4.5 Review

Manual therapy for tension-type headache related to quality of work life and work presenteeism: Secondary analysis of a randomized controlled trial

Journal

COMPLEMENTARY THERAPIES IN MEDICINE
Volume 25, Issue -, Pages 86-91

Publisher

CHURCHILL LIVINGSTONE
DOI: 10.1016/j.ctim.2016.01.008

Keywords

Manual therapy; Quality of work life; Tension-type headache treatment; Work presenteeism

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective: The objective of this research is to evaluate the efficacy of manual therapy for tension-type headache (TTH) in restoring workers quality of work life, and how work presenteeism affects this relation. Design: This study is a secondary analysis of a factorial, randomized clinical trial on manual therapy interventions. Altogether, 80 patients (85% women) with TTH and without current symptoms of any other concomitant disease participated. Interventions: An experienced therapist delivered the treatment: myofascial inhibitory technique (IT), articulatory technique (AT), combined technique (IT and AT), and control group (no treatment). Results: In general, all treatments as compared to our control group had a large effect (f >=.69) in the improvement of participants' quality of work life. Work presenteeism interacted with TTH treatment type's efficacy on participant's quality of work life. The inhibitory technique lead to higher reports of quality of work life than other treatment options only for participants with very low frequency of work presenteeism. In turn, TTH articulatory treatment techniques resulted in higher reports of quality of work life for a high to very high work presenteeism frequency. Conclusion: Articulatory manipulation technique is the more efficient treatment to improve quality of work life when the frequency of work presenteeism is high. Implications for future research and practice are discussed. (C) 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available