Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37550491›Full record

Trial reportScientific reports2023

Immediate systemic neuroimmune responses following spinal mobilisation and manipulation in people with non-specific neck pain: a randomised placebo-controlled trial.

Ivo J Lutke Schipholt, Michel W Coppieters, Martine Reijm, Hetty J Bontkes, Gwendolyne G M Scholten-Peeters

Open access · goldAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Scientific reports, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 21% 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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Review
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.

Ivo J Lutke SchipholtDepartment of Human Movement Sciences, Faculty of Behavioural and Movement Sciences, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam Movement Sciences, Program Musculoskeletal Health, Van Der Boechorststraat 9, 1081BT, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6524-7245
Michel W CoppietersDepartment of Human Movement Sciences, Faculty of Behavioural and Movement Sciences, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam Movement Sciences, Program Musculoskeletal Health, Van Der Boechorststraat 9, 1081BT, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3958-4408
Martine ReijmLaboratory Medical Immunology, Department of Clinical Chemistry, Amsterdam University Medical Centre, Location VUmc, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Hetty J BontkesLaboratory Medical Immunology, Department of Clinical Chemistry, Amsterdam University Medical Centre, Location VUmc, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3562-293X
Gwendolyne G M Scholten-PeetersDepartment of Human Movement Sciences, Faculty of Behavioural and Movement Sciences, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam Movement Sciences, Program Musculoskeletal Health, Van Der Boechorststraat 9, 1081BT, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. g.g.m.scholten-peeters@vu.nl.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4409-9554
Amsterdam University Medical Centers · NLDepartment of Health · ZAGriffith University · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Spinal mobilisation/manipulation is a common intervention for spinal pain, yet the working mechanisms are largely unknown. A randomised placebo-controlled trial was conducted to (1) compare the immediate neuroimmune responses following spinal mobilisation/manipulation and placebo spinal mobilisation/manipulation; (2) compare the immediate neuroimmune responses of those with a good outcome with those of a poor outcome following spinal mobilisation/manipulation; and (3) explore the association between neuroimmune responses and pain reduction. One hundred patients were randomly allocated to spinal mobilisation/manipulation or a placebo mobilisation/manipulation. Primary outcomes were whole blood in-vitro evoked released concentrations of IL-1β and TNF-α measured 10 min and 2 h after the intervention. Immediate effects were studied because successful mobilisation/manipulation is often associated with immediate pain reduction, and immediate neuroimmune responses are less affected by potential confounders than long-term responses. Secondary outcomes included multiple systemic inflammatory marker concentrations, phenotypic analysis of white blood cells and clinical outcomes. Outcomes were compared between the experimental and placebo group, and between people with a good and poor outcome in the experimental group. Estimates of intervention effects were based on intention-to-treat analyses, by using linear mixed-effect models. Although there was a substantial difference in pain reduction between groups (mean (SD) difference visual analogue scale: 30 (21) mm at 10 min and 32 (21) mm at 2 h (p < 0.001) in favour of mobilisation/manipulation, there were no differences in primary outcomes between groups or between people with a good and poor outcome (p ≥ 0.10). In conclusion, possible neuroimmune responses following spinal mobilisations/manipulation cannot be identified at a systemic level. Future research may focus on longer treatment duration and more localised neuroimmune responses.

Indexed as

Manipulation, SpinalNeck PainDuration of TherapyHumansNeck

Identifiers

PMID37550491
PMCPMC10406885
OpenAlexW4385638180

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.