Association between sympathoexcitatory changes and symptomatic improvement following cervical mobilisations in participants with neck pain. A double blind placebo controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: sympathoexcitation observed with passive cervical mobilisations may imply activation of an endogenous pain inhibition system resulting in hypoalgesia. However, research is mostly in asymptomatic participants and there is very limited evidence of a relationship between sympathoexcitation and symptomatic improvement in people with clinical pain. OBJECTIVE: to investigate the effects of cervical mobilisations on the sympathetic nervous system in participants with neck pain, and to explore the relationship between symptomatic improvement and sympathoexcitation. DESIGN: double-blind randomised controlled trial. METHOD: 40 participants with neck pain (aged 20-69 years, 25 female) were randomly allocated to either cervical mobilisations or motionless placebo. Skin conductance was measured before, during, and after intervention. After interventions were completed, their credibility was assessed. Participants were classified as responders or non-responders according to global symptom change. RESULTS: participants receiving mobilisations were more likely to be classified as responders (odds ratio: 4.33, p = 0.03) and demonstrated greater change in most outcome measures of sympathoexcitation from baseline to during the intervention but not from during to after the intervention. There was no association between sympathoexcitation and symptomatic improvement. Mobilisations and placebo were equally credible. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest sympathoexcitatory changes may be caused by an orienting response unrelated to the activation of an endogenous pain inhibition system Alternatively, the observed lack of an association may be explained by the existence of various mechanisms for pain relief. This study used single outcome measures of sympathoexcitation and symptomatic improvement and other measures may reveal different things. CLINICALTRIALS. GOV NUMBER: M10/2016/095.

Short-term effects of manipulative treatment versus a therapeutic home exercise protocol for chronic cervical pain: A randomized clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: While both manipulative treatment and physical exercises are used to treat cervical pain, it remains unclear which is most effective. OBJECTIVE: To compare the short-term effects of high-velocity, low-amplitude manipulation techniques (MT) with those of home-exercise (HE) with stretching and low-intensity (10% of max) isometric contractions on pain and function. METHODS: Single-blind randomized clinical trial was performed. A total of 27 asymptomatic subjects were randomly assigned to 2 groups: manipulation techniques (MT, n= 13) and home exercise (HE, n= 14). The visual analogue scale (VAS); neck disability index (NDI); pressure pain thresholds; cervical spine range of motion and electromyography during the cranio-cervical flexion test was measured before and one week after the intervention. RESULTS: After the intervention, both groups showed improved (P< 0.05) NDI and VAS scores and flexion in both rotation ranges compared with the pre-intervention values. For the NDI, pain intensity, and neck flexion, the effects sizes were large; for the majority of the other measurements, the effect sizes were small to moderate. The MT group showed significantly better results than the HE group for 2 out of 17 tests. CONCLUSIONS: Both interventions improved function and pain after one week, with only marginal between-group differences in favor of MT.

Immediate Effects of Osteopathic Treatment Versus Therapeutic Exercise on Patients With Chronic Cervical Pain.

Context • Alternatives to medication for immediate pain relief are needed because long-term use of pain medication has been associated with adverse effects. High-velocity, low-amplitude (HVLA) manipulation techniques (MTs) and craniocervical flexion (CCF) exercises have been frequently used in the management of chronic cervical pain. Objective • The study intended to compare the immediate effects on pain of a treatment using HVLA manipulation versus one using a CCF exercise protocol. Design • The research team designed a single-blinded, randomized clinical trial. Setting • The study was conducted at osteopathic clinics. Participants • Participants were 25 volunteer patients with chronic neck pain. Intervention • Participants were randomly enrolled in one of 2 groups: the HVLA manipulation group (MT group), n = 12, or the CCF exercise protocol group (CCF group), n = 13. Participants in the CCF group performed the exercise for 10 repetitions of a 10-s duration, with a 10-s rest interval between each contraction, for a total contraction time of 100 s and a total time of the session of 190 s. Outcome Measures • The outcomes were measured at baseline and at 60 s postintervention. The measures included (1) a visual analogue scale (VAS) completed during range of motion (ROM) measurement, (2) an evaluation of the ROM of the cervical spine, (3) a test of pressure pain thresholds (PPTs), and (4) electromyographic (EMG) activation of sternocleidomastoid muscle during a craniocervical flexion test. Results • Following both interventions, significant changes were found between baseline and immediately postintervention in the VAS score during ROM measurement for both groups, with P = .004 and P = .015, respectively. In the MT group, the measures for flexion (P = .001), right-side bending (P = .002), and left rotation (P = .005) changed significantly between baseline and postintervention; however, only flexion (P = .026) and extension (P = .040) ROM changed significantly between baseline and postintervention in the CCF group. Significant changes were observed in upper trapezius PPT following both interventions-MT group, P = .043, and CCF group, P = .005. In addition, significant changes in C5 PPT had occurred in the CCR group (P = .020). Between-group differences were significant for extension and right-side-bending ROM, with P = .019 and P = .012, respectively, and the changes between baseline and postintervention were greater in the MT group. None of the interventions led to changes in EMG. Conclusions • Although both interventions were associated with immediately improved ROM and pain after treatment, HVLA manipulation was more effective than CCF exercise in improving ROM and VAS during ROM. None of the interventions led to changes in EMG.

Effects of Cervical High-Velocity Low-Amplitude Techniques on Range of Motion, Strength Performance, and Cardiovascular Outcomes: A Review.

BACKGROUND: Cervical high-velocity low-amplitude (HVLA) manipulation technique is among the oldest and most frequently used chiropractic manual therapy, but the physiologic and biomechanics effects were not completely clear. OBJECTIVE: This review aims to describe the effects of cervical HVLA manipulation techniques on range of motion, strength, and cardiovascular performance. METHODS/DESIGN: A systematic search was conducted of the electronic databases from January 2000 to August 2016: PubMed (n = 131), ScienceDirect (n = 101), Scopus (n = 991), PEDro (n = 33), CINAHL (n = 884), and SciELO (n = 5). Two independent reviewers conducted the screening process to determine article eligibility. The intervention that included randomized controlled trials was thrust, or HVLA, manipulative therapy directed to the cervical spine. Methodological quality was assessed using the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool. The initial search rendered 2145 articles. After screening titles and abstracts, 11 articles remained for full-text review. RESULTS: The review shows that cervical HVLA manipulation treatment results in a large effect size (d > 0.80) on increasing cervical range of motion and mouth opening. In patients with lateral epicondylalgia, cervical HVLA manipulation resulted in increased pain-free handgrip strength, with large effect sizes (1.44 and 0.78, respectively). Finally, in subjects with hypertension the blood pressure seemed to decrease after cervical HVLA manipulation. Higher quality studies are needed to develop a stronger evidence-based foundation for HVLA manipulation techniques as a treatment for cervical conditions.