Do changes within a manual therapy treatment session predict between-session changes for patients with cervical spine pain?

Australian Journal of Physiotherapy

Volumn 51, Issue 1, 2005, Pages 43-48

  Tuttle, Neil ^a  

^a GRIFFITH UNIVERSITY   (Australia)

Author keywords

Neck pain; Physiotherapy; Predictive value of tests; Range of motion

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CERVICAL SPINE; CLINICAL ARTICLE; CONTROLLED STUDY; HUMAN; JOINT FUNCTION; MANIPULATIVE MEDICINE; MEASUREMENT; MUSCULOSKELETAL DISEASE; NECK PAIN; PAIN ASSESSMENT; PREDICTION; REGRESSION ANALYSIS; TREATMENT PLANNING; VALIDATION PROCESS; VISUAL ANALOG SCALE;

EID: 15344340074     PISSN: 00049514     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0004-9514(05)70052-0     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. Aina A, May S and Clare H (2004): The centralisation phenomenon of spinal symptoms - A systemic review. Manual Therapy 9: 134-143.
2. Birkmeyer NJ, Weintein JN, Tosteson AN, Tosteson TD, Skinner JS, Lurie JD, Deyo R and Wennberg JE (2002): Design of the Spine Patient Outcomes Research Trail (SPORT). Spine 27: 1361-1372.
3. Bland JM and Altman DG (1999): Measuring agreement in method comparison studies. Statistical Methods in Medical Reseach 8: 135-160.
4. Cassidy JD, Lopes AA and Yong-Hing K (1992): The immediate effect of manipulation versus mobilization on pain and range of motion in the cervical spine: a randomized controlled trial. Journal of Manipulative and Physiological Therapeutics 15: 570-575.
5. Cassidy JD, Quon JA, LaFrance LJ and Yong-Hing K (1992): The effect of manipulation on pain and range of motion in the cervical spine: a pilot study. Journal of Manipulative and Physiological Therapeutics 15: 495-500.
6. Castro WH, Sautmann A, Schilgen M and Sautman M (2000): Noninvasive three-dimensional analysis of cervical spine motion in normal subjects in relation to age and sex. An experimental examination. Spine 25: 443-449.
7. Dall'Alba PT. Sterling MM, Treleaven JM, Edwards SL and Jull GA (2001): Cervical range of motion discriminates between asymptomatic persons and those with whiplash. Spine 26: 2090-4.
8. Dvir Z and Prushansky T (2000): Reproducibility and instrument validity of a new ultrasonography-based system for measuring cervical spine kinematics. Clinical Biomechanics 15: 658-64.
9. Feipel V, Rondelet B, Le Pallec J and Rooze M (1999): Normal global motion of the cervical spine: An electrogoniometric study. Clinical Biomechanics 14: 462-470.
10. Ferrario VF, Sforza C, Serrao G, Grassi G and Mossi E (2002): Active range of motion of the head and cervical spine: A three-dimensional investigation in healthy young adults. Journal of Orthopedic Research 20: 122-129.
11. Grant R (2002): Efficacy of manual therapy in the treatment of neck pain. In Grant R (Ed.): Physical Therapy of the Cervical and Thoracic Spine. Edinburgh: Churchill Livingstone, p. 410.
12. Hagen KB, Harms-Ringdahl K, Enger NO, Hedenstad R and Morten H (1997): Relationship between subjective neck disorders and cervical spine mobility and motion-related pain in male machine operators. Spine 22: 1501-1507.
13. Hagg O, Fritzell P, Oden A and Nordwall A (2002): Simplifying outcome measurement: Evaluation of instruments for measuring outcome after fusion surgery for chronic low back pain. Spine 27: 1213-1222.
14. Hahne AJ, Keating JL and Wilson SC (2004): Do within-session changes in pain intensity and range of motion predict between-treatment changes in patients with low back pain? Australian Journal of Physiotherapy 50: 17-23.
15. Jordan K, Dziedzic K, Jones PW, Ong BN and Dawes PT (2000): The reliability of the three-dimensional FASTRAK measurement system in measuring cervical spine and shoulder range of motion in healthy subjects. Rheumatology 39: 382-388.
16. Korthals-de Bos IB, Hoving JL, van Tulder MW, Rutten-van Molken MP, Ader HJ, de Vet HC, Koes BW, Vondeling H and Bouter LM (2003): Cost effectiveness of physiotherapy, manual therapy, and general practitioner care for neck pain: Economic evaluation alongside a randomised controlled trial. BMJ 326: 911.
17. Kotaska A (2004): Inappropriate use of randomised trials to evaluate complex phenomena: Case study of vaginal breech delivery. BMJ 329: 1039-1042.
18. Lowry R (2004): VassarStats. http://faculty.vassar.edu/lowry/vshome.hml. [Accessed 20 September 2004.]
19. Maitland G (1964): Vertebral Manipulation. London: Butterworths.
20. Mannion AF, Dvorak J, Muntener M and Grob D (2003): Prospective study of changes in self-rated disability and range of motion of the lumbar spine in patients with disc herniation undergoing decompression surgery. In International Society for the Study of the Lumbar Spine Conference, Vancouver. Abstract 107.
21. National Health and Medical Research Council (2003): Australian Acute Musculoskeletal Pain Guidelines. Bowen Hills: Australian Academic Press.
22. Refshauge K and Gass E (2004): Musculoskeletal Physiotherapy: Clinical Science and Practice. London: Butterworth Heinemann.
23. Sforza C, Grassi G, Fragnito N, Turci M and Ferrario V (2002): Three-dimensional analysis of active head and cervical spine range of motion: effect of age in healthy male subjects. Clinical Biomechanics 17: 611-614.
24. Walsh T (2001): Point of view. Spine 26: 765.
25. Werneke M and Hart DL (2001): Centralization phenomenon as a prognostic factor for chronic low back pain and disability. Spine 26: 758-764; discussion 765.
26. Werneke M and Hart DL (2003): Discriminant validity and relative precision for classifying patients with nonspecific neck and back pain by anatomic pain pattern. Spine 28: 161-166.
27. Werneke M, Hart DL and Cook D (2001): A descriptive study of the centralisation phenomenon. A prospective analysis. Spine 24: 676-683.
28. Whittingham W and Nilsson N (2001): Active range of motion in the cervical spine increases after spinal manipulation (toggle recoil). Journal of Manipulative and Physiological Therapeutics 24: 552-555.