The combined effects of manual therapy and exercise on pain and related disability for individuals with nonspecific neck pain: A systematic review with meta-analysis.

IF 1.6 Q2 REHABILITATION
Mark Wilhelm, Joshua Cleland, Anthony Carroll, Mark Marinch, Margaret Imhoff, Nicholas Severini, Megan Donaldson
{"title":"The combined effects of manual therapy and exercise on pain and related disability for individuals with nonspecific neck pain: A systematic review with meta-analysis.","authors":"Mark Wilhelm, Joshua Cleland, Anthony Carroll, Mark Marinch, Margaret Imhoff, Nicholas Severini, Megan Donaldson","doi":"10.1080/10669817.2023.2202895","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Neck pain is among the most prevalent and costly musculoskeletal disorders. Manual therapy and exercise are two standard treatment approaches to manage neck pain. In addition, clinical practice guidelines recommend a multi-modal approach, including both manual therapy and exercise for the treatment of neck pain; however, the specific effects of these combined interventions have not recently been reported in the literature.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to determine the effect of manual therapy combined with exercise on pain, disability, and quality of life in individuals with nonspecific neck pain.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Electronic database searches were completed in PubMed, CINAHL, Cochrane, EMBASE, Ovid, and SportDiscus, with publication dates of January 2000 to December 2022. The risk of bias in the included articles was completed using the Revised Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool (RoB 2). Raw data were pooled using standardized mean differences and mean differences for pain, disability, and quality of life outcomes, and forest plots were computed in the meta-analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Twenty-two studies were included in the final review. With moderate certainty of evidence, three studies demonstrated no significant difference between manual therapy plus exercise and manual therapy alone in pain (SMD of -0.25 (95% CI: -0.52, 0.02)) or disability (-0.37 (95% CI: -0.92, 0.18)). With a low certainty of evidence, 16 studies demonstrated that manual therapy plus exercise is significantly better than exercise alone for reducing pain (-0.95 (95%CI: -1.38, -0.51)). Similarly, with low certainty of evidence, 13 studies demonstrated that manual therapy plus exercise is significantly better than exercise alone for reducing disability (-0.59 (95% CI: -0.90, -0.28)). Four studies demonstrated that manual therapy plus exercise is significantly better than a control intervention for reducing pain (moderate certainty) (-2.15 (95%CI: -3.58, -0.73)) and disability (low certainty) (-2.39 (95% CI: -3.80, -0.98)). With a high certainty of evidence, four studies demonstrated no significant difference between manual therapy plus exercise and exercise alone in quality of life (SMD of -0.02 (95% CI: -0.21, 0.18)).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Based on this systematic review and meta-analysis, a multi-modal treatment approach including exercise and manual therapy appears to provide similar effects as manual therapy alone, but is more effective than exercise alone or other interventions (control, placebo, 'conventional physical therapy', etc.) for the treatment of nonspecific neck pain and related disability. Some caution needs to be taken when interpreting these results given the general low to moderate certainty of the quality of the evidence.</p>","PeriodicalId":47319,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Manual & Manipulative Therapy","volume":" ","pages":"393-407"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10642331/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Manual & Manipulative Therapy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10669817.2023.2202895","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/4/24 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"REHABILITATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Neck pain is among the most prevalent and costly musculoskeletal disorders. Manual therapy and exercise are two standard treatment approaches to manage neck pain. In addition, clinical practice guidelines recommend a multi-modal approach, including both manual therapy and exercise for the treatment of neck pain; however, the specific effects of these combined interventions have not recently been reported in the literature.

Objective: To perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to determine the effect of manual therapy combined with exercise on pain, disability, and quality of life in individuals with nonspecific neck pain.

Design: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Methods: Electronic database searches were completed in PubMed, CINAHL, Cochrane, EMBASE, Ovid, and SportDiscus, with publication dates of January 2000 to December 2022. The risk of bias in the included articles was completed using the Revised Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool (RoB 2). Raw data were pooled using standardized mean differences and mean differences for pain, disability, and quality of life outcomes, and forest plots were computed in the meta-analysis.

Results: Twenty-two studies were included in the final review. With moderate certainty of evidence, three studies demonstrated no significant difference between manual therapy plus exercise and manual therapy alone in pain (SMD of -0.25 (95% CI: -0.52, 0.02)) or disability (-0.37 (95% CI: -0.92, 0.18)). With a low certainty of evidence, 16 studies demonstrated that manual therapy plus exercise is significantly better than exercise alone for reducing pain (-0.95 (95%CI: -1.38, -0.51)). Similarly, with low certainty of evidence, 13 studies demonstrated that manual therapy plus exercise is significantly better than exercise alone for reducing disability (-0.59 (95% CI: -0.90, -0.28)). Four studies demonstrated that manual therapy plus exercise is significantly better than a control intervention for reducing pain (moderate certainty) (-2.15 (95%CI: -3.58, -0.73)) and disability (low certainty) (-2.39 (95% CI: -3.80, -0.98)). With a high certainty of evidence, four studies demonstrated no significant difference between manual therapy plus exercise and exercise alone in quality of life (SMD of -0.02 (95% CI: -0.21, 0.18)).

Conclusion: Based on this systematic review and meta-analysis, a multi-modal treatment approach including exercise and manual therapy appears to provide similar effects as manual therapy alone, but is more effective than exercise alone or other interventions (control, placebo, 'conventional physical therapy', etc.) for the treatment of nonspecific neck pain and related disability. Some caution needs to be taken when interpreting these results given the general low to moderate certainty of the quality of the evidence.

手工疗法和运动对非特异性颈痛患者疼痛和相关残疾的联合作用:一项系统综述和荟萃分析。
背景:颈部疼痛是最常见和最昂贵的肌肉骨骼疾病之一。手工疗法和运动是治疗颈部疼痛的两种标准治疗方法。此外,临床实践指南建议采用多模式方法,包括手工治疗和运动治疗颈部疼痛;然而,这些联合干预措施的具体效果最近尚未在文献中报道。目的:进行系统回顾和荟萃分析,以确定手工疗法结合运动对非特异性颈部疼痛患者疼痛、残疾和生活质量的影响。设计:系统评价和荟萃分析。方法:检索PubMed、CINAHL、Cochrane、EMBASE、Ovid和SportDiscus的电子数据库,检索时间为2000年1月至2022年12月。使用修订Cochrane偏倚风险工具(RoB 2)完成纳入文章的偏倚风险。使用疼痛、残疾和生活质量结局的标准化平均差异和平均差异汇总原始数据,并在荟萃分析中计算森林图。结果:最终综述纳入了22项研究。具有中等确定性的证据,三项研究表明,手工疗法加运动与单独手工疗法在疼痛(SMD为-0.25 (95% CI: -0.52, 0.02))或残疾(-0.37 (95% CI: -0.92, 0.18))方面没有显著差异。尽管证据的确定性较低,但有16项研究表明,在减轻疼痛方面,手工疗法加运动明显优于单独运动(-0.95 (95%CI: -1.38, -0.51))。同样,虽然证据的确定性较低,但有13项研究表明,在减少残疾方面,手工疗法加运动明显优于单独运动(-0.59 (95% CI: -0.90, -0.28))。四项研究表明,在减轻疼痛(中度确定性)(-2.15 (95%CI: -3.58, -0.73)和残疾(低确定性)(-2.39 (95%CI: -3.80, -0.98))方面,手工治疗加运动明显优于对照干预。具有高确定性证据的四项研究表明,手工疗法加运动与单独运动在生活质量方面无显著差异(SMD为-0.02 (95% CI: -0.21, 0.18))。结论:基于本系统综述和荟萃分析,包括运动和手工治疗在内的多模式治疗方法似乎与单独的手工治疗效果相似,但在治疗非特异性颈部疼痛和相关残疾方面,比单独的运动或其他干预措施(对照、安慰剂、“常规物理治疗”等)更有效。在解释这些结果时需要谨慎,因为这些证据的质量一般是低到中等的确定性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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