Information needs for people with neck pain seeking physiotherapy neck manipulation or mobilization: an exploratory study.

IF 1.6 Q2 REHABILITATION
Michelle Lumasag, Anita Gross, Derek Clewley, Pasqualina Santaguida
{"title":"Information needs for people with neck pain seeking physiotherapy neck manipulation or mobilization: an exploratory study.","authors":"Michelle Lumasag, Anita Gross, Derek Clewley, Pasqualina Santaguida","doi":"10.1080/10669817.2025.2472374","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To explore the foundational needs for a decision aid on receiving physiotherapy neck manipulation and mobilization from a broad age spectrum.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>An e-survey was conducted from January to 30 April 2024, targeted child/infant-parent dyads, adolescents, adults, and adult-caretaker dyads with neck pain who received physiotherapy treatment in Canada and the United States. The survey method captured knowledge and attitudes to manual therapy, treatment expectations (10 items from the Treatment Expectation Questionnaire (TEX-Q), decision conflict (Decisional Conflict Scale (DCS)) and participant demographics. Descriptive analyses were used to assess responses.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Out of 146 participants who started the survey, 48 adults (mean age 48) completed it fully. Due to low response rates, the survey lacked insights into adolescent, child/infant-parent, or adult-caretaker dyads. Most respondents were familiar with mobilization (86%) and manipulation (82%). Mobilization was preferred (67%) and viewed more favorably compared to manipulation (7%), which was seen as riskier. Stroke was identified as the top risk/adverse event for techniques and was more commonly associated with manipulation (52%) than mobilization (25%). Other perceived risks included soreness, pain, headache, stiffness, tenderness, dizziness, and fatigue, reported more often for mobilization (57%) than manipulation (41%). The TEX-Q showed that respondents' treatment expectations were largely met, indicating positive expectations. Additionally, low scores on the DCS subscales and total scores (mean 16.26, SD 21.00) reflected minimal decisional conflict among respondents.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The study found that adults with neck pain who received physiotherapy involving neck manipulation or mobilization were well informed about the benefits, risks, and potential major and minor adverse events of their treatment. Their expectations for treatment were generally positive, and they experienced minimal decisional conflict. To further support shared decision-making, we recommend adding a qualitative component, such as structured interviews or focus groups with inter-professional child/infant-parent dyads, to help clinicians improve patient counseling and decision-making guidance.</p>","PeriodicalId":47319,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Manual & Manipulative Therapy","volume":" ","pages":"1-8"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Manual & Manipulative Therapy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10669817.2025.2472374","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"REHABILITATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: To explore the foundational needs for a decision aid on receiving physiotherapy neck manipulation and mobilization from a broad age spectrum.

Method: An e-survey was conducted from January to 30 April 2024, targeted child/infant-parent dyads, adolescents, adults, and adult-caretaker dyads with neck pain who received physiotherapy treatment in Canada and the United States. The survey method captured knowledge and attitudes to manual therapy, treatment expectations (10 items from the Treatment Expectation Questionnaire (TEX-Q), decision conflict (Decisional Conflict Scale (DCS)) and participant demographics. Descriptive analyses were used to assess responses.

Results: Out of 146 participants who started the survey, 48 adults (mean age 48) completed it fully. Due to low response rates, the survey lacked insights into adolescent, child/infant-parent, or adult-caretaker dyads. Most respondents were familiar with mobilization (86%) and manipulation (82%). Mobilization was preferred (67%) and viewed more favorably compared to manipulation (7%), which was seen as riskier. Stroke was identified as the top risk/adverse event for techniques and was more commonly associated with manipulation (52%) than mobilization (25%). Other perceived risks included soreness, pain, headache, stiffness, tenderness, dizziness, and fatigue, reported more often for mobilization (57%) than manipulation (41%). The TEX-Q showed that respondents' treatment expectations were largely met, indicating positive expectations. Additionally, low scores on the DCS subscales and total scores (mean 16.26, SD 21.00) reflected minimal decisional conflict among respondents.

Conclusion: The study found that adults with neck pain who received physiotherapy involving neck manipulation or mobilization were well informed about the benefits, risks, and potential major and minor adverse events of their treatment. Their expectations for treatment were generally positive, and they experienced minimal decisional conflict. To further support shared decision-making, we recommend adding a qualitative component, such as structured interviews or focus groups with inter-professional child/infant-parent dyads, to help clinicians improve patient counseling and decision-making guidance.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.50
自引率
20.00%
发文量
55
期刊介绍: The Journal of Manual & Manipulative Therapy is an international peer-reviewed journal dedicated to the publication of original research, case reports, and reviews of the literature that contribute to the advancement of knowledge in the field of manual therapy, clinical research, therapeutic practice, and academic training. In addition, each issue features an editorial written by the editor or a guest editor, media reviews, thesis reviews, and abstracts of current literature. Areas of interest include: •Thrust and non-thrust manipulation •Neurodynamic assessment and treatment •Diagnostic accuracy and classification •Manual therapy-related interventions •Clinical decision-making processes •Understanding clinimetrics for the clinician
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信