Relative effectiveness and adverse effects of cervical manipulation, mobilisation and the activator instrument in patients with sub-acute non-specific neck pain: results from a stopped randomised trial

Hugh Gemmell, Peter Miller, Hugh Gemmell, Peter Miller

Abstract

Background: Neck pain of a mechanical nature is a common complaint seen by practitioners of manual medicine, who use a multitude of methods to treat the condition. It is not known, however, if any of these methods are superior in treatment effectiveness. This trial was stopped due to poor recruitment. The purposes of this report are (1) to describe the trial protocol, (2) to report on the data obtained from subjects who completed the study, (3) to discuss the problems we encountered in conducting this study.

Methods: A pragmatic randomised clinical trial was undertaken. Patients who met eligibility criteria were randomised into three groups. One group was treated using specific segmental high velocity low amplitude manipulation (diversified), another by specific segmental mobilisation, and a third group by the Activator instrument. All three groups were also treated for any myofascial distortions and given appropriate exercises and advice. Participants were treated six times over a three-week period or until they reported being pain free. The primary outcome measure for the study was Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC); secondary outcome measures included the Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36v2), the neck Bournemouth Questionnaire, and the numerical rating scale for pain intensity. Participants also kept a diary of any pain medication taken and noted any perceived adverse effects of treatment. Outcomes were measured at four points: end of treatment, and 3, 6, and 12 months thereafter.

Results: Between January 2007 and March 2008, 123 patients were assessed for eligibility, of these 47 were considered eligible, of which 16 were allocated to manipulation, 16 to the Activator instrument and 15 to the mobilisation group. Comparison between the groups on the PGIC adjusted for baseline covariants did not show a significant difference for any of the endpoints. Within group analyses for change from baseline to the 12-month follow up for secondary outcomes were significant for all groups on the Bournemouth Questionnaire and for pain, while the mobilisation group had a significant improvement on the PCS and MCS subscales of the SF-36v2. Finally, there were no moderate, severe, or long-lasting adverse effects reported by any participant in any group.

Conclusions: Although the small sample size must be taken into consideration, it appears that all three methods of treating mechanical neck pain had a long-term benefit for subacute neck pain, without moderate or serious adverse events associated with any of the treatment methods. There were difficulties in recruiting subjects to this trial. This pragmatic trial should be repeated with a larger sample size.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Flow chart for patient recruitment and follow up. For each follow up point the number of participants completing each of the outcome measures is indicated.

References

    1. Sarigiovannis P, Hollis B. Effectiveness of manual therapy in the treatment of non-specific neck pain: a review. Physical Therapy Review. 2005;10:266–267.
    1. Gross AR, Kay TM, Kennedy C, Gasner D, Hurley L, Yardley K, Hendry L, McLaughlin L. Clinical practice guideline on the use of manipulation and mobilisation in the treatment of adults with mechanical neck disorders. Manual Therapy. 2002;7:193–205. doi: 10.1054/math.2002.0477.
    1. Binder AI. Neck pain. Clin Evid (Online) 2008. p. 1103.
    1. Aker PD, Gross AR, Goldsmith CH. Conservative management of mechanical neck pain: systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ. 1996;313:1291–1296.
    1. Gross AR, Hoving JL, Haines TA, Goldsmith CH, Ka T, Aker P, Bronfort G. A Cochrane review of manipulation and mobilisation for mechanical neck disorders. Spine. 2004;29:1541–1548. doi: 10.1097/01.BRS.0000131218.35875.ED.
    1. Tseng YL, Wang WTJ, Chen WY, Hou TJ, Chan TC, Lau FK. Predictors for the immediate responders to cervical manipulation in patients with neck pain. Manual Therapy. 2006;11:306–315. doi: 10.1016/j.math.2005.08.009.
    1. Hurwitz EL, Morgenstern H, Vassilaki M, Chiang M-L. Frequency and clinical predictors of adverse reactions to chiropractic care in the UCLA neck pain study. Spine. 2005;30:1477–1484. doi: 10.1097/01.brs.0000167821.39373.c1.
    1. Cassidy JD, Lopes AA, Yong-Hing K. The immediate effect of manipulation versus mobilisation on pain and range of motion in the cervical spine. J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 1992;15:570–575.
    1. Wood TG, Colloca CJ, Mathews R. A pilot randomised clinical trial on the relative effect of instrumental (MFMA) versus manual (HVLA) manipulation in the treatment of cervical spine dysfunction. J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 2001;24:260–271. doi: 10.1067/mmt.2001.114365.
    1. Hurwitz EL, Morgenstern H, Harber P, Kominski GF, Yu F, Adams H. A randomised trial of chiropractic manipulation and mobilisation for patients with neck pain: clinical outcomes from the UCLA neck-pain study. Am J Public Health. 2002;92:1634–1641. doi: 10.2105/AJPH.92.10.1634.
    1. Ernst E. Chiropractic spinal manipulation for neck pain: a systematic review. Journal of Pain. 2003;4:417–421. doi: 10.1067/S1526-5900(03)00735-1.
    1. Bale A, Newell D. Chiropractic for neck pain: a pilot study examining whether the duration of the pain affects the clinical outcome. Clinical Chiropractic. 2005;8:179–188. doi: 10.1016/j.clch.2005.06.006.
    1. Hurwitz EL, Coulter ID, Adams AH, Genovese BJ, Shekelle PG. Use of chiropractic services from 1985 through 1991 in the United States and Canada. Am J Public Health. 1998;88:771–776. doi: 10.2105/AJPH.88.5.771.
    1. Coulter ID, Hurwitz EL, Adams AH, Genovese BJ, Hays R, Shekelle PG. Patients using chiropractors in North America: who are they, and why are they in chiropractic care? Spine. 2002;27:291–298. doi: 10.1097/00007632-200202010-00018.
    1. Hurwitz EL, Aker PD, Adams AH, Meeker WC, Shekelle PG, Barr SS. Manipulation and mobilisation of the cervical spine. A systematic review of the literature. Spine. 1996;21:1746–1760. doi: 10.1097/00007632-199608010-00007.
    1. Borghouts JAJ, Koes BW, Bouter LM. Cost-of-illness in neck pain in the Netherlands in 1996. Pain. 1999;80:629–636. doi: 10.1016/S0304-3959(98)00268-1.
    1. McGregor AH, Wragg P, Gedroyc WMW. Can interventional MRI provide an insight into the mechanics of a posterior-anterior mobilisation? Clinical Biomechanics. 2001;16:926–929. doi: 10.1016/S0268-0033(01)00091-2.
    1. Lee RYW, McGregor AH, Bull AMJ, Wragg P. Dynamic response of the cervical spine to posteroanterior mobilisation. Clinical Biomechanics. 2005;20:228–231. doi: 10.1016/j.clinbiomech.2004.09.013.
    1. Refshauge KM, Parry S, Shirley D, Larsen D, Rivett DA, Boland R. Professional responsibility in relation to cervical spine manipulation. Aust J Physiotherapy. 2002;48:171–179.
    1. Sterling M, Jull G, Wright A. Cervical mobilisation: Concurrent effects on pain, sympathetic nerous system activity and motor activity. Manual Therapy. 2001;6:72–81. doi: 10.1054/math.2000.0378.
    1. Jull G. Use of high and low velocity cervical manipulative therapy procedures by Australian manipulative physiotherapists. Aust J Physiotherapy. 2002;48:189–193.
    1. Gleberzon BJ. Name techniques in Canada: current trends in utilization rates and recommendations for their inclusion at the Canadian Memorial Chiropractic College. J Canadian Chiropr Assoc. 2000;44:157–168.
    1. Read D, Wilson F, Gemmell H. Activator as a therapeutic instrument: Survey of usage and opinions amongst members of the British Chiropractic Association. Clinical Chiropractic. 2006;9:70–75. doi: 10.1016/j.clch.2006.03.001.
    1. Christensen MG, Delle Morgan DR. Job analysis of chiropractic: a project report, survey analysis and summary of the practice of chiropractic within Canada. Greeley, CO; National Board of Chiropractic Examiners; 1993.
    1. Bolton JE, Humpreys BK. The Bournemouth Questionnaire: a short-form comprehensive outcome measure. II. Psychometric properties in neck pain patients. J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 2002;25:141–148. doi: 10.1067/mmt.2002.123333.
    1. Koes BW, Assendelft WJJJ, van der Heijden GJMG, Bouter LM, Knipschild PG. Spinal manipulation and mobilisation for back and neck pain: a blinded review. BMJ. 1991;303:1298–1303. doi: 10.1136/bmj.303.6813.1298.
    1. Bronfort G, Haas M, Evans RL, Bouter LM. Efficacy of spinal manipulation and mobilisation for low back pain and neck pain: a systematic review and best evidence synthesis. Spine Journal. 2004;4:335–356. doi: 10.1016/j.spinee.2003.06.002.
    1. Vernon HT, Aker P, Burns S, Viljakaanen S, Short L. Pressure pain threshold evaluation of the effect of spinal manipulation in the treatment of chronic neck pain: a pilot study. J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 1990;13:13–16.
    1. Yurkiw D, Mior S. Comparison of two chiropractic techniques on pain and lateral flexion in neck pain patients: a pilot study. Chiropractic Technique. 1996;8:155–162.
    1. Bogduk N. Spinal manipulation for neck pain does not work. Journal of Pain. 2003;4:427–428. doi: 10.1067/S1526-5900(03)00733-8.
    1. Peloso PM, Gross A. Further studies are needed to assess the competing therapies for neck pain. Journal of Pain. 2003;4:422–426. doi: 10.1067/S1526-5900(03)00734-X.
    1. Leaver AM, Refshauge KM, Maher CG, Latimer J, Herbert RD, Jull G, McAuley JH. Efficacy of manipulation for non-specific neck pain of recent origin: design of a randomised trial. BMC Musculoskeletal Disord. 2007;8:18. doi: 10.1186/1471-2474-8-18.
    1. Haneline MT. Chiropractic manipulation and acute neck pain: A review of the evidence. J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 2005;28:520–525. doi: 10.1016/j.jmpt.2005.07.010.
    1. Borghouts JA, Koes BW, Bouter LM. The clinical course and prognostic factors of non-specific neck pain: a systematic review. Pain. 1998;77:1–13. doi: 10.1016/S0304-3959(98)00058-X.
    1. Douglass AB, Bope ET. Evaluation and treatment of posterior neck pain in family practice. Journal of American Board of Family Practice. 2004;17:S13–S22. doi: 10.3122/jabfm.17.suppl_1.S13.
    1. Evans R, Brontfort G, Bittell S, Anderson AV. A pilot study for a randomized clinical trial assessing chiropractic care, medical care, and self-care education for acute and subacute neck pain. J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 2003;26:403–411. doi: 10.1016/S0161-4754(03)00093-9.
    1. Ernst E. Manipulation of the cervical spine: a systematic review of case reports of serious adverse events. MJA. 2002;176:376–380.
    1. Di Fabio RP. Manipulation of the cervical spine: risks and benefits. Phys Ther. 1999;79:50–65.
    1. Cassidy JD, Boyle E, Cote P, He Y, Hogg-Johnson S, Silver FL, Bondy SJ. Risk of vertebrobasilar stroke and chiropractic care. J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 2009;32:S201–S208. doi: 10.1016/j.jmpt.2008.11.020.
    1. Hurst H, Bolton J. Assessing the clinical significance of change scores recorded on subjective outcome measures. J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 2004;27:26–35. doi: 10.1016/j.jmpt.2003.11.003.
    1. Guy W. ECDEU assessments manual for psychopharmacology, revised. Rockville, MD: US Department of health, Education, and Welfare publication (ADM), National Institute of Mental Health; 1976.
    1. Khorsan R, Coulter ID, Hawk C, Choate CG. Measures in chiropractic research: choosing patient-based outcome assessments. J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 2008;31:355–375. doi: 10.1016/j.jmpt.2008.04.007.
    1. Berk M, Ng F, Dodd S, Callaly T, Campbell S, Bernardo M, Trauer T. The validity of the CGI severity and improvement scales as measures of clinical effectiveness suitable for routine clinical use. J Eval Clin Pract. 2008;14:979–983. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2753.2007.00921.x.
    1. Eversden L, Maggs F, Nightingale P, Jobanputra P. A pragmatic randomised controlled trial of hydrotherapy and land exercises on overall well being and quality of life in rheumatoid arthritis. BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders. 2007;8:23. doi: 10.1186/1471-2474-8-23.
    1. Geisser ME, Clauw DJ, Strand V, Gendreau RM, Palmer R, Williams DA. Contributions of change in clinical status parameters to patient global impression of change (PGIC) scores among persons with fibromyalgia treated with milnacipran. Pain. 2010;149:373–378. doi: 10.1016/j.pain.2010.02.043.
    1. Salaffi F, Stancati A, Sivestri CA, Ciapetti A, Grassi W. Minimal clinically important changes in chronic musculoskeletal pain intensity measured on a numerical rating scale. European J Pain. 2004;8:283–291. doi: 10.1016/j.ejpain.2003.09.004.
    1. Tubach F, Ravaud P, Baron G, Falissard B, Logeart I, Bellamy N, Bombadier C, Felson D, Hochberg M, van der Heijde, Dougados M. Evaluation of clinically relevant changes in patient reported outcomes in knee and hip osteoarthritis: the minimal clinically important improvement. Ann Rheum Dis. 2005;64:29–33. doi: 10.1136/ard.2004.022905.
    1. Wells G, Beaton D, Shea B, Boers M, Simon L, Strand V, Brooks P, Tugwell P. Minimal clinically important differences: review of methods. J Rheumatol. 2001;28:406–412.
    1. Buchbinder R, Bombadier C, Young M, Tugwell P. Which outcome measures should be used in rheumatoid arthritis clinical trials? Clinical and quality-of-life measures' responsiveness to treatment in a randomised controlled trial. Arthritis Rheum. 1995;38:1568–1580. doi: 10.1002/art.1780381108.
    1. Goldsmith CH, Boers M, Bombadier C, Tugwell P. Criteria for clinically important changes in outcome: development, scoring and evaluation of the rheumatoid arthritis patient and trial profiles. OMERACT Committee. J Rheumatol. 1993;20:561–565.
    1. Jenkinson C, Peto V, Coulter A. Measuring change over time: a comparison of results from a global single item of health status and the multidimensional SF-36 health status survey questionnaire in patients presenting with menorrhagia. Qual Life Res. 1994;3:317–321. doi: 10.1007/BF00451723.
    1. Juniper EF, Guyatt GH, Williams A, Griffith LE. Determining a minimal important change in a disease-specific quality of life questionnaire. J Clin Epidemiol. 1994;47:81–87. doi: 10.1016/0895-4356(94)90036-1.
    1. Middel B, Stewart R, Bouma J, van Sonderen E, van den Heuvel W. How to validate clinically important change in health-related functional status. Is the magnitude of the effect size consistently related to magnitude of change as indicated by a global question rating? J Eval Clin Pract. 2001;7:399–410. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2753.2001.00298.x.
    1. Wyrick K, Nienaber N, Tierney W, Wolinsky F. Linking clinical relevance and statistical significance in evaluating intra-individual changes in health-related quality of life. Med Care. 1999;37:469–478. doi: 10.1097/00005650-199905000-00006.
    1. Rowbotham MC. What is a 'clinically meaningful' reduction in pain? Pain. 2001;94:131–132. doi: 10.1016/S0304-3959(01)00371-2.
    1. Yalcin I, Bump RC. Validation of two global impression questionnaires for incontinence. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2003;189:98–101. doi: 10.1067/mob.2003.379.
    1. Evangelou E, Tsianos G, Ionnides JP. Doctors' versus patients' global assessment of treatment effectiveness. BMJ. 2008;336:1287–1290. doi: 10.1136/.
    1. Farrar JT, Young JP, La Moreaux L, Werth JL, Poole RM. Clinical importance of changes in chronic pain intensity measured on an 11-point numerical rating scale. Pain. 2001;94:149–158. doi: 10.1016/S0304-3959(01)00349-9.
    1. Demyttenaere K, Desaiah D, Petit C, Cronlein J, Brecht J. Patient-assessed versus physician-assessed disease severity and outcome in patients with nonspecific pain associated with major depressive disorder. Prim Care Companion J Clin Psychiatry. 2009;11:8–15. doi: 10.4088/PCC.08m00670.
    1. Houweling TAW. Reporting improvement from patient-reported outcome measures: A review. Clinical Chiropractic. 2010;13:15–22. doi: 10.1016/j.clch.2009.12.003.
    1. Schmitt MA, de Wijer A, van Gendersen FR, van der Graaf Y, Helders PJ, van Meeteren N. The neck Bournemouth Questionnaire cross-cultural adaptation into Dutch and evaluation of its psychometric properties in a population with subacute and chronic whiplash associated disorders. Spine. 2009;34:2551–2561. doi: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e3181b318c4.
    1. Martel J, Dugas C, LaFond D, Descarreaux M. Validation of the French version of the Bournemouth Questionnaire. JCCA. 2009;53:102–110.
    1. Gay RE, Madson TJ, Cieslak KR. Poster Board 80: Comparative responsiveness of the neck disability index, the neck Bournemouth Questionnaire and the pain visual analog scale in patients with chronic, uncomplicated neck pain. Am J Phys Med Rehabil. 2005;84:224. doi: 10.1097/00002060-200503000-00116.
    1. Ware JE, Sherbourne CD. The MOS 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36), 1: conceptual framework and item selection. Med Care. 1992;30:473–483. doi: 10.1097/00005650-199206000-00002.
    1. McHorney CA, Ware JE. Construction and validation of an alternate form general mental health scale for the Medical Outcomes Study Short-Form Health Survery. Med Care. 1995;33:15–28. doi: 10.1097/00005650-199501000-00002.
    1. Jensen MP, Karoly P, Braver S. The measurement of clinical pain intensity: a comparison of six methods. Pain. 1986;27:117–126. doi: 10.1016/0304-3959(86)90228-9.
    1. Bolton JE, Wilkinson RC. Responsiveness of pain scales: a comparison of three pain intensity measures in chiropractic patients. J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 1998;21:1–7.
    1. Farrar JT, Young JP, LaMoureaux L, Werth JL, Poole RM. Clinical importance of changes in chronic pain intensity measured on an 11-point numerical rating scale. Pain. 2001;94:149–158. doi: 10.1016/S0304-3959(01)00349-9.
    1. Hagg O, Fritzell P, Nordwall A. The clinical importance of changes in outcome scores after treatment for chronic low back pain. Eur Spine J. 2003;12:12–20.
    1. Rosier EM, Ladarola MJ, Coghill RC. Reproducibility of pain measurement and pain perception. Pain. 2002;98:205–216. doi: 10.1016/S0304-3959(02)00048-9.
    1. Vickers A, Altman D. Analysing controlled trials with baseline and follow up measurements. BMJ. 2001;323:1123–1124. doi: 10.1136/bmj.323.7321.1123.
    1. Alvarez DJ, Rockwell PG. Trigger points: diagnosis and management. Am Fam Physician. 2002;65:653–660.
    1. Hou CR, Tsai LC, Cheng KF, Chung KC, Hong CZ. Immediate effects of various physical therapeutic modalities on cervical myofascial pain and trigger-point sensitivity. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2002;83:1406–1414. doi: 10.1053/apmr.2002.34834.
    1. Blikstad A, Gemmell H. Immediate effect of activator trigger point therapy and myofascial band therapy on non-specific neck pain patients with upper trapezius trigger points compared to sham ultrasound: A randomised controlled trial. Clinical Chiropractic. 2008;11:23–29. doi: 10.1016/j.clch.2007.11.002.
    1. Gemmell H, Miller P, Nordstrom H. Immediate effect of ischaemic compression and trigger point pressure release on neck pain and upper trapezius trigger points: A randomised controlled trial. Clinical Chiropractic. 2008;11:30–36. doi: 10.1016/j.clch.2007.09.001.
    1. Fernandez-de-las-Penas C, Carnero JF, Miangolarra Page JC. Musculoskeletal disorders in mechanical neck pain: myofascial trigger points versus cervical joint dysfunction - a clinical study. J Musculoskeletal Pain. 2005;13:27–35. doi: 10.1300/J094v13n01_04.
    1. Bronfort G, Evans R, nelson B, Aker PD, Goldsmith CH, Vernon H. A randomised trial of exercise and spinal manipulation for patients with chronic neck pain. Spine. 2001;26:788–799. doi: 10.1097/00007632-200104010-00020.
    1. van Tulder M, Malmivaara A, Esmail R, Koes B. Exercise therapy for low back pain. A systematic review within the framework of the Cochrane Collaboration Back Review Group. Spine. 2000;25:2784–2796. doi: 10.1097/00007632-200011010-00011.
    1. UK BEAM Trial Team. United Kingdom back pain exercise and manipulation (UK BEAM) randomised trial: effectiveness of physical treatments for back pain in primary care. BMJ. 2004;329:1137. doi: 10.1136/bmj.329.7475.1137. doi:10.1136/.
    1. Linton S, van Tulder M. Preventive interviews for back and neck pain problems: What is the evidence? Spine. 2001;26:778–787. doi: 10.1097/00007632-200104010-00019.
    1. Loisel P, Gosselin L, Durand P, Lemarie J, Poitras S, Abenhaim L. Implementation of a participatory ergonomics program in the rehabilitation of workers suffereing from subacute back pain. Applied Ergonomics. 2001;32:53–60. doi: 10.1016/S0003-6870(00)00038-7.
    1. Stubbs DA, Buckle PW, Hudson MP, Rivers PM. Back pain in the nursing profession II. Effectiveness of training. Ergonomics. 1983;26:767–779. doi: 10.1080/00140138308963398.
    1. Dontigny RL. Function and pathomechanics of the sacroiliac joint. A review. Physical Therapy. 1985;65:35–44.
    1. Pickar JG. Neurophysiological effects of spinal manipulation. The Spine Journal. 2002;2:357–371. doi: 10.1016/S1529-9430(02)00400-X.
    1. Farrell JP, Jensen GM. Manual therapy: A critical assessment of role in the profession of physical therapy. Phys Ther. 1992;72:843–852.
    1. Keir KA, Goats GC. Introduction to manipulation. Br J Sports Med. 1991;25:221–226. doi: 10.1136/bjsm.25.4.221.
    1. Threkeld AJ. The effects of manual therapy on connective tissue. Phy Ther. 1992;72:893–902.
    1. Cohen SP, Raja SN. Pathogenesis, diagnosis, and treatment of lumbar zygapophysial (facet) joint pain. Anesthesiology. 2007;106:591–614. doi: 10.1097/00000542-200703000-00024.
    1. Benjamin M, Toumi H, Ralph JR, Bydder G, Best TM, Milz S. Where tendons and ligaments meet bone: attachment sites ('entheses') in relation to exercise and/or mechanical load. J Anat. 2006;208:471–490. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-7580.2006.00540.x.
    1. Cantu RI, Grodin AJ. Myofascial Manipulation: Therapy and Clinical Application. Austin, Pro-Ed. 2001.
    1. McPartlan JM, Simons DG. Myofascial trigger points: Translating molecular theory into manual therapy. J Manual Manipulative Therapy. 2006;14:232–239.
    1. Langevin HM, Yandow JA. Relationship of acupuncture points and meridians to connective tissue planes. Anatom Rec. 2002;269:257–265. doi: 10.1002/ar.10185.
    1. Langevin HM, Konofagou EA, Badger GJ, Churchill DL, Fox JR, Ophir J, Garra BS. Tissue displacements during acupuncture using ultrasound elastography techniques. Ultrasound in Med & Biol. 2004;30:1173–1183.
    1. Langevin HM, Churchill DL, Cipolla MJ. Mechanical signalling through connective tissue: a mechanism for the therapeutic effect of acupuncture. FASED J. 2001;15:2275–2282. doi: 10.1096/fj.01-0015hyp.
    1. Langevin HM, Storch KN, Cipolls MJ, Buttolph TR, Taatjes DJ. Finroblasts spreading induced by connective tissue stretch involves intracellular redistribution of σ- and β-actin. Histochem Cell Biol. 2006;125:487–495. doi: 10.1007/s00418-005-0138-1.
    1. Langevin HM, Boufford NA, Badger GJ, Churchill DL, Hove AK. Subcutaneous tissue fibroblast cytoskeletal remodelling induced by acupuncture: Evidence for a meachanotransduction-based mechanism. J Cell Physiol. 2006. pp. 767–774.
    1. Gemmell H, Miller P. Comparative effectiveness of manipulation, mobilisation and the Activator instrument in treatment of non-specific neck pain: a systematic review. Chiropractic & Osteopathy. 2006;14:7.
    1. Thiel H, Bolton J, Docherty S, Portlock J. Safety of chiropractic manipulation of the cervical spine: a prospective national survey. Spine. 2007;32:2375–2378. doi: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e3181557bb1.
    1. Vernon H, Janz G, Goldsmith CH, McDermaid C. A randomised, placebo-controlled clinical trial of chiropractic and medical prophylactic treatment of adults with tension-type headache: Results from a stopped trial. J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 2009;32:344–351. doi: 10.1016/j.jmpt.2009.04.004.
    1. Dziedic K, Hill J, Lewis M, Sim J, Daniels J, Hay EM. Effectiveness of manual therapy or pulsed shortwave diathermy in addition to advice and exercise for neck disorders: A pragmatic randomised controlled trial in physical therapy clinics. Arthritis Rheum. 2005;53:214–212. doi: 10.1002/art.21087.

Source: PubMed

Patrocinadores y Colaboradores

Condiciones médicas

Intervenciones de drogas

3
Suscribir