Thoracic spine thrust manipulation improves pain, range of motion, and self-reported function in patients with mechanical neck pain

A systematic review

Kevin M. Cross, Chris Kuenze, Terry L. Grindstaff, Jay Hertel

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

63 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

STUDY DESIGN: Systematic review. BACKGROUND: Neck pain is a common diagnosis in the physical therapy setting, yet there is no gold standard for treatment. This study is part of a growing body of literature on the use of thoracic spine thrust manipulation for the treatment of individuals with mechanical neck pain. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this systematic review was to determine the effects of thoracic spine thrust manipulation on pain, range of motion, and self-reported function in patients with mechanical neck pain. METHODS: Six online databases were comprehensively searched from their respective inception to October 2010. The primary search terms included "thoracic mobilization," "thoracic spine mobilization," "thoracic manipulation," and "thoracic spine manipulation." Of the 44 studies assessed for inclusion, 6 randomized controlled trials were retained. Between-group mean differences and effect sizes for pretreatment-to-posttreatment change scores, using Cohen's d formula, were calculated for pain, range of motion, and subjective function at all stated time intervals. RESULTS: Effect size point estimates for the pain change scores were significant for global assessment across all studies (range, 0.38-4.03) but not conclusively significant at the end range of active rotation (range, 0.02-1.79). Effect size point estimates were large among all range-of-motion change measures (range, 1.40-3.52), and the effect size point estimates of the change scores among the functional questionnaires (range, 0.47-3.64) also indicated a significant treatment effect. CONCLUSIONS: Thoracic spine thrust manipulation may provide short-term improvement in patients with acute or subacute mechanical neck pain. However, the body of literature is weak, and these results may not be generalizable.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)633-643
Number of pages11
JournalJournal of Orthopaedic and Sports Physical Therapy
Volume41
Issue number9
DOIs
StatePublished - Sep 2011

Fingerprint

Neck Pain
Articular Range of Motion
Spine
Thorax
Pain
Therapeutics
Randomized Controlled Trials
Databases

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Physical Therapy, Sports Therapy and Rehabilitation

Cite this

@article{6edfbabf39f24c259b69149e09ba395e,
title = "Thoracic spine thrust manipulation improves pain, range of motion, and self-reported function in patients with mechanical neck pain: A systematic review",
abstract = "STUDY DESIGN: Systematic review. BACKGROUND: Neck pain is a common diagnosis in the physical therapy setting, yet there is no gold standard for treatment. This study is part of a growing body of literature on the use of thoracic spine thrust manipulation for the treatment of individuals with mechanical neck pain. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this systematic review was to determine the effects of thoracic spine thrust manipulation on pain, range of motion, and self-reported function in patients with mechanical neck pain. METHODS: Six online databases were comprehensively searched from their respective inception to October 2010. The primary search terms included {"}thoracic mobilization,{"} {"}thoracic spine mobilization,{"} {"}thoracic manipulation,{"} and {"}thoracic spine manipulation.{"} Of the 44 studies assessed for inclusion, 6 randomized controlled trials were retained. Between-group mean differences and effect sizes for pretreatment-to-posttreatment change scores, using Cohen's d formula, were calculated for pain, range of motion, and subjective function at all stated time intervals. RESULTS: Effect size point estimates for the pain change scores were significant for global assessment across all studies (range, 0.38-4.03) but not conclusively significant at the end range of active rotation (range, 0.02-1.79). Effect size point estimates were large among all range-of-motion change measures (range, 1.40-3.52), and the effect size point estimates of the change scores among the functional questionnaires (range, 0.47-3.64) also indicated a significant treatment effect. CONCLUSIONS: Thoracic spine thrust manipulation may provide short-term improvement in patients with acute or subacute mechanical neck pain. However, the body of literature is weak, and these results may not be generalizable.",
author = "Cross, {Kevin M.} and Chris Kuenze and Grindstaff, {Terry L.} and Jay Hertel",
year = "2011",
month = "9",
doi = "10.2519/jospt.2011.3670",
language = "English",
volume = "41",
pages = "633--643",
journal = "Journal of Orthopaedic and Sports Physical Therapy",
issn = "0190-6011",
publisher = "JOSPT",
number = "9",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Thoracic spine thrust manipulation improves pain, range of motion, and self-reported function in patients with mechanical neck pain

T2 - A systematic review

AU - Cross, Kevin M.

AU - Kuenze, Chris

AU - Grindstaff, Terry L.

AU - Hertel, Jay

PY - 2011/9

Y1 - 2011/9

N2 - STUDY DESIGN: Systematic review. BACKGROUND: Neck pain is a common diagnosis in the physical therapy setting, yet there is no gold standard for treatment. This study is part of a growing body of literature on the use of thoracic spine thrust manipulation for the treatment of individuals with mechanical neck pain. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this systematic review was to determine the effects of thoracic spine thrust manipulation on pain, range of motion, and self-reported function in patients with mechanical neck pain. METHODS: Six online databases were comprehensively searched from their respective inception to October 2010. The primary search terms included "thoracic mobilization," "thoracic spine mobilization," "thoracic manipulation," and "thoracic spine manipulation." Of the 44 studies assessed for inclusion, 6 randomized controlled trials were retained. Between-group mean differences and effect sizes for pretreatment-to-posttreatment change scores, using Cohen's d formula, were calculated for pain, range of motion, and subjective function at all stated time intervals. RESULTS: Effect size point estimates for the pain change scores were significant for global assessment across all studies (range, 0.38-4.03) but not conclusively significant at the end range of active rotation (range, 0.02-1.79). Effect size point estimates were large among all range-of-motion change measures (range, 1.40-3.52), and the effect size point estimates of the change scores among the functional questionnaires (range, 0.47-3.64) also indicated a significant treatment effect. CONCLUSIONS: Thoracic spine thrust manipulation may provide short-term improvement in patients with acute or subacute mechanical neck pain. However, the body of literature is weak, and these results may not be generalizable.

AB - STUDY DESIGN: Systematic review. BACKGROUND: Neck pain is a common diagnosis in the physical therapy setting, yet there is no gold standard for treatment. This study is part of a growing body of literature on the use of thoracic spine thrust manipulation for the treatment of individuals with mechanical neck pain. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this systematic review was to determine the effects of thoracic spine thrust manipulation on pain, range of motion, and self-reported function in patients with mechanical neck pain. METHODS: Six online databases were comprehensively searched from their respective inception to October 2010. The primary search terms included "thoracic mobilization," "thoracic spine mobilization," "thoracic manipulation," and "thoracic spine manipulation." Of the 44 studies assessed for inclusion, 6 randomized controlled trials were retained. Between-group mean differences and effect sizes for pretreatment-to-posttreatment change scores, using Cohen's d formula, were calculated for pain, range of motion, and subjective function at all stated time intervals. RESULTS: Effect size point estimates for the pain change scores were significant for global assessment across all studies (range, 0.38-4.03) but not conclusively significant at the end range of active rotation (range, 0.02-1.79). Effect size point estimates were large among all range-of-motion change measures (range, 1.40-3.52), and the effect size point estimates of the change scores among the functional questionnaires (range, 0.47-3.64) also indicated a significant treatment effect. CONCLUSIONS: Thoracic spine thrust manipulation may provide short-term improvement in patients with acute or subacute mechanical neck pain. However, the body of literature is weak, and these results may not be generalizable.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=80052462086&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=80052462086&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.2519/jospt.2011.3670

DO - 10.2519/jospt.2011.3670

M3 - Review article

VL - 41

SP - 633

EP - 643

JO - Journal of Orthopaedic and Sports Physical Therapy

JF - Journal of Orthopaedic and Sports Physical Therapy

SN - 0190-6011

IS - 9

ER -