Observational studyChiropractic & manual therapies2021
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.
Observational study in Chiropractic & manual therapies, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Continuous Non-Invasive Assessment of Segmental Cervical Motion: A Narrative Review and Validation Framework.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Cross-validation of two independent methods to analyze the sequence of segmental contributions in the cervical spine in extension cineradiographic recordings.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2025Article
- An observational study of quality of motion in the aging cervical spine: sequence of segmental contributions in dynamic fluoroscopy recordings.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2024Observational
- Effects of experimental pain on the cervical spine reposition errors.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIn clinical diagnosis, the maximum motion of a cervical joint is thought to be found at the joint's end-range and it is this perception that forms the basis for the interpretation of flexion/extension imaging studies. There have however, been representative cases of joints producing their maximum motion before end-range, but this phenomenon is yet to be quantified. PURPOSE: To provide a quantitative assessment of the difference between maximum joint motion and joint end-range in healthy subjects. Secondarily to classify joints into type based on their motion and to assess the proportions of these joint types. STUDY
designThis is an observational study. SUBJECT SAMPLE: Thirty-three healthy subjects participated in the study. OUTCOME MEASURES: Maximum motion, end-range motion and surplus motion (the difference between maximum motion and end-range) in degrees were extracted from each cervical joint.
methodsThirty-three subjects performed one flexion and one extension motion excursion under video fluoroscopy. The motion excursions were divided into 10% epochs, from which maximum motion, end-range and surplus motion were extracted. Surplus motion was then assessed in quartiles and joints were classified into type according to end-range.
resultsFor flexion 48.9% and for extension 47.2% of joints produced maximum motion before joint end-range (type S). For flexion 45.9% and for extension 46.8% of joints produced maximum motion at joint end-range (type C). For flexion 5.2% of joints and for extension 6.1% of joints concluded their motion anti-directionally (type A). Significant differences were found for C2/C3 (P = 0.000), C3/C4 (P = 0.001) and C4/C5 (P = 0.005) in flexion and C1/C2 (P = 0.004), C3/C4 (P = 0.013) and C6/C7 (P = 0.013) in extension when comparing the joint end- range of type C and type S. The average pro-directional (motion in the direction of neck motion) surplus motion was 2.41° ± 2.12° with a range of (0.07° -14.23°) for flexion and 2.02° ± 1.70° with a range of (0.04°-6.97°) for extension.
conclusionThis is the first study to categorise joints by type of motion. It cannot be assumed that end-range is a demonstration of a joint's maximum motion, as type S constituted approximately half of the joints analysed in this study.
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.