Effects of kinesiotaping during early post-operative rehabilitation in individuals who underwent a total knee arthroplasty: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized control trials.

OBJECTIVE: To report the treatment effects of early use kinesiotaping on pain, range of motion, mobility, and edema outcomes following total knee arthroplasty. DATA SOURCES: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, PubMED, SPORTDiscus, Biosis Citation Index, and the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature were searched for potential randomized control trials from inception to 8 January 2024. REVIEW METHODS: Randomized control trials evaluating the effect of kinesiotaping published in English were included. Reference lists for relevant reviews were searched. Study quality was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 tool. Certainty of evidence was determined using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach. RESULTS: Seven articles totaling 534 participants were included for meta-analysis. Kinesiotaping with standard rehabilitation when compared to standard rehabilitation alone had very low certainty of evidence in pain and knee flexion range of motion. Kinesiotaping was favored at post-operative days two to four for pain (P = 0.03, standard mean difference = -0.77 [-1.45, -0.09]) and range of motion (P = 0.002, standard mean difference = -0.24 [-0.44, -0.03]). Kinesiotaping was favored at post-operative days six to eight for pain (P = 0.02, standard mean difference = -0.76 [-1.41, -0.12]) and range of motion (P = 0.04, standard mean difference = -0.63 [-1.22, -0.04]). Edema and mobility could not be meta-analyzed. CONCLUSION: The use of kinesiotaping early in post-operative rehabilitation could be a useful modality for reducing pain and increasing the range of knee flexion, however, the certainty of evidence is very low.

Comparing dry needling or local acupuncture to various wet needling injection types for musculoskeletal pain and disability. A systematic review of randomized clinical trials.

PURPOSE: Systematically evaluate the comparative effectiveness of dry needling (DN) or local acupuncture to various types of wet needling (WN) for musculoskeletal pain disorders (MPD). METHODS: Seven databases (PubMed, PEDro, SPORTDiscus, CINAHL, Scopus, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials) were searched following PROSPERO registration. Randomized clinical trials were included if they compared DN or local acupuncture with WN for MPD. Primary outcomes were pain and/or disability. The Revised Cochrane Collaboration tool (RoB 2.0) assessed the risk of bias. RESULTS: Twenty-six studies were selected. Wet Needling types included cortisone (CSI) (N = 5), platelet-rich plasma (PRP) (N = 6), Botox (BoT) (N = 3), and local anesthetic injection (LAI) (N = 12). Evidence was rated as low to moderate quality. Results indicate DN produces similar effects to CSI in the short-medium term and superior outcomes in the long term. In addition, DN produces similar outcomes compared to PRP in the short and long term and similar outcomes as BoT in the short and medium term; however, LAI produces better pain outcomes in the short term. CONCLUSION: Evidence suggests the effectiveness of DN to WN injections is variable depending on the injection type, outcome time frame, and diagnosis. In addition, adverse event data were similar but inconsistently reported. PROSPERO Registration: 2019 CRD42019131826Implications for rehabilitationDry needling produces similar effects for pain and disability in the short and medium term compared to cortisone, Botox, and platelet-rich plasma injections. Local anesthetic injection may be more effective at reducing short-term pain.Long-term effects on pain and disability are similar between dry needling and platelet-rich plasma injections, but dry needling may produce better long-term outcomes than cortisone injections.The available adverse event data is similar between dry and wet needling.The conclusions from this study may be beneficial for patients and clinicians for considering risk and cost benefit analyses.

Identifying priority gaps in contextual factors research and force-based manipulation. An international and interdisciplinary Delphi study.

OBJECTIVE: To establish priority gaps related to contextual factors (CFs) research and force-based manipulation (FBM). METHODS: A three-round Delphi following recommended guidelines for conducting and reporting Delphi studies (CREDES) involving international and interdisciplinary panelists with expertise in CFs and FBM. Round 1 was structured around two prompting questions created by the workgroup. Ranking of each priority gap was done by calculating composite scores for each theme generated. Consensus threshold was set with an agreement ≥75% among panelists. Median and interquartile range were calculated for each priority gap to provide the central tendency of responses. Wilcoxon rank-sum test was used to evaluate the consistency and stability of responses between rounds 2 and 3. RESULTS: Forty-six panelists participated in all three rounds of the Delphi. Consensus was reached for 16 of 19 generated themes for priority gaps in CFs research and FBM. The ranking of each identified gap was computed and presented. Wilcoxon rank-sum test was non-significant (P > .05), demonstrating consistency and stability of results between rounds. CONCLUSION: The result of this Delphi provides international and interdisciplinary consensus-based priority gaps in CFs research and FBM. The gaps identified can be used to generate future research inquiries involving CFs research and FBM.

Creation of a risk of harms informed consent form for dry needling: A nominal group technique.

BACKGROUND: When consenting patients to dry needling treatment, it is necessary to inform patients of potential risks of harms. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to identify elements and framework for an Informed Consent (IC) risk of harm statement to improve patient decision-making. DESIGN: A virtual Nominal Group Technique (vNGT) methodology was used to achieve consensus among participants to identify what needs to be on a consent form, how it should be framed, and what it should state so patients understand the true risks. METHODS: Eligible participants were identified as one of four groups: legal expert, policy expert, dry needling expert, or patient. The vNGT session consisted of 5 rounds of idea generation and final consensus voting which lasted for 2 h. RESULTS: Five individuals consented to participate. Of the 27 original ideas, 22 reached consensus including ones specifically related to a risk of harms statement: identifying risks and discomforts, identify different sensations, and using a classification to order risks by severity. Consensus was achieved with percent agreement of ≥ 80%. The constructed risk of harm statement had a reading level of grade 7 and provided a list of stratified risks associated with dry needling. CONCLUSION: The generated risk of harm statement can be incorporated on IC forms that require disclosure of risks in both the clinical and research setting. Additionally, further elements were identified by panel participants about defining the framework for an IC form outside of the risk of harm statement. GOV REGISTRATION: NCT05560100 (29/09/22).

Identifying which adverse events associated with dry needling should be included for informed consent: A modified e-Delphi study.

OBJECTIVE: Dry needling (DN) uses a monofilament needle to reduce pain and is performed by various healthcare professions. Due to the invasive needle puncture, adverse events (AEs) have been associated with DN. It is unclear, which AEs should be included in a risk statement for Informed Consent (IC). The purpose of this study was to identify which AEs should be included in a risk statement for IC. METHODS: A three-round e-Delphi study was undertaken using a panel of DN experts. Expert inclusion criteria included: (1) ≥5 years practice performing DN and one of the following secondary criteria: (A) certification in DN; (B) completion of a manual therapy fellowship that included DN training; or (C) ≥1 publication involving the use of DN. Participants rated their level of agreement using a 4-point Likert scale. Consensus was defined as either: 1) ≥80% agreement; or 2) ≥70% and <80% agreement with median ≥3, interquartile range ≤1, and standard deviation ≤1. RESULTS: A total of 14 (28%) AEs achieved final consensus in Round 3 for inclusion on IC. Kendall's Coefficient (w) of agreement for Round 2 was 0.213 and improved to 0.349 after Round 3. Wilcoxon rank tests revealed statistically significant changes for 12 of the 50 AEs. CONCLUSION: Consensus was attained for 14 AEs for inclusion on IC. The AEs identified can be used for the development of a shorter, more concise IC risk statement. A total of 93.6% of experts agreed on definitions for AE classification.

Increased Comfortable Gait Speed Is Associated With Improved Gait Biomechanics in Persons With Chronic Stroke Completing an 8-Week Forced-Rate Aerobic Cycling Intervention: A Preliminary Study.

ABSTRACT: Task-specific gait training is recommended to improve locomotor function after stroke. Our objective was to determine the effects of a forced-rate aerobic exercise intervention on gait velocity and biomechanics in the absence of task-specific gait training. Individuals with chronic stroke ( N = 14) underwent 24 sessions of forced-rate aerobic exercise, at a targeted aerobic intensity of 60%-80% of their heart rate reserve. Change in comfortable walking speed in addition to spatiotemporal, kinematic, and kinetic variables were measured using three-dimensional motion capture. Overground walking capacity was measured by the 6-min walk test. To determine gait biomechanics associated with increased walking speed, spatiotemporal, kinematic, and kinetic variables were analyzed separately for those who met the minimal clinically important difference for change in gait velocity compared with those who did not. Participants demonstrated a significant increase in gait velocity from 0.61 to 0.70 m/sec ( P = 0.004) and 6-min walk test distance from 272.1 to 325.1 meters ( P < 0.001). Those who met the minimal clinically important difference for change in gait velocity demonstrated significantly greater improvements in spatiotemporal parameters ( P = 0.041), ground reaction forces ( P = 0.047), and power generation ( P = 0.007) compared with those who did not. Improvements in gait velocity were accompanied by normalization of gait biomechanics.

Dry Needling for Subacromial Pain Syndrome: A Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis.

OBJECTIVE: The authors of this systematic review with meta-analysis evaluated the evidence for the effectiveness of various applications of dry needling (DN) combined with other conservative treatments for subacromial pain syndrome (SAPS). METHODS: Six databases (PubMED, CINAHL, Biosis, Web of Science, SPORTDiscus, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials) were searched after the study had been registered in PROSPERO. The authors included randomized clinical trials investigating the clinical effects of DN in combination with other conservative interventions for SAPS. Outcomes included pain and disability. RESULTS: Eight studies were selected. All eight studies involving 10 comparisons were included in the analyses (N = 538). A random-effects model was used to analyze between-group effects. Dry needling performed in combination with other conservative interventions produced favorable outcomes at all time points for pain and disability. Standard mean differences ranged from -0.57 (moderate) to -1.29 (large) for pain and -0.69 (moderate) to -1.07 (large) for disability, favoring groups receiving DN in addition to conservative treatment. Four of the eight studies were rated as having unclear or high risk of bias. CONCLUSION: The meta-analysis suggests that various applications of DN performed with other conservative interventions are more effective than conservative treatment alone for reducing pain and disability in patients with SAPS. Direct-comparison studies are needed to determine whether one application of DN is superior to another.

An 8-week aerobic cycling intervention elicits improved gait velocity and biomechanics in persons with Parkinson's disease.

BACKGROUND: It is unknown if improvements in gait velocity following an aerobic cycling intervention are accompanied by improved gait biomechanics in individuals with Parkinson's disease (PD) or if gait abnormalities are exaggerated in response to increased velocity. Research question Can an 8-week aerobic cycling intervention elicit improvements in locomotor function in individuals with mild to moderate PD? METHODS: A secondary analysis of data from a randomized clinical trial was conducted in individuals with mild to moderate idiopathic PD (N = 28). Participants were randomized to an aerobic cycling intervention (PDex, N = 14) consisting of 24 sessions at a targeted aerobic intensity of 60-80% of heart rate reserve or to a no intervention control group (PDcontrol, N = 14). Change in comfortable walking speed in addition to gait kinematics, kinetics, and spatiotemporal variables using motion capture were obtained at baseline and end of treatment (EOT). RESULTS: The PDex group made significantly greater improvements in the primary outcome, change in comfortable gait velocity, from 0.86 ± 0.24 m/s at baseline to 1.00 ± 0.23 m/s at EOT compared to the PDcontrol group who declined from 0.91 ± 0.23 m/s at baseline to 0.80 ± 0.29 at EOT (P = 0.002). Improvements in gait velocity for the PDex group were accompanied by improvements in gait kinematics, kinetics, and spatiotemporal parameters, while the PDcontrol group demonstrated slight worsening in all gait parameters over the 8-week period. Significance The 8-week moderate- to high-intensity cycling intervention elicited significantly greater improvements in gait velocity compared to the PDcontrol group. Increased gait velocity was accompanied by normalization of gait biomechanics, rather than an exaggeration of existing gait deviations. Aerobic cycling may be a viable treatment approach to improve gait velocity and gait biomechanics in individuals with mild to moderate PD and may mitigate declines in mobility.

Immediate effects of superficial dry needling of the trigeminal nerve innervation field for participants with cervicogenic headache. A randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Cervicogenic headache (CGH) is a common condition with a neuroanatomical basis involving the trigeminal nerve. Dry needling (DN) is a safe and effective treatment for CGH but most studies involve deep DN to cervical musculature. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to investigate immediate effects of superficial DN of the trigeminal nerve innervation field on numeric pain rating scale (NPRS), flexion-rotation test (FRT), cervical range of motion (AROM), and pain-pressure threshold (PPT) of right (R) and left (L) supraorbital (SO), and right (R) and left (L) greater occipital (GO) nerves in participants with CGH. METHODS: A parallel controlled randomized design involving 30 participants with CGH received either superficial DN (N = 17) or sham DN (N = 13). Participants and outcome assessors were blind to group assignment. Wilcoxon signed rank analyzed within-group effects and Mann-Whitney U analyzed between-group. RESULTS: Statistically significant between-group differences were observed for NPRS (P < .001) and AROM (P < .006) favoring DN and were clinically meaningful. Right and left Flexion rotation tests (FRT) outcomes were non-significant (P = .137) but clinically meaningful. No differences were observed for PPT over: R SO (P = .187); L SO (P = .052); R GO (P = .187); or L GO (P = .052). Between-group effect sizes across variables were moderate to large (0.53-1.4) but confidence intervals were wide. CONCLUSION: Superficial DN targeting the innervation field of the trigeminal nerve improves clinical outcomes in patients with CGH. Only the immediate effects were analyzed and the sample size was small. Larger, longer-term assessments are needed comparing superficial DN of the trigeminal innervation field and other conservative interventions for CGH.

Premorbid anxiety and depression and baseline neurocognitive, ocular-motor and vestibular performance: A retrospective cohort study.

Concussion has become a growing concern among sport and healthcare practitioners. Experts continue to investigate ways to advance the quality of concussion evaluation, diagnosis and management. Psychological conditions have been reported to influence concussion assessment outcomes at baseline and post-concussion; however, little evidence has examined psychological conditions and their effect on multifaceted measures of concussion. A retrospective cohort design was employed to examine differences between those with and without a premorbid psychological condition for high school and collegiate athletes who completed a preseason baseline battery, consisting of symptom reporting, computerized neurocognitive assessment, Vestibular-Ocular Motor Screening (VOMS), and the King-Devick (KD) test. Forty athletes within the sample self-reported a diagnosed psychological risk factor, consisting of depression and/or anxiety, and each were matched with a discordant control. Controls were matched on sex, age, sport, concussion history and ocular history. Athletes with psychological conditions reported higher symptom severity and had worse visual motor speed than controls. There were no differences between groups on other neurocognitive domains, VOMS, or KD. These results suggest that vestibular-ocular tools may be more consistent or less likely to vary between those with and without a premorbid psychological diagnosis, adding value to tools such as the KD and VOMS.

Pragmatically Applied Cervical and Thoracic Nonthrust Manipulation Versus Thrust Manipulation for Patients With Mechanical Neck Pain: A Multicenter Randomized Clinical Trial.

Study Design Randomized clinical trial. Background The comparative effectiveness between nonthrust manipulation (NTM) and thrust manipulation (TM) for mechanical neck pain has been investigated, with inconsistent results. Objective To compare the clinical effectiveness of concordant cervical and thoracic NTM and TM for patients with mechanical neck pain. Methods The Neck Disability Index (NDI) was the primary outcome. Secondary outcomes included the Patient-Specific Functional Scale (PSFS), numeric pain-rating scale (NPRS), deep cervical flexion endurance (DCF), global rating of change (GROC), number of visits, and duration of care. The covariate was clinical equipoise for intervention. Outcomes were collected at baseline, visit 2, and discharge. Patients were randomly assigned to receive either NTM or TM directed at the cervical and thoracic spines. Techniques and dosages were selected pragmatically and applied to the most symptomatic level. Two-way mixed-model analyses of covariance were used to assess clinical outcomes at 3 time points. Analyses of covariance were used to assess between-group differences for the GROC, number of visits, and duration of care at discharge. Results One hundred three patients were included in the analyses (NTM, n = 55 and TM, n = 48). The between-group analyses revealed no differences in outcomes on the NDI (P = .67), PSFS (P = .26), NPRS (P = .25), DCF (P = .98), GROC (P = .77), number of visits (P = .21), and duration of care (P = .61) for patients with mechanical neck pain who received either NTM or TM. Conclusion NTM and TM produce equivalent outcomes for patients with mechanical neck pain. The trial was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02619500). Level of Evidence Therapy, level 1b. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2018;48(3):137-145. Epub 6 Feb 2018. doi:10.2519/jospt.2018.7738.

Does early change predict long-term (6 months) improvements in subjects who receive manual therapy for low back pain?

Early change is commonly assessed for manual therapy interventions and has been used to determine treatment appropriateness. However, current studies have only explored the relationship of between or within-session changes and short-/medium-term outcomes. The goal of this study was to determine whether pain changes after two weeks of pragmatic manual therapy could predict those participants with chronic low back pain who demonstrate continued improvements at 6-month follow-up. This study was a retrospective observational design. Univariate logistic regression analyses were performed using a 33% and a 50% pain change to predict improvement. Those who experienced a ≥33% pain reduction by 2 weeks had 6.98 (95% CI = 1.29, 37.53) times higher odds of 50% improvement on the GRoC and 4.74 (95% CI = 1.31, 17.17) times higher odds of 50% improvement on the ODI (at 6 months). Subjects who reported a ≥50% pain reduction at 2 weeks had 5.98 (95% CI = 1.56, 22.88) times higher odds of a 50% improvement in the GRoC and 3.99 (95% CI = 1.23, 12.88) times higher odds of a 50% improvement in the ODI (at 6 months). Future studies may investigate whether a change in plan of care is beneficial for patients who are not showing early improvement predictive of a good long-term outcome.

A Prescriptively Selected Nonthrust Manipulation Versus a Therapist-Selected Nonthrust Manipulation for Treatment of Individuals With Low Back Pain: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

STUDY DESIGN: Randomized controlled trial. BACKGROUND: Several studies that have investigated the effects of a therapist-selected versus a randomly assigned segmental approach have looked at immediate effects only for pain-related outcomes. OBJECTIVES: To examine differences in outcomes following a therapist-selected nonthrust manipulation versus a prescriptively selected nonthrust manipulation in subjects with low back pain. METHODS: Subjects with mechanically producible low back pain were randomly treated with nonthrust manipulation in a therapist-selected approach or a prescriptively selected approach. All subjects received a standardized home exercise program. Outcome measures included pain, disability, global rating of change, and patient acceptable symptom state. Analyses of covariance, chi-square tests, and Mann-Whitney U tests were used to determine differences between groups. RESULTS: Sixty-three subjects were tracked for 6 months, during which subjects in both groups significantly improved. There were no differences between groups in pain, disability, or patient acceptable symptom state scores at 6 months. There was a significant difference in global rating of change scores favoring the therapist-selected manipulation group at 6 months. CONCLUSION: This study measured long-term differences between a prescriptively selected nonthrust manipulation and a therapist-selected approach to nonthrust manipulation. In pain, disability, and patient acceptable symptom state there were no differences in outcomes, findings similar to studies of immediate effects. After 6 months, perceived well-being was significantly higher for those in the therapist-selected treatment group. The study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01940744). LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapy, level 1b.

A preliminary study comparing the use of cervical/upper thoracic mobilization and manipulation for individuals with mechanical neck pain.

OBJECTIVES: Neck pain is routinely managed using manual therapy (MT) to the cervical and thoracic spines. While both mobilizations and manipulations to these areas have been shown to reduce neck pain, increase cervical range of motion, and reduce disability, the most effective option remains elusive. The purpose of this preliminary trial was to compare the pragmatic use of cervical and thoracic mobilizations vs. manipulation for mechanical neck pain. METHODS: This trial included 20 patients with mechanical neck pain. Each patient was randomized to receive either mobilization or manipulation to both the cervical and thoracic spines during their plan of care. Within-group analyses were made with Wilcoxon signed-rank tests and between-group analyses were made with Mann-Whitney U. RESULTS: There were no between-group differences for any of the dependent variables including cervical active range of motion (CAROM) (P = 0.18), deep cervical flexion (DCF) endurance (P = 0.06), numerical pain rating scale (NPRS) (P = 0.26), the neck disability index (NDI, P = 0.33), patient-specific functional scale (PSFS, P = 0.20), or the global rating of change (GROC) scale (P = 0.94). Within-group results were significant for all outcome variables (P<0.001) from initial evaluation to discharge for both groups. DISCUSSION: These findings were consistent with other trials previously conducted that applied the MT techniques in a pragmatic fashion, but varied from previous trials where the treatment was standardized. A larger experimental study is necessary to further examine the differences between mobilization and manipulation for neck pain.

The effect of manual therapy with augmentative exercises for neck pain: a randomised clinical trial.

OBJECTIVES: To compare the effect of manual therapy (MT) and an augmentative exercise programme (AEP) versus MT and general neck range of motion (ROM) on functional outcomes for patients with neck pain. A secondary objective was to examine changes in self-report measures and quantitative sensory testing (QST) following MT and AEP. METHODS: This was a randomised clinical trial. Seventy-two patients with neck pain were recruited. All patients received a single session of MT. Patients were randomly assigned to MT+AEP or MT+ROM. Clinical self-report outcome measures for disability and pain, and QST measures (pain and vibration thresholds) were collected at baseline, post MT treatment, at ∼48 hours, and at ∼96 hours. Repeated measures ANOVA and MANOVA were used to analyse within and between-group effects for clinical and QST measures. RESULTS: There were no between-group differences for disability, pain and QST measures. There was, however, a significant difference between groups for Global Rating of Change (GRoC) scores (P = 0.037). Patients in both groups showed improvements in pain, disability and trapezius pressure-pain threshold (PPT) (all P < 0.001). DISCUSSION: Augmentative exercise programme does not significantly improve disability, pain or QST measures in patients with chronic neck pain although it may enhance their GRoC scores. Over a 96-hour period, patients benefitted from MT plus exercise whether the exercise was general or specific.

Establishing the reliability and concurrent validity of physical performance tests using virtual reality equipment for community-dwelling healthy elders.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to determine the reliability and concurrent validity of commonly used physical performance tests using the OmniVR Virtual Rehabilitation System for healthy community-dwelling elders. METHOD: Participants (N = 40) were recruited by the authors and were screened for eligibility. The initial method of measurement was randomized to either virtual reality (VR) or clinically based measures (CM). Physical performance tests included the five times sit to stand, Timed Up and Go (TUG), Forward Functional Reach (FFR) and 30-s stand test. A random number generator determined the testing order. The test-re-test reliability for the VR and CM was determined. Furthermore, concurrent validity was determined using a Pearson product moment correlation (Pearson r). RESULTS: The VR demonstrated excellent reliability for 5 × STS intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) = 0.931(3,1), FFR ICC = 0.846(3,1) and the TUG ICC = 0.944(3,1). The concurrent validity data for the VR and CM (ICC 3, k) were moderate for FFR ICC = 0.682, excellent 5 × STS ICC = 0.889 and excellent for the TUG ICC = 0.878. The concurrent validity of the 30-s stand test was good ICC = 0.735(3,1). CONCLUSIONS: This study supports the use of VR equipment for measuring physical performance tests in the clinic for healthy community-dwelling elders. IMPLICATIONS FOR REHABILITATION: Virtual reality equipment is not only used to treat balance impairments but it is also used to measure and determine physical impairments through the use of physical performance tests. Virtual reality equipment is a reliable and valid tool for collecting physical performance data for the 5 × STS, FFR, TUG and 30-s stand test for healthy community-dwelling elders.

The addition of cervical unilateral posterior-anterior mobilisation in the treatment of patients with shoulder impingement syndrome: a randomised clinical trial.

Shoulder impingement syndrome (SIS) is a complex, multi-factorial problem that is treated with a variety of different conservative options. One conservative option that has shown effectiveness is manual therapy to the thoracic spine. Another option, manual therapy to the cervical spine, has been studied only once with good results, evaluating short-term outcomes, in a small sample size. The purpose of this study was to investigate the benefit of neck manual therapy for patients with SIS. The study was a randomised, single blinded, clinical trial where both groups received pragmatic, evidence-based treatment to the shoulder and one group received neck manual therapy. Subjects with neck pain were excluded from the study. Comparative pain, disability, rate of recovery and patient acceptable symptom state (PASS) measures were analyzed on the 68 subjects seen over an average of 56.1 days (standard deviation (SD)=55.4). Eighty-six percent of the sample reported an acceptable change on the PASS at discharge. There were no between-groups differences in those who did or did not receive neck manual therapy; however, both groups demonstrated significant within-groups improvements. On average both groups improved 59.7% (SD=25.1) for pain and 53.5% (SD=40.2) for the Quick Disabilities of the Shoulder and Hand Questionnaire (QuickDASH) from baseline. This study found no value when neck manual therapy was added to the treatment of SIS. Reasons may include the lack of therapeutic dosage provided for the manual therapy approach or the lack of benefit to treating the neck in subjects with SIS who do not have concomitant neck problems.