Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34259850›Full record

Trial reportJAMA network open2021

Chuna Manual Therapy vs Usual Care for Patients With Nonspecific Chronic Neck Pain: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Jinho Lee, Jae-Heung Cho, Koh-Woon Kim, Jun-Hwan Lee, Me-Riong Kim, Joowon Kim, Min-Young Kim, Hyun-Woo Cho, Yoon Jae Lee, Sook-Hyun Lee and 4 more

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract readRandomized Controlled TrialPragmatic Clinical Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in JAMA network open, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03294785 (Comparative Effectiveness and Cost-effectiveness of Chuna Manual Therapy for Chronic Neck Pain), which is not on this map. Cited by 23 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed
4.8field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

NCT03294785 nacompletednot on this map

Comparative Effectiveness and Cost-effectiveness of Chuna Manual Therapy for Chronic Neck Pain: A Multi-center Randomized Controlled Trial

TypeinterventionalSponsorJaseng Medical FoundationRan2017 to 2019Enrolled108ConditionsChronic Neck PainArmsChuna manual therapy, Conventional medication, Physical therapy
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

23 citing papers in PubMed, 40 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

14 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.

Jinho LeeJaseng Hospital of Korean Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
Jae-Heung ChoDepartment of Korean Rehabilitation Medicine, College of Korean Medicine, Kyung Hee University, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
Koh-Woon KimDepartment of Korean Rehabilitation Medicine, College of Korean Medicine, Kyung Hee University, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
Jun-Hwan LeeClinical Research Division, Korea Institute of Oriental Medicine, Daejeon, Republic of Korea.
Me-Riong KimJaseng Medical Academy, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
Joowon KimBucheon Jaseng Hospital of Korean Medicine, Bucheon, Republic of Korea.
Min-Young KimDaejeon Jaseng Hospital of Korean Medicine, Daejeon, Republic of Korea.
Hyun-Woo ChoHaeundae Jaseng Hospital of Korean Medicine, Busan, Republic of Korea.
Yoon Jae LeeJaseng Spine and Joint Research Institute, Jaseng Medical Foundation, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
Sook-Hyun LeeJaseng Spine and Joint Research Institute, Jaseng Medical Foundation, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
Joon-Shik ShinJaseng Hospital of Korean Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
Lawrence L ProkopDepartment of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, College of Osteopathic Medicine, Michigan State University, East Lansing.
Byung-Cheul ShinSchool of Korean Medicine, Pusan National University, Yangsan, Kyungnam, Republic of Korea.
In-Hyuk HaJaseng Spine and Joint Research Institute, Jaseng Medical Foundation, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
Jaseng Hospital of Korean Medicine · KRJaseng Medical Foundation · KRKyung Hee University · KRMichigan State University · USPusan National University · KR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: The incidence rate of neck pain is increasing worldwide, and the disease is associated with a high social burden. Manual therapy has been widely applied in the treatment of neck pain, but a high-quality, pragmatic randomized clinical trial for this treatment has not been conducted to date. Objective: This study aimed to compare the effectiveness of Chuna manual therapy with that of usual care for patients with chronic neck pain. Design, Setting, and Participants: A multicenter, assessor-blinded, pragmatic, randomized clinical trial was conducted between October 18, 2017, and June 28, 2019. This intention-to-treat analysis included 108 patients with chronic neck pain persisting for at least 3 months; patients were recruited from 5 hospitals in Korea. Interventions: Ten sessions (2 sessions per week for 5 weeks) of Chuna manual therapy or usual care (electrotherapy and oral medication) were conducted. Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcome was the difference in visual analog scale (VAS) score for chronic neck pain between baseline and 5 weeks after randomization. Results: This randomized clinical trial recruited 108 patients (mean [SD] age, 38.4 [9.3] years; 73 women [67.6%]). Fifty-four patients were allocated to the Chuna therapy group, and 54 received usual care. At 5 weeks after randomization, manual therapy showed statistically superior results compared with usual care in terms of pain (difference in chronic neck pain VAS, 16.8 mm; 95% CI, 10.1-23.5 mm), function (difference in Neck Disability Index, 8.6%; 95% CI, 4.2%-13.1%), and quality of life (difference in the European Quality of Life-5 Dimension 5 Levels (EQ-5D-5L) scores, -0.07 points; 95% CI, -0.11 to -0.02 points). Regarding the 1-year cumulative values measured using area under the curve analyses, superior outcomes were attained in the manual therapy group in terms of the numerical rating scale for chronic neck pain (1.3 points; 95% CI, 0.5-2.0 points), Neck Disability Index (6.7%; 95% CI, 2.5%-10.9%), Neck Pain Questionnaire (7.4%; 95% CI, 2.3%-12.6%), and EQ-5D-5L scores (-0.03 points; -0.07 to 0.00 points). Conclusions and Relevance: In this randomized clinical trial, for patients with chronic neck pain, Chuna manual therapy was more effective than usual care in terms of pain and functional recovery at 5 weeks and 1 year after randomization. These results support the need to consider recommending manual therapies as primary care treatments for chronic neck pain. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03294785.

Indexed as

AdultChronic PainElectric Stimulation TherapyFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedMusculoskeletal ManipulationsNeck PainRepublic of KoreaSurveys and Questionnaires

Identifiers

PMID34259850
PMCPMC8280970
OpenAlexW3181558923

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

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.