Search

Purpose: An evidence-based clinical practice guideline was developed to ascertain the risks and benefits for manipulation or mobilization in treating mechanical neck disorders with or without radicular findings or cerviogenic headache. Pain, function, patient satisfaction and adverse events were appraised., Methods: The practice guideline development cycle/model and Cochrane reviewing process, critiquing past reviews, randomized trials and surveys were used., Results: Manipulation and mobilization alone showed similar effects as placebo, wait period, or control group, and appeared similar in benefit for pain relief. While high-technology exercises were superior to manipulation alone for improving long-term pain scores, manipulation plus low-technology exercise had the same effect. Patient satisfaction scores favoured manipulation plus low-technology exercise over manipulation alone, and high-technology exercise alone. Multi-modal care including some combination of manipulation or mobilizations and exercise was superior to control, other physical medicine methods, and rest. Based on weak evidence, estimates for serious complication for manipulation ranged from one in 20,000 to five in 10,000,000., Recommendations: Stronger evidence suggests a multi-modal management strategy using mobilization or manipulation plus exercise is beneficial for relief of mechanical neck pain. Weaker evidence suggest less benefit to either manipulation/mobilization done alone than when used with exercise. The risk rate is uncertain.

As part of the process of developing a Clinical Practice Guideline (CPG) on cervical spine manipulation (CSM), a working group sent out an 82-item postal survey to 150 randomly selected Ontario physiotherapists (PTs) who perform spinal manipulation, to collect information on the socio-demographics, practices, opinions of risk, and attitudes towards CPGs of these PTs (n = 118; response rate = 79%). Of the 118 respondents who performed spinal manipulation, 41 performed CSM. Respondents strongly agreed with three out of six indications listed in the survey for applying CSM: segmental fixation, stiff but stable joint, internal derangement (over 70%). Respondents also strongly agreed (over 88%) that all screening tests listed in the survey should be performed prior to applying CSM: tests for irritability, stability, vascular and neurological systems. Respondents rated patient education, other manual therapy, and exercise as the most common adjuncts to CSM (over 88%). Respondents reported seeing mild complications or side effects only rarely following the application of CSM. Fourteen percent of respondents reported having a written CSM policy or CPG on CSM in their work setting. Feedback from this survey will be used in developing a CSM CPG. A future survey will evaluate changes in clinical practice and in attitudes toward CPGs some time after the dissemination of the CSM CPG., (Copyright 2002 Elsevier Science Ltd.)