首页> 外文OA文献 >Manual and Instrument Applied Cervical Manipulation for Mechanical Neck Pain: A Randomized Controlled Trial
【2h】

Manual and Instrument Applied Cervical Manipulation for Mechanical Neck Pain: A Randomized Controlled Trial

机译:手动和仪器应用颈椎操作治疗机械性颈部疼痛:一项随机对照试验

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

Objective: The purpose of this study was to compare the effects of 2 different cervical manipulation techniques for mechanical neck pain (MNP). Methods: Participants with MNP of at least 1 month's duration (n = 65) were randomly allocated to 3 groups: (1) stretching (control), (2) stretching plus manually applied manipulation (MAM), and (3) stretching plus instrument-applied manipulation (IAM). MAM consisted of a single high-velocity, low-amplitude cervical chiropractic manipulation, whereas IAM involved the application of a single cervical manipulation using an (Activator IV) adjusting instrument. Preintervention and postintervention measurements were taken of all outcomes measures. Pain was the primary outcome and was measured using visual analogue scale and pressure pain thresholds. Secondary outcomes included cervical range of motion, hand grip-strength, and wrist blood pressure. Follow-up subjective pain scores were obtained via telephone text message 7 days postintervention. Results: Subjective pain scores decreased at 7-day follow-up in the MAM group compared with control (P = .015). Cervical rotation bilaterally (ipsilateral: P = .002; contralateral: P = .015) and lateral flexion on the contralateral side to manipulation (P = .001) increased following MAM. Hand grip-strength on the contralateral side to manipulation (P = .013) increased following IAM. No moderate or severe adverse events were reported. Mild adverse events were reported on 6 occasions (control, 4; MAM, 1; IAM, 1). Conclusion: This study demonstrates that a single cervical manipulation is capable of producing immediate and short-term benefits for MNP. The study also demonstrates that not all manipulative techniques have the same effect and that the differences may be mediated by neurological or biomechanical factors inherent to each technique.
机译:目的:本研究的目的是比较2种不同的宫颈操纵技术对机械颈部疼痛(MNP)的影响。方法:将至少1个月的持续时间(n = 65)的参与者随机分配给3组:(1)拉伸(控制),(2)拉伸加上手动施加的操纵(MAM),以及(3)拉伸加仪器 - 应用操作(IAM)。 MAM由单一的高速,低振幅脊椎疗法操作组成,而IAM涉及使用(Activator IV)调节仪器的单颈操操作。所有结果措施都采取了预领取和后期测量。疼痛是主要结果,并使用视觉模拟刻度和压力疼痛阈值测量。二次结果包括宫颈范围的运动,手柄强度和腕部压力。通过电话发短信7天后获得后续主观疼痛评分。结果:与对照(P = .015)相比,MAM组7天的7天随访时,主观疼痛评分减少(P = .015)。颈部旋转双侧(Ipsilidatallal:P = .002;对侧:对侧侧的横向屈曲,以操纵(P = .001)玛姆增加。手动夹持强度对侧侧以操纵(P = .013)在IAM后增加。没有报道不良或严重的不良事件。 6场场合报告了温和的不良事件(控制,4; MAM,1; IAM,1)。结论:本研究表明,单宫颈操纵能够为MNP产生即时和短期的益处。该研究还表明,并非所有操纵技术都具有相同的效果,并且可以通过每个技术固有的神经学或生物力学因素介导的差异。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号