Trial reportThe spine journal : official journal of the North American Spine Society2015
Randomized clinical trial assessing whether additional massage treatments for chronic neck pain improve 12- and 26-week outcomes.
Trial report in The spine journal : official journal of the North American Spine Society, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Treatment of Cervical Syndrome With Myofascial Therapies
Vacuum Myofascial Therapy Device for Non-specific Neck Pain. A Single Blind Randomized Clinical Trial
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 25 citations in OpenAlex.
- Massage for neck pain.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2024Pooled it
- Public Awareness and Perception of Risks Associated With Neck Manipulations in Southern Saudi Arabia.Cureus · 2024Article
- Musculoskeletal Ultrasound Assessment of the Clinical Efficacy of the Combination of Acupressure and "Three Methods of Neck Movement (TCM)" Therapy in the Treatment of Cervical Spondylosis: A Study Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial.Journal of pain research · 2024Article
- Review
- Therapist-Delivered Versus Care Ally-Assisted Massage for Veterans With Chronic Neck Pain: Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial.JMIR research protocols · 2022Article
- Clinical Evidence of Chinese Massage Therapy (Evidence-based complementary and alternative medicine : eCAM · 2017Review
- Evidence-Based Evaluation of Complementary Health Approaches for Pain Management in the United States.Mayo Clinic proceedings · 2016Review
- Departing Thoughts from IJTMB's Practice & Education Section Editor: Critical Inquiry, Dichotomy vs. Continuum, and Improving TMB Discourse.International journal of therapeutic massage & bodywork · 2016Article
- Scanning the Global Literature.Global advances in health and medicine · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
background contextThis is the first study to systematically evaluate the value of a longer treatment period for massage. We provide a framework of how to conceptualize an optimal dose in this challenging setting of nonpharmacologic treatments. PURPOSE: The aim was to determine the optimal dose of massage for neck pain. STUDY DESIGN/
settingTwo-phase randomized trial for persons with chronic nonspecific neck pain. Primary randomization to one of five groups receiving 4 weeks of massage (30 minutes 2x/or 3x/wk or 60 minutes 1x, 2x, or 3x/wk). Booster randomization of participants to receive an additional six massages, 60 minutes 1x/wk, or no additional massage. PATIENT SAMPLE: A total of 179 participants from Group Health and the general population of Seattle, WA, USA recruited between June 2010 and August 2011 were included. OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcomes self-reported neck-related dysfunction (Neck Disability Index) and pain (0-10 scale) were assessed at baseline, 12, and 26 weeks. Clinically meaningful improvement was defined as greater than or equal to 5-point decrease in dysfunction and greater than or equal to 30% decrease in pain from baseline.
methodsClinically meaningful improvement for each primary outcome with both follow-up times was analyzed using adjusted modified Poisson generalized estimating equations (GEEs). Secondary analyses for the continuous outcomes used linear GEEs.
resultsThere were no observed differences by primary treatment group at 12 or 26 weeks. Those receiving booster dose had improvements in both dysfunction and pain at 12 weeks (dysfunction: relative risk [RR]=1.56 [1.08-2.25], p=.018; pain: RR=1.25 [0.98-1.61], p=.077), but those were nonsignificant at 26 weeks (dysfunction: RR=1.22 [0.85-1.74]; pain: RR=1.09 [0.82-1.43]). Subgroup analysis by primary and booster treatments found the booster dose only effective among those initially randomized to one of the 60-minute massage groups.
conclusions"Booster" doses for those initially receiving 60 minutes of massage should be incorporated into future trials of massage for chronic neck pain.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.