Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41705211›Full record

ArticleArchives of physiotherapy

Effectiveness of manual therapy as a prophylactic treatment for migraine: a randomized controlled trial.

Andreas L Amons, René F Castien, Willem De Hertogh, Johannes C van der Wouden, Jos Wr Twisk, Joost Dekker, Henriëtte E van der Horst

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Archives of physiotherapy. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

7 authors.

Andreas L AmonsDepartment of General Practice, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, Amsterdam - Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7060-1069
René F CastienDepartment of General Practice, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, Amsterdam - Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8177-7684
Willem De HertoghDepartment of Rehabilitation Sciences and Physiotherapy, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, University of Antwerp, Antwerp - Belgium.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8856-2507
Johannes C van der WoudenDepartment of General Practice, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, Amsterdam - Netherlands.
Jos Wr TwiskDepartment of Epidemiology & Data Science, Amsterdam UMC, Amsterdam - Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9617-1020
Joost DekkerDepartment of Rehabilitation Medicine and Department of Psychiatry, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, Amsterdam - Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2027-0027
Henriëtte E van der HorstDepartment of General Practice, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, Amsterdam - Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4060-4354

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Migraine is a leading cause of disability worldwide. Although effective, the use of pharmacological prophylaxis is low due to suboptimal efficacy and poor tolerability. This has led to a growing interest in non-pharmacological approaches such as manual therapy (MT), especially among patients with comorbid neck pain. While evidence for MT remains inconclusive, its adjunctive use is recommended. This study evaluated the effect of MT in patients with migraine and neck pain, compared to usual care provided by general practitioners (UC). Methods: In this randomized controlled trial in primary care, participants with migraine and neck pain were allocated to MT (n = 36) or UC (n = 31). MT included mobilizations, exercises and myofascial techniques. Follow-up assessments were performed at 12-, 26-, and 52-weeks post-inclusion. The primary outcome was the number of migraine days. Secondary outcomes included migraine intensity, disability, medication use, neck pain intensity, neck muscle endurance, pressure pain thresholds, allodynia, and perceived recovery. Results: There were no significant between-group differences in migraine days or most secondary outcomes. Compared with usual care, the MT group demonstrated significantly higher-pressure pain thresholds over the occipital muscles and reported greater perceived recovery at both 12 and 52 weeks. Use of prophylactic medication was higher in the UC group throughout follow-up. Conclusion: MT, including postural and cranio-cervical exercises, was not superior to usual care in reducing migraine days and most secondary outcomes. Still, patient preference and treatment satisfaction for MT were high and may be considered in migraine management.

Indexed as

Manual therapyMigrainePhysical therapyProphylactic treatmentRandomized controlled trial

Identifiers

PMID41705211
PMCPMC12907805

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.