Non-specific Mechanical Neck Pain Research Articles

Spesifik Olmayan Mekanik Boyun Ağrısı Olan Yetişkinler ve Sağlıklılarda Uyku Kalitesi, Vücut Farkındalık ve Boyun Özrünün Farkları: Kesitsel Bir Çalışma

Introduction: Non-specific mechanical neck pain (NMNP) may cause decrease of work quality, sleep disturbance, disability in adults. There is still a need for studies in the literature on sleep quality, body awareness and neck disability in adults with nonspecific mechanical neck pain. 
 Aim: The study aimed to compare sleep quality, body awareness, and neck disability in adults with and without NMNP. Adults with non-specific mechanical neck pain (n=89) and age-matched asymptomatic controls (n=90) were included in this cross-sectional study. Body awareness, sleep quality, and neck disability were assessed using online questionnaires. Sleep quality was assessed using the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index, body awareness was assessed using the Body Awareness Questionnaire, and neck disability was evaluated with the Neck Bournemouth Questionnaire. 
 Results: Overall, 179 adults (mean age: 24.14±22.42 years) were divided into two groups of those with and without nonspecific mechanic neck pain. Females comprised 70.2% (n=125) of the sample. Sleep quality was better and neck disability was lower in participants without NMNP (p

Additive effect of “Brahma Mudra” on pain, proprioception and functional abilities in non-specific mechanical neck pain

ObjectiveBeing the second highest musculoskeletal problem irrespective of age, gender and occupation, the etiology of neck pain is predominantly mechanical in nature. This can lead to dysfunction with time and recurrence. Altered joint position sense (JPS) from soft tissues can alter the cervical biomechanics by compromising the cephalo spatial orientation, which depends on the visual, vestibular and proprioceptive cues. This study was done to observe the additive effect of “Brahma mudra” (BM) a yogic tool on non-specific mechanical neck pain and its clinical implication on pain, proprioception and functional abilities. MethodsIt was a quasi-experimental pre –post study design involving 30 individuals from a software firm between the age group of 18–45 years. The conventional treatment group received standard physiotherapy regime and in the BM group BM was incorporated in addition to standard physiotherapy regime. Independent sample student t-test/Mann Whitney test were used to compare continuous variables between two groups. Paired sample test/Wilcoxon signed rank test were used for within groups. ResultsThere was a significant reduction in pain, improved functional abilities and proprioception in BM group when compared to conventional treatment group with 0.01 level of statistical significance. ConclusionIt may be concluded that practice of BM had an added effect to conventional standard physiotherapy regime in reduction of pain, improvement of proprioception and functional abilities among individuals with chronic non-specific mechanical neck pain.

Effect of adding stretching to standardized procedures on cervical range of motion, pain, and disability in patients with non-specific mechanical neck pain: A randomized clinical trial

Objectiveto investigate the benefit of adding stretching exercises to cervical joint mobilization and active rotation exercises for patients with non-specific mechanical neck pain. MethodsThirty-eight subjects with non-specific mechanical neck pain were randomly assigned to a standard procedure group (passive cervical mobilization and active cervical rotation range of motion exercise) or a combined procedure (passive cervical mobilization, active cervical rotation range of motion exercises, and stretching procedures). Mixed factorial analysis of variance was used to compare changes between groups over time in active cervical range of motion, Numeric Pain Rating Scale, Neck Disability Index, Global Rating of Change, and Pressure Pain Threshold. ResultsThere was a significant change in mean active range of motion in all directions, Pressure Pain Threshold, perceived pain, disability levels, and global rating of change over time (p < 0.001). There was a significant group by time interaction in mean active range of motion during extension (p = 0.01), right rotation (p = 0.004), right and left lateral flexion (p = 0.05, and p = 0.02 respectively). However, there was no significant group by time interaction in mean active range of motion during flexion, left rotation, pain intensity (p = 0.09), right and left pressure pain threshold (p = 0.30, 0.47, respectively), and disability (p = 0.07). ConclusionsBoth study groups improved significantly in all subjective and objective outcome measures. However, data from this study suggest that adding stretching to the standard procedures may be more effective than the standard procedure alone at improving cervical extension, right rotation, and lateral flexion active range of motion, but not pain and disability.

Effect of adding interferential current stimulation to exercise on outcomes in primary care patients with chronic neck pain: a randomized controlled trial

Objective: To evaluate the effect of adding interferential current stimulation to exercise on pain, disability, psychological status and range of motion in patients with neck pain. Design: A single-blinded randomized controlled trial. Setting: Primary care physiotherapy units. Subjects: A total of 84 patients diagnosed with non-specific mechanical neck pain. This sample was divided into two groups randomly: experimental (n = 42) versus control group (n = 42). Interventions: Patients in both groups had a supervised therapeutic exercise programme, with the experimental group having additional interferential current stimulation treatment. Main measures: The main measures used were intensity of neck pain according to the Visual Analogue Scale; the degree of disability according to the Neck Disability Index and the CORE Outcome Measure; anxiety and depression levels according to the Goldberg scale; apprehension as measured by the Personal Psychological Apprehension scale; and the range of motion of the cervical spine. The sample was evaluated at baseline and posttreatment (10 sessions/two weeks). Results: Statistically significant differences between groups at posttreatment were observed for Visual Analogue Scale (2.73 ± 1.24 vs 4.99 ± 1.56), Neck Disability Index scores (10.60 ± 4.77 vs 18.45 ± 9.04), CORE Outcome Measure scores (19.18 ± 9.99 vs 35.12 ± 13.36), Goldberg total score (6.17 ± 4.27 vs 7.90 ± 4.87), Goldberg Anxiety subscale, Personal Psychological Apprehension Scale scores (28.17 ± 9.61 vs 26.29 ± 11.14) and active and passive right rotation. Conclusions: Adding interferential current stimulation to exercise resulted in better immediate outcome across a range of measures.

The immediate effects of cervical spine manipulation on pain and biochemical markers in females with acute non-specific mechanical neck pain: a randomized clinical trial

ABSTRACTStudy Design: Randomized clinical trial with pre-test, post-test control group design.Objectives: To examine the immediate effects of cervical spinal manipulation (CSM) on serum concentration of biochemical markers (oxytocin, neurotensin, orexin A, and cortisol).Background: Several studies have found an association between spinal manipulation (SM) and pain perception. However, the mechanism by which SM modulates pain remains undefined.Methods: Twenty-eight female subjects with non-specific mechanical neck pain were randomly assigned to one of two interventions (CSM versus sham CSM). Blood samples were drawn before and immediately after the respective interventions. Oxytocin, neurotensin, orexin A, and cortisol were measured from the blood and serum using the Milliplex Map Magnetic Bead Panel Immunoassay on the Luminex 200 Platform.Results: In the CSM group, there were significant increases in pre- versus post-manipulation mean oxytocin (154.5 ± 60.1 vs. 185.1 ± 75.6, p = .012); neurotensin (116.0 ± 26.5 vs.136.4 ± 34.1, p < . 001); orexin A (52.2 ± 31.1 vs. 73.8 ± 38.8, p < .01) serum concentration; but no significant differences in mean cortisol (p = .052) serum concentration. In the sham group, there were no significant differences in any of the biomarkers (p > .05).Conclusion: The results of the current study suggest that the mechanical stimuli provided through a CSM may modify neuropeptide expression by immediately increasing the serum concentration of nociception-related biomarkers (oxytocin, neurotensin, orexin A, but not cortisol) in the blood of female subjects with non-specific mechanical neck pain.Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03176654.

Effectiveness of Thoracic Manipulation on the Treatment of Patients With Mechanical Non-Specific Neck Pain

Introduction: Non-specific mechanical neck pain is a common musculoskeletal complaint that is generally treated conservatively using electro/thermal therapeutic agents, exercise, soft tissue techniques, and manual therapy. In this review, we evaluated the effectiveness of Thoracic Manipulation (TM) compared to cervical manipulations, multi-level TM with single-level TM, and TM with other interventions such as electro/thermal therapy and exercise. Material and Methods: PubMed, Google scholar and PEDro database were searched from inception until May 2016 by the following keywords: “neck pain”, “thoracic manipulation”, “physical therapy treatment”, “cervical manipulation”, and different combinations. Quality of the included studies were evaluated using physiotherapy evidence database [PEDro] scale. Results: A total of 15 studies out of 47 based on PEDro score were included in this review. All studies measured pain intensity as a parameter indicating effectiveness of interventions, 9 studies measured disability as a key outcome and used either NDI or NPQ for its assessment. Conclusion: Thoracic manipulation is equally effective as cervical manipulation in reduction of pain and improving function. Thoracic manipulation is also more effective than electrotherapy or exercise therapy alone. When combined with multimodal neck program, thoracic manipulation for patients with neck pain significantly improves function and reduces pain intensity.

2016 JOSPT Awards: Additive Effects and Biological Mechanisms of Interventions Offer Important Insights.

During the American Physical Therapy Association's Combined Sections Meeting in San Antonio, TX in February 2017, JOSPT recognized the authors of the most outstanding research and clinical practice manuscripts published in JOSPT during 2016. The 2016 JOSPT Excellence in Research Award was presented to Carol A. Courtney, Alana D. Steffen, César Fernández-de-las-Peñas, John Kim, and Samuel J. Chmell, MD, for their March 2016 article "Joint Mobilization Enhances Mechanisms of Conditioned Pain Modulation in Individuals With Osteoarthritis of the Knee." The 2016 George J. Davies-James A. Gould Excellence in Clinical Inquiry Award was presented to Seyda Toprak Celenay, Turkan Akbayrak, and Derya Ozer Kaya for their February 2016 article "A Comparison of the Effects of Stabilization Exercises Plus Manual Therapy to Those of Stabilization Exercises Alone in Patients With Nonspecific Mechanical Neck Pain: A Randomized Clinical Trial." J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2017;47(4):225-227. doi:10.2519/jospt.2017.0104.

AB0667 The effectiveness of therapeutic ultrasound in non-specific mechanical cervical pain and comparison of different application methods for clinical practice

ObjectivesThe aim of this study was to investigate the effectiveness of therapeutic ultrasound (US) in non-specific mechanical neck pain, and to compare the effects of intermittent and continuous US applications...