Effectiveness of manual therapy applied to craniomandibular structures in temporomandibular disorders: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Within physical therapy, manual therapy is known to be effective for managing temporomandibular disorders (TMDs). However, manual therapy is a broad term including different approaches applied to different body regions. AIMS: This is the first systematic review that aims to evaluate the effectiveness of manual therapy applied specifically to the craniomandibular structures (Cranio-Mandibular Manual Therapy [CMMT]) on pain and maximum mouth opening in people with TMD. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This systematic review was developed based on a pre-determined published protocol which was prospectively registered with PROSPERO (CRD42019160213). A search of MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, ZETOC, Web of Science, SCOPUS, PEDro, PubMed, Cochrane Library and Best Evidence, EBM reviews-Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Index to Chiropractic Literature ChiroAccess and Google Scholar databases was conducted from inception until October 2020. Randomised controlled trials comparing the effect of CMMT on pain and maximum mouth opening versus other types of treatment in TMDs were included. Two reviewers independently screened articles for inclusion, extracted data, assessed risk of bias with the revised Cochrane risk of bias tool for randomised trials and evaluated the overall quality of evidence with the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations. RESULTS: A total of 2720 records were screened, of which only 6 (293 participants) satisfied the inclusion criteria. All studies showed some concerns in risk of bias, except for one, which was high risk of bias. The overall quality of evidence was very low for all outcomes because of high heterogeneity and small sample sizes. All studies showed a significant improvement in pain and maximum mouth opening for CMMT from baseline in the mid-term, but only two showed superiority compared to other interventions. Given the high heterogeneity and small sample sizes of the included studies, a quantitative synthesis was not performed. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: There is the need for future high methodology research investigating different manual therapy techniques applied to different regions and different populations (e.g., chronic versus acute TMD) to determine what is most effective for pain and maximum mouth opening in patients with TMDs.

The effectiveness of manual therapy applied to craniomandibular structures in the treatment of temporomandibular disorders: protocol for a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: The term temporomandibular disorder (TMD) includes disorders of the temporomandibular joints (TMJ), masticatory muscles and adjacent tissues. Several studies have examined the effectiveness of manual therapy (MT) for TMDs by evaluating changes in pain and maximum mouth opening (MMO). Nevertheless, the effectiveness of MT exclusively applied to the craniomandibular structures (craniomandibular manual therapy (CMMT)) on pain and TMJ range of motion remains unclear. This review aims to evaluate the effectiveness of CMMT on pain and TMJ range of motion in people with TMDs. METHODS: This protocol is reported in line with the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P). Databases including MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, ZETOC, Web of Science, SCOPUS, PEDro, PubMed, Cochrane Library and Best Evidence, EBM reviews-Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Index to Chiropractic Literature ChiroAccess and Google Scholar will be searched from inception as well as key journals and grey literature. Randomised controlled trials involving adults with TMD that compare the effect of any type of CMMT (e.g. mobilisation) on pain and range of motion with a placebo intervention, controlled care intervention or other types of treatment will be included. Two reviewers will independently screen articles for inclusion, extract data, assess risk of bias (revised Cochrane risk of bias tool) for included studies and evaluate overall quality of evidence (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation). A meta-analysis will be conducted if possible. If not, a narrative synthesis will be conducted reporting the effectiveness of CMMT according to disorder type (TMJ disorders, masticatory muscle disorders and mixed disorders). DISCUSSION: In this review, the effectiveness of MT applied to craniomandibular structures for the treatment of TMD will be evaluated. Results will be submitted for publication in a peer-reviewed journal and presented at conferences. We expect our findings will facilitate treatment planning for manual therapists managing patients with TMD and provide future clinical research implications. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42019160213.

The efficacy of manual therapy and exercise for treating non-specific neck pain: A systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: To review and update the evidence for different forms of manual therapy (MT) and exercise for patients with different stages of non-specific neck pain (NP). DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, Cochrane-Register-of-Controlled-Trials, PEDro, EMBASE. METHOD: A qualitative systematic review covering a period from January 2000 to December 2015 was conducted according to updated-guidelines. Specific inclusion criteria only on RCTs were used; including differentiation according to stages of NP (acute - subacute [ASNP] or chronic [CNP]), as well as sub-classification based on type of MT interventions: MT1 (HVLA manipulation); MT2 (mobilization and/or soft-tissue-techniques); MT3 (MT1 + MT2); and MT4 (Mobilization-with-Movement). In each sub-category, MT could be combined or not with exercise and/or usual medical care. RESULTS: Initially 121 studies were identified for potential inclusion. Based on qualitative and quantitative evaluation criteria, 23 RCTs were identified for review. Evidence for ASNP: MODERATE-evidence: In favour of (i) MT1 to the cervical spine (Cx) combined with exercises when compared to MT1 to the thoracic spine (Tx) combined with exercises; (ii) MT3 to the Cx and Tx combined with exercise compared to MT2 to the Cx with exercise or compared to usual medical care for pain and satisfaction with care from short to long-term. Evidence for CNP: STRONG-evidence: Of no difference of efficacy between MT2 at the symptomatic Cx level(s) in comparison to MT2 on asymptomatic Cx level(s) for pain and function. MODERATE to STRONG-evidence: In favour of MT1 and MT3 on Cx and Tx with exercise in comparison to exercise or MT alone for pain, function, satisfaction with care and general-health from short to moderate-terms. MODERATE-evidence: In favour (i) of MT1 as compared to MT2 and MT4, all applied to the Cx, for neck mobility, and pain in the very short term; (ii) of MT2 using sof-tissue-techniques to the Cx and Tx or MT3 to the Cx and Tx in comparison to no-treatment in the short-term for pain and disability. CONCLUSION: This systematic review updates the evidence for MT combined or not with exercise and/or usual medical care for different stages of NP and provides recommendations for future studies. Two majors points could be highlighted, the first one is that combining different forms of MT with exercise is better than MT or exercise alone, and the second one is that mobilization need not be applied at the symptomatic level(s) for improvements of NP patients. These both points may have clinical implications for reducing the risk involved with some MT techniques applied to the cervical spine.

Reliability and Reproducibility of Chest Wall Expansion Measurement in Young Healthy Adults.

OBJECTIVE: The purposes of this study were to (1) evaluate the reliability and reproducibility of chest expansion (CE) measurement on 2 different levels and (2) observe relationships between upper and lower CE measurements and lung function. METHODS: Fifty-three healthy subjects aged between 18 and 39 years were recruited. Chest expansion measurements were taken with a cloth tape measure at 2 levels of the rib cage (upper and lower). Reproducibility of the measurement was measured for 2 physiotherapists and on 2 different days. Lung function (ie, forced expiratory volume in 1 second [FEV1], forced vital capacity (FVC), vital capacity and, inspiratory capacity) was measured for all subjects by a spirometer (MEC Pocket-spiro USB100, Medical Electronic Construction, Brussels, Belgium). RESULTS: Upper CE was less than lower CE (5.4 cm and 6.4 cm, respectively; P < .001). Intrarater and interrater reliability were good for upper and lower CE. Reproducibility between physiotherapists was verified for both CE measurements. Reproducibility between days was only verified for upper CE. Sex influenced lower CE. Upper and lower CE values were correlated (r = 0.747; P < .01). Lower and upper CE were significantly and positively correlated with all lung function parameters and inspiratory muscle strength (moderately and weakly, respectively) except to inspiratory capacity for upper CE (P = .051) and for FEV1/FVC for both CE measurements. CONCLUSION: Upper and lower CE measurements showed good intra- and interrater reliability and reproducibility in healthy subjects. Although both measurements were correlated with lung functions (ie, FEV1, FVC, and vital capacity), the findings of this study showed that upper CE measurements may be more useful in clinical practice to evaluate chest mobility and to give indirect information on lung volume function and inspiratory muscle strength.

Effectiveness of Manual Therapy and Therapeutic Exercise for Temporomandibular Disorders: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Manual therapy (MT) and exercise have been extensively used to treat people with musculoskeletal conditions such as temporomandibular disorders (TMD). The evidence regarding their effectiveness provided by early systematic reviews is outdated. PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to summarize evidence from and evaluate the methodological quality of randomized controlled trials that examined the effectiveness of MT and therapeutic exercise interventions compared with other active interventions or standard care for treatment of TMD. DATA SOURCES: Electronic data searches of 6 databases were performed, in addition to a manual search. STUDY SELECTION: Randomized controlled trials involving adults with TMD that compared any type of MT intervention (eg, mobilization, manipulation) or exercise therapy with a placebo intervention, controlled comparison intervention, or standard care were included. The main outcomes of this systematic review were pain, range of motion, and oral function. Forty-eight studies met the inclusion criteria and were analyzed. DATA EXTRACTION: Data were extracted in duplicate on specific study characteristics. DATA SYNTHESIS: The overall evidence for this systematic review was considered low. The trials included in this review had unclear or high risk of bias. Thus, the evidence was generally downgraded based on assessments of risk of bias. Most of the effect sizes were low to moderate, with no clear indication of superiority of exercises versus other conservative treatments for TMD. However, MT alone or in combination with exercises at the jaw or cervical level showed promising effects. LIMITATIONS: Quality of the evidence and heterogeneity of the studies were limitations of the study. CONCLUSIONS: No high-quality evidence was found, indicating that there is great uncertainty about the effectiveness of exercise and MT for treatment of TMD.

Short-term effects of Mulligan mobilization with movement on pain, disability, and kinematic spinal movements in patients with nonspecific low back pain: a randomized placebo-controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this clinical study was to compare the immediate- and short-term effects of lumbar Mulligan sustained natural apophyseal glides (SNAGs) on patients with nonspecific low back pain with respect to 2 new kinematic algorithms (KA) for range of motion and speed as well as pain, functional disability, and kinesiophobia. METHODS: This was a 2-armed randomized placebo-controlled trial. Subjects, blinded to allocation, were randomized to either a real-SNAG group (n = 16) or a sham-SNAG group (n = 16). All patients were treated during a single session of real/sham SNAG (3 × 6 repetitions) to the lumbar spine from a sitting position in a flexion direction. Two new KA from a validated kinematic spine model were used and recorded with an optoelectronic device. Pain at rest and during flexion as well as functional disability and kinesiophobia was recorded by self-reported measures. These outcomes were blindly evaluated before, after treatment, and at 2-week follow-up in both groups. RESULTS: Of 6 variables, 4 demonstrated significant improvement with moderate-to-large effect sizes (ES) in favor of the real-SNAG group: KA-R (P = .014, between-groups ES Cliff δ = -.52), pain at rest and during flexion (visual analog scale, P < .001; ES = -.73/-.75), and functional-disability (Oswestry Disability Index, P = .003 and ES = -.61). Kinesiophobia was not considered to be significant (Tampa scale, P = .03) but presented moderate ES = -.46. Kinematic algorithms for speed was not significantly different between groups (P = .118) with a small ES = -.33. All 6 outcome measures were significantly different (P ≤ .008) during within-group analysis (before and after treatment) only in the real-SNAG group. No serious or moderate adverse events were reported. CONCLUSION: This study showed evidence that lumbar spine SNAGs had a short-term favorable effect on KA-R, pain, and function in patients with nonspecific low back pain.