Aquino 2009.
| Methods | Type of trial: RCT Number analysed/randomly assigned: 48/48 Intention‐to‐treat analysis: calculated | |
| Participants | Chronic non‐specific cervical disorder | |
| Interventions | INDEX TREATMENT
Mobilisation at most symptomatic cervical vertebral level (B): technique: anterior central vertebral pressure, posterior‐anterior unilateral pressure and transversal vertebral pressure; technique selected at physiotherapist’s discretion, indications by Maitland et al.; timing: at baseline; frequency: 1 session; route: cervical spine COMPARISON TREATMENT Mobilisation randomly chosen at cervical vertebral level (A): technique: posterior‐anterior central vertebral pressure, posterior‐anterior unilateral pressure and transversal vertebral pressure; technique selected at physiotherapist’s discretion, indications by Maitland et al.; timing: at baseline; frequency: 1 session; route: cervical spine CO‐INTERVENTION: not applicable (N/A) Duration of treatment: 1 day, 1 session Duration of follow‐up: 0 days |
|
| Outcomes | PAIN (during most painful movement, 11‐point pain scale, 0 to 10) Baseline mean: A 6.2, B 6.04 End of study mean: A 3.58, B 3.37 Absolute benefit: A 2.62, B 2.67 Reported results: not significant SMD (A vs B): 0.07 (95% CI ‐0.49 to 0.64) FUNCTION: not reported (NR) GPE: NR PATIENT SATISFACTION: NR QoL: NR SIDE EFFECTS: NR COST OF CARE: NR |
|
| Notes | ||
| Risk of bias | ||
| Bias | Authors' judgement | Support for judgement |
| Random sequence generation (selection bias) | Unclear risk | Not adequately designed; page 96, middle column, paragraph 2 |
| Allocation concealment (selection bias) | Unclear risk | Not adequately designed; page 96, middle column, paragraph 2 |
| Blinding of Participants (performance bias) | Unclear risk | Participant blinding not described but possible |
| Blinding of Personal (performance bias) | High risk | Study authors state that care providers were blinded; however, we believe this was not possible because treatment was provided at the discretion of the therapist |
| Blinding of the Outcome assessor (detection bias) | Unclear risk | Participant is the assessor |
| Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) | Low risk | Pre‐post design; Figure 1 |
| Randomized Participants analysed were allocated (attrition bias) | Low risk | Pre‐post |
| Selective outcome (reporting bias) | Unclear risk | No protocol |
| Similar groups at baseline? | Low risk | Table 1 and Table 3 |
| co‐interventions avoided or similar? | Low risk | Pre‐post design |
| Compliance acceptable? | Low risk | Pre‐post design |
| Similar timing of outcome assessment? | Low risk | Pre‐post design |