4.5 Article

Dose Optimization for Spinal Treatment Effectiveness: A Randomized Controlled Trial Investigating the Effects of High and Low Mobilization Forces in Patients With Neck Pain

期刊

出版社

J O S P T
DOI: 10.2519/jospt.2014.4778

关键词

biomechanics; cervical vertebrae; manual therapy; musculoskeletal manipulations; neck

资金

  1. Physiotherapy Research Foundation of the Australian Physiotherapy Association
  2. National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia

向作者/读者索取更多资源

STUDY DESIGN: Randomized controlled trial. OBJECTIVE: To determine if force magnitude during posterior-to-anterior mobilization affects immediate and short-term outcomes in patients with chronic, nonspecific neck pain. BACKGROUND: The optimal dose of mobilization to effectively treat patients with neck pain is not known. METHODS: Patients with neck pain of at least 3 months in duration (n = 64) were randomized to receive a single treatment of posterior-to-anterior mobilization applied with 30 N or 90 N of mean peak force (3 sets of 30 seconds) or a placebo (detuned laser) on the spinous process at the painful spinal level. Pressure pain threshold, pain measured with a visual analog scale (range, 0-100 mm), cervical range of motion, and spinal stiffness at the painful spinal level (measured with a custom device and normalized as a percentage of C7 stiffness) were assessed before, immediately after, and at a mean +/- SD follow-up of 4.0 +/- 1.8 days following treatment. Repeated-measures analysis of covariance and Bonferroni-adjusted post hoc tests determined group differences for each outcome measure after treatment and at follow-up. CONCLUSION: A specific dose of mobilization, in terms of applied force, appears necessary for reducing stiffness and potentially pain in patients with chronic neck pain. Changes were not observed immediately after mobilization, suggesting that its effects are not directly mechanical. Trial registration: Australian and New Zealand

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据