Dataset Information

Thoracic spine thrust manipulation for individuals with cervicogenic headache: a crossover randomized clinical trial.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

To determine if thoracic spine manipulation (TSM) improves pain and disability in individuals with cervicogenic headache (CeH).

Methods

A randomized controlled crossover trial was conducted on 48 participants (mean age: 34.4 years) with CeH symptoms. Participants were randomized to 6 sessions of TSM or no treatment (Hold) and after 4-weeks, groups crossed over. Outcomes were collected at 4, 8 and 12 weeks and included: headache disability inventory (HDI), neck disability index (NDI), and the global rating of change (GRC). Outcomes were analyzed using a linear mixed-effects model with Bonferroni correction. Odds of achieving the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) on the GRC of +4 or greater were also calculated. Scores at 4 weeks represent the only timepoint where 1 group is fully treated and other group has not received any treatment.

Results

Comparing hold to active treatment, HDI were not significantly different between groups (mean difference = 7.39, 95 CI: -4.39 to 19.18; P = 0.214) at any timepoint; the NDI was significant (mean difference = 6.90, 95 CI: 0.05 to 13.75; P = 0.048) at 4 weeks. Odds of achieving the +4 MCID on the GRC (OR = 38.0, 95 CI: 6.6 to 220.0; p < 0.001) favored TSM at 4 weeks.

Conclusion

TSM had no effect on headache-related disability but resulted in significant improvements in neck-related disability and participant reported perceived improvement. Future studies are needed to examine the long-term impact of TSM in this population.

SUBMITTER: McDevitt AW

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8967200 | biostudies-literature | 2022 Apr

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Thoracic spine thrust manipulation for individuals with cervicogenic headache: a crossover randomized clinical trial.

McDevitt Amy W AW Cleland Joshua A JA Rhon Daniel I DI Altic Rebecca A K RAK Courtney Drew J DJ Glynn Paul E PE Mintken Paul E PE

The Journal of manual & manipulative therapy 20210716 2

<h4>Objective</h4>To determine if thoracic spine manipulation (TSM) improves pain and disability in individuals with cervicogenic headache (CeH).<h4>Methods</h4>A randomized controlled crossover trial was conducted on 48 participants (mean age: 34.4 years) with CeH symptoms. Participants were randomized to 6 sessions of TSM or no treatment (Hold) and after 4-weeks, groups crossed over. Outcomes were collected at 4, 8 and 12 weeks and included: headache disability inventory (HDI), neck disability ...[more]

PMID: 34269160

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThere is ample evidence supporting the use of different manipulative therapy techniques for Cervicogenic Headache (CgH). However, no technique can be singled as the best available treatment for patients with CgH. Therefore, the objective of the study is to find and compare the clinical effects of cervical spine over thoracic spine manipulation and conventional physiotherapy in patients with CgH.Design, setting, and participantsIt is a prospective, randomized controlled study conducted between July 2020 and January 2023 at the University hospital. N = 96 eligible patients with CgH were selected based on selection criteria and they were divided into cervical spine manipulation (CSM; n = 32), thoracic spine manipulation (TSM; n = 32) and conventional physiotherapy (CPT; n = 32) groups, and received the respective treatment for four weeks. Primary (CgH frequency) and secondary CgH pain intensity, CgH disability, neck pain frequency, neck pain intensity, neck pain threshold, cervical flexion rotation test (CFRT), neck disability index (NDI) and quality of life (QoL) scores were measured. The effects of treatment at various intervals were analyzed using a 3 × 4 linear mixed model analysis (LMM), with treatment group (cervical spine manipulation, thoracic spine manipulation, and conventional physiotherapy) and time intervals (baseline, 4 weeks, 8 weeks, and 6 months), and the statistical significance level was set at P < 0.05.ResultsThe reports of the CSM, TSM and CPT groups were compared between the groups. Four weeks following treatment CSM group showed more significant changes in primary (CgH frequency) and secondary (CgH pain intensity, CgH disability, neck pain frequency, pain intensity, pain threshold, CFRT, NDI and QoL) than the TSM and CPT groups (p = 0.001). The same gradual improvement was seen in the CSM group when compared to TSM and CPT groups (p = 0.001) in the above variables at 8 weeks and 6 months follow-up.ConclusionThe reports of the current randomized clinical study found that CSM resulted in significantly better improvements in pain parameters (intensity, frequency and threshold) functional disability and quality of life in patients with CgH than thoracic spine manipulation and conventional physiotherapy.Trial registrationClinical trial registration: CTRI/2020/06/026092 trial was registered prospectively on 24/06/2020.

Project description:BackgroundAlthough commonly utilized interventions, no studies have directly compared the effectiveness of cervical and thoracic manipulation to mobilization and exercise in individuals with cervicogenic headache (CH). The purpose of this study was to compare the effects of manipulation to mobilization and exercise in individuals with CH.MethodsOne hundred and ten participants (n = 110) with CH were randomized to receive both cervical and thoracic manipulation (n = 58) or mobilization and exercise (n = 52). The primary outcome was headache intensity as measured by the Numeric Pain Rating Scale (NPRS). Secondary outcomes included headache frequency, headache duration, disability as measured by the Neck Disability Index (NDI), medication intake, and the Global Rating of Change (GRC). The treatment period was 4 weeks with follow-up assessment at 1 week, 4 weeks, and 3 months after initial treatment session. The primary aim was examined with a 2-way mixed-model analysis of variance (ANOVA), with treatment group (manipulation versus mobilization and exercise) as the between subjects variable and time (baseline, 1 week, 4 weeks and 3 months) as the within subjects variable.ResultsThe 2X4 ANOVA demonstrated that individuals with CH who received both cervical and thoracic manipulation experienced significantly greater reductions in headache intensity (p < 0.001) and disability (p < 0.001) than those who received mobilization and exercise at a 3-month follow-up. Individuals in the upper cervical and upper thoracic manipulation group also experienced less frequent headaches and shorter duration of headaches at each follow-up period (p < 0.001 for all). Additionally, patient perceived improvement was significantly greater at 1 and 4-week follow-up periods in favor of the manipulation group (p < 0.001).ConclusionsSix to eight sessions of upper cervical and upper thoracic manipulation were shown to be more effective than mobilization and exercise in patients with CH, and the effects were maintained at 3 months.Trial registrationNCT01580280 April 16, 2012.

Project description:BACKGROUND CONTEXT:The optimal number of visits for the care of cervicogenic headache (CGH) with spinal manipulative therapy (SMT) is unknown. PURPOSE:The present study aimed to identify the dose-response relationship between visits for SMT and chronic CGH outcomes and to evaluate the efficacy of SMT by comparison with a light-massage control. STUDY DESIGN/SETTING:This is a two-site, open-label randomized controlled trial. PATIENT SAMPLE:Participants were 256 adults with chronic CGH. OUTCOME MEASURES:The primary outcome was days with CGH in the previous 4 weeks evaluated at the 12- and 24-week primary end points. Secondary outcomes included CGH days at remaining end points, pain intensity, disability, perceived improvement, medication use, and patient satisfaction. METHODS:Participants were randomized to four dose levels of chiropractic SMT: 0, 6, 12, or 18 sessions. They were treated three times per week for 6 weeks and received a focused light-massage control at sessions when SMT was not assigned. Linear dose effects and comparisons with the no-manipulation control group were evaluated at 6, 12, 24, 39, and 52 weeks. The present study was funded by the National Center for Complementary and Integrative Health (R01AT006330) and is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01530321). The authors declare no conflicts of interest. RESULTS:A linear dose-response was observed for all follow-ups, a reduction of approximately 1 CGH day/4 weeks per additional 6 SMT visits (p<.05); a maximal effective dose could not be determined. Cervicogenic headache days/4 weeks were reduced from about 16 to 8 for the highest and most effective dose of 18 SMT visits. Mean differences in CGH days/4 weeks between 18 SMT visits and control were -3.3 (p=.004) and -2.9 (p=.017) at the primary end points, and were similar in magnitude at the remaining end points (p<.05). Differences between other SMT doses and control were smaller in magnitude (p>.05). Cervicogenic headache intensity showed no important improvement nor differed by dose. Other secondary outcomes were generally supportive of the primary outcome. CONCLUSIONS:There was a linear dose-response relationship between SMT visits and days with CGH. For the highest and most effective dose of 18 SMT visits, CGH days were reduced by half and about 3 more days per month than for the light-massage control.

Dataset Information

Thoracic spine thrust manipulation for individuals with cervicogenic headache: a crossover randomized clinical trial.

Objective

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Publications

Thoracic spine thrust manipulation for individuals with cervicogenic headache: a crossover randomized clinical trial.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets