic antidepressants, and anticonvulsants for the treatment of radicular pain. Acute and subacute cervical radicular pain may respond well to epidural corticosteroid administration, preferentially using an interlaminar approach. By contrast, for chronic cervical radicular pain, the efficacy of epidural corticosteroid administration is limited. In these patients, pulsed radiofrequency treatment adjacent to the dorsal root ganglion may be considered.

Conclusions

There is currently no gold standard for the diagnosis of cervical radicular pain. There is scant evidence for the use of medication. Epidural corticosteroid injection and pulsed radiofrequency adjacent to the dorsal root ganglion may be considered. [Correction added on 12 June 2023, after first online publication: The preceding sentence was corrected.]     

Reproducibility of global three-dimensional motion during manual atlanto-axial rotation mobilization: an in vitro study

Abstract

The reproducibility of the three-dimensional (3D) kinematic aspects of motion coupling patterns during manual mobilizing techniques is still a debatable matter. The present in vitro study analysed segmental 3D motion of the atlanto-axial joint during manual axial rotation mobilization. Twenty fresh frozen human cervical specimens were studied in a test–retest situation with two examiners. The specimens were manually mobilized using three different techniques: (1) a regional mobilization technique of the cervical spine; (2) a segmental mobilization technique of the atlas with manual fixation of the axis; and (3) a segmental mobilization of the atlas on the axis applying a locking technique. Segmental atlanto-axial kinematics was registered with a Zebris CMS-20 ultrasound-based tracking system. The Euclidian norm was used as a representation of overall 3D motion. The results indicated good reproducibility (mean intraclass correlation coefficient, ICC: 0.87). Intraobserver reproducibility was slightly higher (mean ICC: 0.91; range: 0.76–0.99) than interobserver reproducibility (mean ICC: 0.85; range: 0.56–0.98) (P < 0.05). The total range of motion expressed as the Euclidean norm of 3D motion components was a parameter with good reproducibility in the study of segmental kinematics of manual atlanto-axial mobilization. Although previous studies have demonstrated poor inter-rater reliability of manual examination and mobilization of segmental motion components, the results of the present study shed a new and more positive light on the reproducibility of techniques for manual mobilization of the upper cervical spine.     

Barriers to Compliance With Evidence-Based Clinical Practice Guidelines

Abstract

Study design: Systematic literature review and meta-analysis.

Objective: In symptomatic subjects to: (1) examine the effects of a single session of joint mobilization on pain at rest and with most painful movement, and (2) compare the effects when joint mobilization is provided to a specific or non-specific spinal level.

Background: Joint mobilization is routinely used for treating spinal pain in conjunction with other interventions, but its unique effect is not well understood. Further, there is controversy about the role of ‘specific level’ techniques in producing benefit.

Methods: Searches were performed for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) using electronic databases (MEDLINE, CINAHL, and PEDro) from 1966 through November 2010. Methodological quality was assessed using previously detailed criteria. Meta-analysis and meta-regression were conducted on eligible studies.

Results: Eight RCTs with a mean methodological score of 10/12 were included. Significant heterogeneity (P?=?0·075) was found in the overall meta-analysis estimate. When stratified by body location, no significant individual effect was found for pain at rest. However, there was a statistical mean difference [0·71 (95% confidence interval: 0·13–1·28)] between pain at rest for the cervical and lumbar individual means.

Conclusions: We found multiple studies which provided evidence that a single session of joint mobilization can lead to a reduction of pain at rest and with most painful movement. When using joint mobilization, the need for specific versus non-specific level mobilization may be influenced by anatomical region; the direction of effect in the cervical spine was toward specific mobilization and in the lumbar spine towards non-specific mobilization.     

Comparison of manual therapy and exercise therapy for postural hyperkyphosis: A randomized clinical trial

Objective: To compare the efficacy of a manual therapy and an exercise therapy program in improving postural hyperkyphosis among young adults. Methods: Forty-six women between the ages of 18 to 30 years with thoracic kyphosis diagnosed by flexicurve ruler were randomly assigned to either an exercise therapy or a manual therapy group. The exercise therapy program focused on stretching and strengthening exercises in 15 sessions over 5 weeks. The manual therapy group received 15 sessions of manual techniques including massage, mobilization, muscle energy and myofascial release. Kyphosis angle and back extensor muscle strength were measured with a motion analysis system and a dynamometer at the baseline and after treatment. The data were analyzed with paired and independent t-tests. Results: After treatment, the angle of thoracic kyphosis was smaller and back extensor muscle strength was significantly greater in both the exercise and manual therapy groups (p < 0.001). We found no significant differences between groups in the changes in kyphosis angle or muscle strength after treatment (p > 0.05). Conclusion: Manual therapy was as effective as exercise therapy in reducing kyphosis angle and increasing back extensor muscle strength in young women with postural hyperkyphosis.     

The status of temporomandibular and cervical spine education in credentialed orthopedic manual physical therapy fellowship programs: a comparison of didactic and clinical education exposure

Abstract

Objective:

The purpose of this investigation was to establish a baseline of physical therapist education on temporomandibular disorders (TMD)-related topics during credentialed orthopedic manual physical therapy fellowship training and compare it to cervical spine disorders education.

Method:

An online survey was distributed electronically to each fellowship program credentialed by the American Physical Therapy Association (APTA) and recognized by the Academy of Orthopedic Manual Physical Therapists (AAOMPT). Data were analyzed to compare overall exposure to TMD educational content, including a direct comparison of TMD and cervical spine disorders education.

Results:

The response rate was 79%. Thirteen programs (87%) reported providing both didactic and clinical training on both TMD and cervical spine disorders. Didactic education for cervical spine disorders ranged from 16–20 hours to over 25 hours, whereas TMD hours ranged from 0 to 6–10 hours. Clinical education for cervical spine disorders ranged from 11–15 hours to over 25 hours, whereas TMD hours ranged from 0 to 6–10 hours. The number of hours of exposure during didactic training and the number of patients exposed to during clinical training were significantly different when comparing TMD to cervical spine disorders exposure (P<0·0001).

Discussion:

The data indicate a lack of uniformity between credentialed fellowship programs in orthopedic manual physical therapy with respect to the extent to which programs expose trainees to evaluation and management of TMD. There is consistency in that all programs provided more training on cervical spine disorders than TMD. Despite a high level of clinical specialization, fellows-in-training receive minimal TMD education.     

A risk–benefit assessment strategy to exclude cervical artery dissection in spinal manual-therapy: a comprehensive review

Cervical artery dissection refers to a tear in the internal carotid or the vertebral artery that results in an intramural haematoma and/or an aneurysmal dilatation. Although cervical artery dissection is thought to occur spontaneously, physical trauma to the neck, especially hyperextension and rotation, has been reported as a trigger. Headache and/or neck pain is the most common initial symptom of cervical artery dissection. Other symptoms include Horner’s syndrome and lower cranial nerve palsy. Both headache and/or neck pain are common symptoms and leading causes of disability, while cervical artery dissection is rare. Patients often consult their general practitioner for headache and/or neck pain, and because manual-therapy interventions can alleviate headache and/or neck pain, many patients seek manual therapists, such as chiropractors and physiotherapists. Cervical mobilization and manipulation are two interventions that manual therapists use. Both interventions have been suspected of being able to trigger cervical artery dissection as an adverse event. The aim of this review is to provide an updated step-by-step risk–benefit assessment strategy regarding manual therapy and to provide tools for clinicians to exclude cervical artery dissection.

• Key messages

• Cervical mobilization and/or manipulation have been suspected to be able to trigger cervical artery dissection (CAD). However, these assumptions are based on case studies which are unable to established direct causality.

• The concern relates to the chicken and the egg discussion, i.e. whether the CAD symptoms lead the patient to seek cervical manual-therapy or whether the cervical manual-therapy provoked CAD along with the non-CAD presenting complaint.

• Thus, instead of proving a nearly impossible causality hypothesis, this study provide clinicians with an updated step-by-step risk–benefit assessment strategy tool to (a) facilitate clinicians understanding of CAD, (b) appraise the risk and applicability of cervical manual-therapy, and (c) provide clinicians with adequate tools to better detect and exclude CAD in clinical settings.

     

T2 radiculopathy: A differential screen for upper extremity radicular pain

Radicular pain in the upper extremity can have a cervical origin terminating at the cervicothoracic junction (C8, T1). Review of the literature suggests cutaneous representations of T2 nerve root to the axilla, posteromedial arm, and lateral forearm, suggesting yet another source of upper extremity radicular pain. A 53-year-old female experienced insidious right upper thoracic pain radiating into the right axilla, upper arm, and lateral forearm (10/10 numerical pain rating scale (NPRS)) of 1-week duration. Medical referral suggested cervical radiculopathy, however, cervical spine examination was unremarkable. She presented with mechanical dysfunction of C8, T1; T1, T2; and T2, T3 vertebral segments with restricted cervical extension. Firm compression over the right lateral aspect of the second and third thoracic vertebrae reproduced her symptoms markedly. There was a predominance of right axillary pain. Cervical extension reproduced local upper thoracic pain. Nine treatment visits for a period of 3 weeks addressed mechanical dysfunction at the cervicothoracic junction and upper thoracic region, comprising manual therapy, corrective exercise, and pain modalities. Reduction of local tenderness, and radiating axillary and right arm pain was observed (2/10 NPRS), with improved cervical extension. The second thoracic intercostal nerve and the adjoining intercostobrachial nerve, medial antebrachial cutaneous nerve, and the posterior brachial cutaneous branch of the radial nerve are speculated to be potential symptom mediators. They have a representation to the axilla, medial and posterior arm, and lateral forearm – a representation supporting the speculation of upper extremity radicular symptoms following mechanical dysfunction of the upper thoracic vertebrae.     

Treatment of a Patient with Cervical Radiculopathy Using Thoracic Spine Thrust Manipulation, Soft Tissue Mobilization, and Exercise

While there is currently little evidence to suggest which non-operative treatment approach is best for the management of patients with cervical radiculopathy, emerging evidence suggests that these patients benefit from a multimodal treatment approach. The purpose of this case report is to describe the physical therapy management of a patient with cervical radiculopathy. Diagnosis was based on the patient''s meeting three of the four criteria in the diagnostic test cluster currently used to identify patients with cervical radiculopathy. Treatment included thrust manipulation of the thoracic spine, soft tissue mobilization, and therapeutic exercise. After three visits, patient-perceived disability, as measured by the Patient-Specific Functional Scale, improved from 5/10 to 10/10. The Numeric Pain Rating Score decreased from 4.66/10 to 0/10. The patient rated his improvement as a very great deal better on the Global Rating of Change Scale. These clinically meaningful improvements were maintained at the 14-week follow-up. While a cause-and-effect relationship may not be established from a case report, a multimodal approach including thoracic spine manipulation, soft tissue mobilization, and therapeutic exercise was associated with decreased pain and perceived disability in a patient with cervical radiculopathy. Further research is needed to investigate benefits of the components of this approach.Key Words: Cervical Radiculopathy, Physical Therapy, Soft Tissue Mobilization, Spinal ManipulationCervical radiculopathy is a disorder of a cervical nerve root¹ and is common in the general population, with an annual incidence of approximately 83 per 100,000². Patients with cervical radiculopathy often report neck pain; however, they most frequently seek treatment to address their arm pain^1,3,4. People with neck pain combined with upper extremity symptoms experience greater levels of disability than do people with neck pain alone⁴. Authors have suggested that patients with neck and arm pain should be treated more expeditiously in order to avoid the further negative impact on mental health status associated with chronic symptoms⁴.Treatment strategies for patients with cervical radiculopathy range from conservative management to surgery. Evidence suggests that patients who are treated conservatively may experience superior outcomes compared to those who undergo surgery⁵; however, there is little evidence to suggest which non-operative interventions are the most effective^6,7. Recently, two case series^3,8 used a combination of thrust and non-thrust mobilization/manipulation techniques directed at the cervical and thoracic spine, mechanical cervical traction, and exercise to treat patients with a clinical diagnosis of cervical radiculopathy. Cleland et al³ reported that 10 of 11 patients demonstrated clinically meaningful improvement in pain and function at discharge and 6-month follow-up. Waldrop⁸ reported improvement of 13% to 88% in the Northwick Park Neck questionnaire scores in 6 patients, with scores ranging from 13% to 88%. A recent prospective cohort study⁷ also described the use of an individualized approach including thrust and non-thrust cervical mobilization/manipulation techniques, repeated endrange exercises to promote centralization of symptoms, neural mobilization, traction, and cervical stabilization exercises. Of the participants, 77% surpassed the minimally clinically important difference on the Bournemouth Disability Questionnaire at discharge (mean=11 visits). This value increased to 93% at long-term follow-up (mean=8.2 months).While these preliminary reports suggest that a multimodal treatment approach may be beneficial for patients with cervical radiculopathy, exactly which interventions should be included in this approach, and in what combination, requires further research. The purpose of this case report is to describe the evaluation, clinical decision-making process, and treatment of a patient with cervical radiculopathy. The rationale for thrust manipulation of the thoracic spine and soft tissue mobilization are discussed. Approval for this case report was provided by the Institutional Review Board at Cayuga Medical Center, Ithaca, New York.     

Diagnosis and Management of Cervicogenic Headache and Local Cervical Syndrome with Multiple Pain Generators

Abstract

Numerous pain generators can be responsible for cervicogenic headache and pain in both the cervical and thoracic regions. A 45-year-old female presented in the clinic with a 20-year history of cervicogenic and migraine headaches, accompanied by a prolonged history of local cervical and interscapular pain. The cervicogenic symptoms were attributed to secondary discrelated changes in the cervical spine, as evidenced by specific provocation behaviors and segmental limitation patterns. The patient was educated regarding the presenting problems, and ergonomic changes were initiated. The limitations were addressed with joint-specific mobilization techniques, accompanied by specific home exercises. The patient demonstrated initial rapid improvements that were characterized by reduced symptoms and increased motion, followed by gradual full motion recovery and resolution of cervicogenic symptoms. This recovery pattern suggests the efficacy of manual techniques in the management of cervicogenic headaches and local cervical syndrome, even in the context of rather prolonged symptoms.     

Thoracic manual therapy in the management of non-specific shoulder pain: a systematic review

Abstract

Objectives:

Non-specific shoulder pain (NSSP) is often persistent and disabling leading to high socioeconomic costs. Cervical manipulation has demonstrated improvements in patients with NSSP, although risks associated with thrust techniques are documented. Thoracic manual therapy (TMT) may utilise similar neurophysiological effects with less risk. The current evidence for TMT in treating NSSP is limited to systematic reviews of manual therapy (MT) applied to the upper quadrant. These reviews included trials that used shoulder girdle manual therapy (SG-MT) in the TMT group. This limits the scope of their conclusions with regard to the exclusive effectiveness of TMT for NSSP.     

Effects of sling-based manual therapy on cervicothoracic junction in patients with neck pain and forward head posture: A randomized clinical trial

ObjectiveThe purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of 4 weeks of sling-based manual therapy on the cervicothoracic junction (CTJ) area in patients with neck pain and forward head posture.DesignSingle-blind randomized controlled trial.SettingOutpatient, Chonbuk National University hospital, Republic of Korea.SubjectsA total of 22 participants with neck pain (Numeric Pain Rating Scale >3) and forward head posture (craniovertebral angle <51) were randomly assigned to a CTJ group or a control group (n = 11 each).InterventionIn the control group, joint mobilization and motor control training was applied for the upper cervical spine (C0–C1). The CTJ group applied the same intervention to the upper cervical spine and cervicothoracic junction (C7-T3).Main measuresNumeric pain rating scale and neck disability index, craniovertebral angle, active range of motion, and muscle activity were evaluated before and after 4 weeks of intervention.ResultThe CTJ group participants showed significant improvement in the craniovertebral angle and cervical extension range after the intervention than the control group (P = 0.025, P = 0.001). While both groups presented significant differences after the intervention regarding Numeric pain rating scale, neck disability index, and muscle activity (sternocleidomastoid and anterior scalene muscle), there were no statistically significant differences between the groups (P > 0.05).ConclusionOur results suggest that the CTJ and the upper cervical region in patients with neck pain and forward head posture represent an area which if approached by manual therapy, improves cervical mobility and posture.     

Effectiveness of manual therapy in the treatment of non-specific neck pain: a review

Abstract

The aim of the current review was to assess the evidence for the effectiveness of cervical spine manipulation and mobilisation in the treatment of non-specific neck pain. A review of the literature was performed in a systematic format, based upon a structured search of six computerised bibliographic databases, together with manual searching of selected journals and reference lists to identify randomised clinical trials (RCTs) researching the effectiveness of manual therapy in the treatment of non-specific neck pain. The methodological quality of the studies was assessed using a set of pre-defined criteria adapted from Koes et al. (Koes BW, Assendelft WJJ, van der Heijden GJMG, Bouter LM, Knipschild PG. Spinal manipulation and mobilisation for back and neck pain: a blinded review. BMJ 1991; 303 :1298–303) and updated in the light of recent literature.

A total of 12 RCTs met the selection criteria. The scores achieved for methodological quality of the studies ranged from 25 points to 67 points out of a possible 100 points. Only four RCTs scored above 50 points: two of these reached a positive conclusion about the effectiveness of spinal manual therapy in the treatment of non-specific neck pain, and two a negative conclusion. Eight RCTs scored below 50 points; six of these reached a positive conclusion and two a negative conclusion.

RCTs researching the effectiveness of manual therapy for non-specific neck pain demonstrate methodological shortcomings in both design and reporting. The effectiveness of spinal manual therapy on non-specific neck pain remains inconclusive. The available evidence favoured spinal manual therapy when it was used in conjunction with exercise, particularly in the treatment of patients with chronic non-specific neck pain. Further, well-designed RCTs are needed to draw valid conclusions about the effectiveness of spinal manual therapy on nonspecific neck pain. In such future RCTs, placebo treatments should be designed to be indistinguishable (as far as possible) from manual therapy, and without the specific effects of active therapy. Furthermore, psychosocial factors should be considered prior to randomisation of patients by using appropriate measures.     

The validity of using an electrocutaneous device for pain assessment in patients with cervical radiculopathy

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the validity and preference for assessing pain magnitude with electrocutaneous testing (ECT) compared to the visual analogue scale (VAS) and Borg CR10 scale in men and women with cervical radiculopathy of varying sensory phenotypes. An additional purpose was to investigate ECT sensory and pain thresholds in men and women with cervical radiculopathy of varying sensory phenotypes. This is a cross-sectional study of 34 patients with cervical radiculopathy. Scatterplots and linear regression were used to investigate bivariate relationships between ECT, VAS and Borg CR10 methods of pain magnitude measurement as well as ECT sensory and pain thresholds. The use of the ECT pain magnitude matching paradigm for patients with cervical radiculopathy with normal sensory phenotype shows good linear association with arm pain VAS (R²?=?0.39), neck pain VAS (R²?=?0.38), arm pain Borg CR10 scale (R²?=?0.50) and neck pain Borg CR10 scale (R²?=?0.49) suggesting acceptable validity of the procedure. For patients with hypoesthesia and hyperesthesia sensory phenotypes, the ECT pain magnitude matching paradigm does not show adequate linear association with rating scale methods rendering the validity of the procedure as doubtful. ECT for sensory and pain threshold investigation, however, provides a method to objectively assess global sensory function in conjunction with sensory receptor specific bedside examination measures.     

A comparison of two non-thrust mobilization techniques applied to the C7 segment in patients with restricted and painful cervical rotation

Objectives:

Cervical mobilization and manipulation have been shown to improve cervical range of motion and pain. Rotatory thrust manipulation applied to the lower cervical segments is associated with controversy and the potential for eliciting adverse reactions (AR). The purpose of this clinical trial was to describe two translatory non-thrust mobilization techniques and evaluate their effect on cervical pain, motion restriction, and whether any adverse effects were reported when applied to the C7 segment.

Methods:

This trial included 30 participants with painful and restricted cervical rotation. Participants were randomly assigned to receive one of the two mobilization techniques. Active cervical rotation and pain intensity measurements were recorded pre- and post-intervention. Within group comparisons were determined using the Wilcoxon signed-rank test and between group comparisons were analyzed using the Mann–Whitney U test. Significance was set at P = 0.05.

Results:

Thirty participants were evaluated immediately after one of the two mobilization techniques was applied. There was a statistically significant difference (improvement) for active cervical rotation after application of the C7 facet distraction technique for both right (P = 0.022) and left (P = 0.022) rotation. Statistically significant improvement was also found for the C7 facet gliding technique for both right (P = 0.022) and left rotation (P = 0.020). Pain reduction was statistically significant for both right and left rotation after application of both techniques. Both mobilization techniques produced similar positive effects and one was not statistically superior to the other.

Discussion:

A single application of both C7 mobilization techniques improved active cervical rotation, reduced perceived pain, and did not produce any AR in 30 patients with neck pain and movement limitation. These two non-thrust techniques may offer clinicians an additional safe and effective manual intervention for patients with limited and painful cervical rotation. A more robust experimental design is recommended to further examine these and similar cervical translatory mobilization techniques.     

Manual fixation versus locking during upper cervical segmental mobilization. Part 2: an in vitro three-dimensional arthrokinematic analysis of manual axial rotation and lateral bending mobilization of the atlanto-axial joint

BackgroundThree-dimensional kinematic aspects of coupled motion during manual cervical mobilization have not previously been studied. Using an in vitro 3D-motion analysis method, the kinematic effects of two different segmental techniques for axial rotation and lateral bending mobilization of the upper cervical spine were investigated as a second part of the study (in part one, kinematic effects of flexion-extension mobilization have been investigated).MethodsAxial rotation and lateral bending mobilization of the atlanto-occipital and atlanto-axial segments were analysed in vitro using an electromagnetic tracking device. Local reference frames were defined based on bony reference points that were registered using a 3D-digitizing stylus.Five embalmed and one fresh specimen were analysed. Segmental motion was registered simultaneously in the atlanto-occipital and the atlanto-axial joints during manual mobilization through the full range of axial rotation and lateral bending mobility. The 3D-kinematic aspects during regional mobilization were compared with those during segmental mobilization with manual fixation and during segmental mobilization using a locking technique.ResultsDuring both segmental axial rotation techniques of the atlanto-axial joint, a significant reduction of the coupled lateral bending and flexion-extension motion was observed. The locking technique also induced an increase in the main axial rotation component. During lateral bending mobilization of the atlanto-axial joint, the manual fixation technique reduced the effect on the coupled flexion-extension component significantly.InterpretationsThese results suggest that for manual segmental axial rotation and lateral bending mobilization of the upper cervical spine segmental manual fixation or locking may be preferred in different situations depending on the desired effects. This study brings additional information to the data provided by part 1 of this study on the 3D-arthrokinematic effects of flexion-extension mobilization.