ArticleBMC musculoskeletal disorders2017
Cervical spine reposition errors after cervical flexion and extension.
Article in BMC musculoskeletal disorders, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Review
- Cervical Proprioception Assessed through Targeted Head Repositioning: Validation of a Clinical Test Based on Optoelectronic Measures.Brain sciences · 2023Article
- Outcomes of active cervical therapeutic exercise on dynamic intervertebral foramen changes in neck pain patients with disc herniation.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2022Article
- Effects of experimental pain on the cervical spine reposition errors.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2022Article
- The global end-ranges of neck flexion and extension do not represent the maximum rotational ranges of the cervical intervertebral joints in healthy adults - an observational study.Chiropractic & manual therapies · 2021Observational
- Experimental assessment of cervical ranges of motion and compensatory strategies.Chiropractic & manual therapies · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundUpright head and neck position has been frequently applied as baseline for diagnosis of neck problems. However, the variance of the position after cervical motions has never been demonstrated. Thus, it is unclear if the baseline position varies evenly across the cervical joints. The purpose was to assess reposition errors of upright cervical spine.
methodsCervical reposition errors were measured in twenty healthy subjects (6 females) using video-fluoroscopy. Two flexion movements were performed with a 20 s interval, the same was repeated for extension, with an interval of 5 min between flexion and extension movements. Cervical joint positions were assessed with anatomical landmarks and external markers in a Matlab program. Reposition errors were extracted in degrees (initial position minus reposition) as constant errors (CEs) and absolute errors (AEs).
resultsTwelve of twenty-eight CEs (7 joints times 4 repositions) exceeded the minimal detectable change (MDC), while all AEs exceeded the MDC. Averaged AEs across the cervical joints were larger after 5 min' intervals compared to 20 s intervals (p < 0.05).
conclusionsThis is the first study to demonstrate single joint reposition errors of the cervical spine. The cervical spine returns to the upright positions with a 2° average absolute difference after cervical flexion and extension movements in healthy adults.
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.