Trial reportBMC musculoskeletal disorders2016
Three combinations of manual therapy techniques within naprapathy in the treatment of neck and/or back pain: a randomized controlled trial.
Trial report in BMC musculoskeletal disorders, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Massage for neck pain.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2024Pooled it
- The effects of osteopathic manipulative treatment on pain and disability in patients with chronic neck pain: A single-blinded randomized controlled trial.PM & R : the journal of injury, function, and rehabilitation · 2022Trial
- Vigorous regular leisure-time physical activity is associated with a clinically important improvement in back pain - a secondary analysis of randomized controlled trials.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2021Trial
- Effect of Spinal Manipulative and Mobilization Therapies in Young Adults With Mild to Moderate Chronic Low Back Pain: A Randomized Clinical Trial.JAMA network open · 2020Trial
- A randomized control trial to determine the effectiveness and physiological effects of spinal manipulation and spinal mobilization compared to each other and a sham condition in patients with chronic low back pain: Study protocol for The RELIEF Study.Contemporary clinical trials · 2018Trial
- Mechanical cues as immunomodulators in neuroinflammation-driven spinal sensitization: analgesic mechanisms and therapeutic strategies.Frontiers in immunology · 2026Review
- Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundManual therapy as spinal manipulation, spinal mobilization, stretching and massage are common treatment methods for neck and back pain. The objective was to compare the treatment effect on pain intensity, pain related disability and perceived recovery from a) naprapathic manual therapy (spinal manipulation, spinal mobilization, stretching and massage) to b) naprapathic manual therapy without spinal manipulation and to c) naprapathic manual therapy without stretching for male and female patients seeking care for back and/or neck pain.
methodParticipants were recruited among patients, ages 18-65, seeking care at the educational clinic of Naprapathögskolan - the Scandinavian College of Naprapathic Manual Medicine in Stockholm. The patients (n = 1057) were randomized to one of three treatment arms a) manual therapy (i.e. spinal manipulation, spinal mobilization, stretching and massage), b) manual therapy excluding spinal manipulation and c) manual therapy excluding stretching. The primary outcomes were minimal clinically important improvement in pain intensity and pain related disability. Treatments were provided by naprapath students in the seventh semester of eight total semesters. Generalized estimating equations and logistic regression were used to examine the association between the treatments and the outcomes.
resultsAt 12 weeks follow-up, 64% had a minimal clinically important improvement in pain intensity and 42% in pain related disability. The corresponding chances to be improved at the 52 weeks follow-up were 58% and 40% respectively. No systematic differences in effect when excluding spinal manipulation and stretching respectively from the treatment were found over 1 year follow-up, concerning minimal clinically important improvement in pain intensity (p = 0.41) and pain related disability (p = 0.85) and perceived recovery (p = 0.98). Neither were there disparities in effect when male and female patients were analyzed separately.
conclusionThe effect of manual therapy for male and female patients seeking care for neck and/or back pain at an educational clinic is similar regardless if spinal manipulation or if stretching is excluded from the treatment option.
trial registrationCurrent Controlled Trials ISRCTN92249294.
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.