scholarly journals SHORT TERM EFFECTS OF HIGH VELOCITY LOW AMPLITUDE THRUST MANIPULATION TO THORACIC SPINE AND MYOFASCIAL RELEASE THERAPY ON MECHANICAL NECK PAIN, DISABILITY AND CERVICAL RANGE OF MOTION

2018 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
pp. 2664-2670
Author(s):  
Shreya Modi ◽  
◽  
Ankit Shrivastava ◽  
Ashok Shyam ◽  
Parag Sancheti ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Neck Pain ◽  
Range Of Motion ◽  
Thoracic Spine ◽  
High Velocity ◽  
Short Term ◽  
Myofascial Release ◽  
Cervical Range Of Motion ◽  
Pain Disability ◽  
Low Amplitude ◽  
Short Term Effects

scholarly journals Immediate and Short-Term Effects of Upper Cervical High-Velocity, Low-Amplitude Manipulation on Standing Postural Control and Cervical Mobility in Chronic Nonspecific Neck Pain: A Randomized Controlled Trial

2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (8) ◽  
pp. 2580
Author(s):  
Francisco Gómez ◽  
Pablo Escribá ◽  
Jesús Oliva-Pascual-Vaca ◽  
Roberto Méndez-Sánchez ◽  
Ana Silvia Puente-González
Keyword(s):  
Neck Pain ◽  
Postural Control ◽  
High Velocity ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Short Term ◽  
Upper Cervical ◽  
Low Amplitude ◽  
Cervical Rotation ◽  
Short Term Effects

This study aimed to determine the immediate and short-term effects of a single upper cervical high-velocity, low-amplitude (HVLA) manipulation on standing postural control and cervical mobility in chronic nonspecific neck pain (CNSNP). A double-blinded, randomized placebo-controlled trial was performed. Forty-four patients with CNSNP were allocated to the experimental group (n = 22) or control group (n = 22). All participants were assessed before and immediately after the intervention, with a follow-up on the 7th and 15th days. In each evaluation, we assessed global and specific stabilometric parameters to analyze standing postural balance and performed the cervical flexion-rotation test (CFRT) to analyze upper cervical mobility. We obtained statistically significant differences, with a large effect size, in the limited cervical rotation and global stabilometric parameters. Upper cervical HVLA manipulation produced an improvement in the global stabilometric parameters, significantly decreasing the mean values of velocity, surface, path length, and pressure in all assessments (p < 0.001; ƞ 2 p = 0.323–0.856), as well as significantly decreasing the surface length ratio (L/S) on the 7th (−0.219 1/mm; p = 0.008; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.042–0.395) and 15th days (−0.447 1/mm; p < 0.001; 95% CI: 0.265–0.629). Limited cervical rotation values increased significantly immediately after manipulation (7.409°; p < 0.001; 95% CI: 6.131–8.687) and were maintained during follow-up (p < 0.001). These results show that a single upper cervical HVLA manipulation produces an improvement in standing postural control and increases the rotational range of motion (ROM) in the upper cervical spine in patients with CNSNP.

scholarly journals Short-Term Effects of Cervical Kinesio Taping on Pain and Cervical Range of Motion in Patients With Acute Whiplash Injury: A Randomized Clinical Trial

2009 ◽  
Vol 39 (7) ◽  
pp. 515-521 ◽  
Author(s):  
Javier GonzáLez-Iglesias ◽  
César Fernández-de-las-Peñas ◽  
Joshua Cleland ◽  
Peter Huijbregts ◽  
Maria Del Rosario Gutiérrez-Vega
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trial ◽  
Range Of Motion ◽  
Randomized Clinical Trial ◽  
Whiplash Injury ◽  
Short Term ◽  
Cervical Range Of Motion ◽  
Kinesio Taping ◽  
Short Term Effects

Comparison Between Neck Pain Disability and Cervical Range of Motion in Patients With Episodic and Chronic Migraine: A Cross-Sectional Study

2014 ◽  
Vol 37 (9) ◽  
pp. 641-646 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gabriela F. Carvalho ◽  
Thais C. Chaves ◽  
Maria C. Gonçalves ◽  
Lidiane L. Florencio ◽  
Carolina A. Braz ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Neck Pain ◽  
Range Of Motion ◽  
Chronic Migraine ◽  
Cross Sectional Study ◽  
Sectional Study ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Cervical Range Of Motion ◽  
Pain Disability

scholarly journals Prognostic Factors for Improvement in Pain and Disability after Multidisciplinary Rehabilitation in Patients with Chronic Neck Pain

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Martin Weigl ◽  
Josefine Letzel ◽  
Felix Angst
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Prognostic Factors ◽  
Neck Pain ◽  
Range Of Motion ◽  
Psychological Treatment ◽  
Short Form ◽  
Chronic Neck Pain ◽  
Rehabilitation Programme ◽  
Cervical Range Of Motion ◽  
Pain Disability

Abstract Background: Recent clinical studies support the effectiveness of chronic neck pain specific multidisciplinary biopsychosocial rehabilitation programmes, but prognostic factors for improvement in pain and disability are unknown. The aim of this study was to identify predictors of improvement in patients with chronic neck pain after participation in a three-week multidisciplinary biopsychosocial rehabilitation programme. Methods: In this observational prospective cohort study patients were assessed at the beginning and the end of a multidisciplinary biopsychosocial rehabilitation programme. Inclusion for participation in the rehabilitation programme depended upon an interdisciplinary pain assessment. Consecutive patients who fulfilled the inclusion criteria were invited to participate in the study. A total of 112 patients participated. The primary outcomes, pain and disability, were measured by the Northern American Spine Society questionnaire (NASS), quantified by effect sizes (ES), and modelled with various co-factors. Secondary outcomes were mental health measured by the Short-Form 36 and total cervical active range of motion measured by a reliable, validated cervical range of motion instrument.Results: Patients’ mean age was 59.7 years (standard deviation=10.8); 70.5% were female. Patients improved significantly (p<0.001) in pain+disability (ES=0.56), mental health (ES=0.45) and cervical range of motion (ES=0.39). Prognostic factors for improvement in pain+disability were worse baseline scores (partial, adjusted correlation r=0.41, p<0.001), higher age (r=0.22, p=0.024), higher improvement in cervical range of motion (r=0.21, p=0.033) and higher improvement in mental health scale (r=0.20; p=0.047). Conclusions: Better outcomes for patients with improvement in neck range of motion, improvement of mental health, and higher age support the use of multidisciplinary biopsychosocial rehabilitation that combines physical and psychological treatment components. Furthermore, the results suggest that older patients may improve more compared to younger patients.

scholarly journals Is Dry Needling Effective When Combined with Other Therapies for Myofascial Trigger Points Associated with Neck Pain Symptoms? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 2021 ◽  
pp. 1-24
Author(s):  
César Fernández-De-Las-Peñas ◽  
Gustavo Plaza-Manzano ◽  
Jorge Sanchez-Infante ◽  
Guido F Gómez-Chiguano ◽  
Joshua A Cleland ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Neck Pain ◽  
Pain Intensity ◽  
Range Of Motion ◽  
Dry Needling ◽  
Short Term ◽  
Pain Thresholds ◽  
Pressure Pain ◽  
Cervical Range Of Motion ◽  
Pressure Pain Thresholds

Objective. To evaluate the effects of combining dry needling with other physical therapy interventions versus the application of the other interventions or dry needling alone applied over trigger points (TrPs) associated to neck pain. Databases and Data Treatment. Electronic databases were searched for randomized controlled trials where at least one group received dry needling combined with other interventions for TrPs associated with neck pain. Outcomes included pain intensity, pain-related disability, pressure pain thresholds, and cervical range of motion. The risk of bias (RoB) was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool, methodological quality was assessed with PEDro score, and the quality of evidence was assessed by using the GRADE approach. Between-groups mean differences (MD) and standardized mean difference (SMD) were calculated. Results. Eight trials were included. Dry needling combined with other interventions reduced pain intensity at short-term (SMD −1.46, 95% CI −2.25 to −0.67) and midterm (SMD −0.38, 95% CI −0.74 to −0.03) but not immediately after or at long-term compared with the other interventions alone. A small effect on pain-related disability was observed at short-term (SMD −0.45, 95% CI −0.87 to −0.03) but not at midterm or long-term. The inclusion of dry needling was also effective for improving pressure pain thresholds only at short-term (MD 112.02 kPa, 95% CI 27.99 to 196.06). No significant effects on cervical range of motion or pain catastrophism were observed. Conclusion. Low-to-moderate evidence suggests a positive effect to the combination of dry needling with other interventions for improving pain intensity, pain-related disability, pressure pain thresholds, and cervical range of motion in people with neck pain associated with TrPs at short-term. No midterm or long-term effects were observed.

scholarly journals Effectiveness of Dry Needling for Myofascial Trigger Points Associated with Neck Pain Symptoms: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (10) ◽  
pp. 3300
Author(s):  
Marcos J. Navarro-Santana ◽  
Jorge Sanchez-Infante ◽  
César Fernández-de-las-Peñas ◽  
Joshua A. Cleland ◽  
Patricia Martín-Casas ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Neck Pain ◽  
Range Of Motion ◽  
Trigger Points ◽  
Dry Needling ◽  
Short Term ◽  
Pressure Pain ◽  
Cervical Range Of Motion ◽  
Pressure Pain Thresholds ◽  
Mean Differences ◽  
Pain Symptoms

Our aim was to evaluate the effect of dry needling alone as compared to sham needling, no intervention, or other physical interventions applied over trigger points (TrPs) related with neck pain symptoms. Randomized controlled trials including one group receiving dry needling for TrPs associated with neck pain were identified in electronic databases. Outcomes included pain intensity, pain-related disability, pressure pain thresholds, and cervical range of motion. The Cochrane risk of bias tool and the Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro) score were used to assessed risk of bias (RoB) and methodological quality of the trials. The quality of evidence was assessed by using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. Between-groups mean differences (MD) and standardized mean differences (SMD) were calculated (3) Twenty-eight trials were finally included. Dry needling reduced pain immediately after (MD −1.53, 95% CI −2.29 to −0.76) and at short-term (MD −2.31, 95% CI −3.64 to −0.99) when compared with sham/placebo/waiting list/other form of dry needling and, also, at short-term (MD −0.51, 95% CI −0.95 to −0.06) compared with manual therapy. No differences in comparison with other physical therapy interventions were observed. An effect on pain-related disability at the short-term was found when comparing dry needing with sham/placebo/waiting list/other form of dry needling (SMD −0.87, 95% CI −1.60 to −0.14) but not with manual therapy or other interventions. Dry needling was effective for improving pressure pain thresholds immediately after the intervention (MD 55.48 kPa, 95% CI 27.03 to 83.93). No effect on cervical range of motion of dry needling against either comparative group was found. No between-treatment effect was observed in any outcome at mid-term. Low to moderate evidence suggests that dry needling can be effective for improving pain intensity and pain-related disability in individuals with neck pain symptoms associated with TrPs at the short-term. No significant effects on pressure pain sensitivity or cervical range of motion were observed.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document