Effectiveness of Manual Joint Mobilization Techniques in the Treatment of Nonspecific Neck Pain: Systematic Review With Meta-Analysis and Meta-Regression of Randomized Controlled Trials.
{"title":"Effectiveness of Manual Joint Mobilization Techniques in the Treatment of Nonspecific Neck Pain: Systematic Review With Meta-Analysis and Meta-Regression of Randomized Controlled Trials.","authors":"Alessia Benetton, Simone Battista, Gianluca Bertoni, Giacomo Rossettini, Luca Falsiroli Maistrello","doi":"10.2519/jospt.2025.12836","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>OBJECTIVE:</b> The purpose of this study was to investigate the effects of cervical joint mobilization techniques (JMTs) on pain and disability in adults with nonspecific neck pain. <b>DESIGN:</b> This study is an intervention systematic review with meta-analysis and meta-regression of randomized controlled trials (RCTs). <b>LITERATURE SEARCH:</b> We searched MEDLINE, Cochrane CENTRAL, EMBASE, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Physiotherapy Evidence Database, and Web of Science databases, including references from other reviews or clinical practice guidelines up to October 16, 2024. <b>STUDY SELECTION CRITERIA:</b> Eligible RCTs evaluated JMTs compared to routine physiotherapy, minimally active interventions, or no treatment. The primary outcome was pain; secondary outcomes were disability, Global Perceived Effect (GPE), quality of life, psychosocial status, and adverse events. <b>DATA SYNTHESIS:</b> Meta-analyses and meta-regression were conducted for pain, disability, and GPE. The risk of bias was assessed with Cochrane RoB 2.0 Tool; the certainty of the evidence was assessed with the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations approach. We used The Template for the Intervention Description and Replication checklist to evaluate the quality of reporting of interventions delivered. <b>RESULTS:</b> Results from 16 RCTs were pooled (<i>n</i> = 1,157 participants), reporting nonclinically positive results on pain reduction (mean difference [MD] = -0.86 (95% confidence interval [-1.35, -0.36])), disability (MD=-2.11 [-3.31, -0.91]), and GPE (standardized mean difference = 0.11 ([-0.15, 0.37]) and high heterogeneity. The meta-regressions did not identify any covariates associated with the treatment effects. Minor side effects (increased neck pain and headache) were reported. <b>CONCLUSION:</b> There was very low certainty evidence supporting the efficacy of JTMs for reducing pain and improving disability in people with NSNP. <i>J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2025;55(3):1-20. Epub 12 February 2025. doi:10.2519/jospt.2025.12836</i>.</p>","PeriodicalId":50099,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Orthopaedic & Sports Physical Therapy","volume":"55 3","pages":"1-20"},"PeriodicalIF":6.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Orthopaedic & Sports Physical Therapy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2519/jospt.2025.12836","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to investigate the effects of cervical joint mobilization techniques (JMTs) on pain and disability in adults with nonspecific neck pain. DESIGN: This study is an intervention systematic review with meta-analysis and meta-regression of randomized controlled trials (RCTs). LITERATURE SEARCH: We searched MEDLINE, Cochrane CENTRAL, EMBASE, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Physiotherapy Evidence Database, and Web of Science databases, including references from other reviews or clinical practice guidelines up to October 16, 2024. STUDY SELECTION CRITERIA: Eligible RCTs evaluated JMTs compared to routine physiotherapy, minimally active interventions, or no treatment. The primary outcome was pain; secondary outcomes were disability, Global Perceived Effect (GPE), quality of life, psychosocial status, and adverse events. DATA SYNTHESIS: Meta-analyses and meta-regression were conducted for pain, disability, and GPE. The risk of bias was assessed with Cochrane RoB 2.0 Tool; the certainty of the evidence was assessed with the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations approach. We used The Template for the Intervention Description and Replication checklist to evaluate the quality of reporting of interventions delivered. RESULTS: Results from 16 RCTs were pooled (n = 1,157 participants), reporting nonclinically positive results on pain reduction (mean difference [MD] = -0.86 (95% confidence interval [-1.35, -0.36])), disability (MD=-2.11 [-3.31, -0.91]), and GPE (standardized mean difference = 0.11 ([-0.15, 0.37]) and high heterogeneity. The meta-regressions did not identify any covariates associated with the treatment effects. Minor side effects (increased neck pain and headache) were reported. CONCLUSION: There was very low certainty evidence supporting the efficacy of JTMs for reducing pain and improving disability in people with NSNP. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2025;55(3):1-20. Epub 12 February 2025. doi:10.2519/jospt.2025.12836.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Orthopaedic & Sports Physical Therapy® (JOSPT®) publishes scientifically rigorous, clinically relevant content for physical therapists and others in the health care community to advance musculoskeletal and sports-related practice globally. To this end, JOSPT features the latest evidence-based research and clinical cases in musculoskeletal health, injury, and rehabilitation, including physical therapy, orthopaedics, sports medicine, and biomechanics.
With an impact factor of 3.090, JOSPT is among the highest ranked physical therapy journals in Clarivate Analytics''s Journal Citation Reports, Science Edition (2017). JOSPT stands eighth of 65 journals in the category of rehabilitation, twelfth of 77 journals in orthopedics, and fourteenth of 81 journals in sport sciences. JOSPT''s 5-year impact factor is 4.061.