Table 1.

Selected articles summary.

Title	Authors and Publication Year	Study Sample and Design	Outcomes of the Study	Results
Effect of Spinal Manipulative and Mobilization Therapies in Young Adults With Mild to Moderate Chronic Low Back Pain: A Randomized Clinical Trial.	Thomas J.S. et al., 2020 [11]	RCT—162 patients with chronic LBP qualified for randomization to 1 of 3 treatment groups. Participants received 6 treatment sessions of (1) spinal manipulation, (2) spinal mobilization, or (3) sham cold laser therapy (placebo) during a 3-weeks period.	NPRS, RDQ	At the primary end point, there was no significant difference for pain and self-reported disability scores between spinal manipulation and spinal mobilization, and between spinal manipulation and placebo.
The effect of two weeks of spinal manipulative therapy and home stretching exercises on pain and disability in patients with persistent or recurrent neck pain; a randomized controlled trial.	Bakken A.G. et al., 2021 [12]	RCT—131 adult subjects with recurrent neck pain were randomized in two groups. Both groups received 4 treatments for 2 weeks, spinal manipulative therapies and home stretching exercises compared to home stretching exercises alone.	NRS-11, MPQ, EQ-5D, NDI	There were no statistically significant differences between the groups for any of the outcome measures.
Effects of autogenic and reciprocal inhibition techniques with conventional therapy in mechanical neck pain—a randomized control trial	Siddiqui M. et al., 2022 [13]	RCT—80 patients randomized in two groups. Group 1 received autogenic inhibition with conventional treatment and group 2 received. Reciprocal inhibition with conventional physiotherapy treatment.	VAS, Goniometer, NDI	There was a more significant improvement in pain, disability, neck ROMs in flexion, extension, right and left lateral flexion, and right and left rotation in the group 1 than in the group 2 after the last session.
Does Upper Cervical Manual Therapy Provide Additional Benefit in Disability and Mobility over a Physiotherapy Primary Care Program for Chronic Cervicalgia? A Randomized Controlled Trial.	González-Rueda V. et al., 2020 [14]	RCT—78 patients with chronic neck pain and restricted upper cervical rotation were randomized into three groups: the upper cervical translatoric mobilization group, inhibitory suboccipital technique group, and control group.	NDI, active cervical mobility, flexion-rotation test	The addition of manual therapy to a conventional physical therapy protocol for the upper cervical spine increased the flexion-rotation test in the short and mid-term in patients with chronic neck pain. No changes were found in the NDI or in the global active cervical ROM.
Approaches to cervical spine mobilization for neck pain: a pilot randomized controlled trial.	Lagoutaris C et al., 2020 [15]	Pilot RCT—20 adults with mechanical NP, randomly allocated to either pragmatic or prescriptive mobilization intervention groups.	NDI, NPRS, CROM, Global Perceived Effect	The primary outcome of change in disability scores at 48 h follow-up was not significantly different between the pragmatic and prescriptive group. Global perceived effect of treatment was significantly higher in the pragmatic group. Secondary outcomes of pain and ROM were not significantly different between groups.
Spinal manipulative therapy-specific changes in pain sensitivity in individuals with low back pain (NCT01168999)	Bialosky J.E. et al., 2014 [16]	RCT—110 participants with LBP were randomly assigned to receive Spinal Manipulative Therapy (SMT), placebo SMT, or no intervention. Participants receiving the SMT and placebo SMT received their assigned intervention 6 times over 2 weeks.	NRS, ODI, NASS Lumbar Spine Outcome Assessment, MVAS, FABQ, TSK, PCS	A reduction in pain sensitivity was greater in response to SMT than in response to the expectation of receiving an SMT.
Does manual therapy affect functional and biomechanical outcomes of a sit-to-stand task in a population with low back pain? A preliminary analysis	Carpino G. et al., 2020 [17]	RCT—40 participants suffering from LBP underwent Manual therapy (MT) treatment consisting of two high-velocity low-amplitude spinal manipulations, two grade IV mobilizations of the lumbar spine and pelvis.	Optoelectronic motion capture system; Pelvis and thorax kinematic data; STS	After MT, lumbar sagittal ROM increased and time to complete the STS test decreased. MT might influence the biomechanical and functional performance of an STS task in a population suffering from LBP.
The Effectiveness of Manual Therapy in the Cervical Spine and Diaphragm, in Combination with Breathing Reeducation Exercises, in Patients with Non-Specific Chronic Neck Pain: Protocol for Development of Outcome Measures and a Randomized Controlled Trial	P.I. Tatsios et al., 2022 [18]	RCT—90 adult volunteers of both genders, aged between 25 and 65 years, and with mechanical chronic NP, were divided in 3 groups: group A underwent cervical manual therapy, diaphragm manual therapy, and breathing education exercise; group B underwent cervical manual therapy with soft tissue therapeutic techniques, plus sham diaphragm MT; group C underwent typical conventional physiotherapy.	NDI, VAS, cervical ROM, CVA, HADS, TSK	Release of the diaphragm, in combination with breathing reeducation, decreased pain and other musculoskeletal-related outcomes, and also improved the body’s ability to achieve homeostasis
Effectiveness of a specific manual approach to the suboccipital region in patients with chronic mechanical neck pain and rotation deficit in the upper cervical spine: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.	V González Rueda et al., 2017 [19]	RCT—78 participants randomly distributed into three groups. The control group received a protocolized treatment, the mobilization group received the same protocolized treatment and 6 sessions of the translatory dorsal glide mobilization (TDGM) C0-C1 technique, and the pressure group received the same protocolized treatment and 6 sessions of the pressure maintained suboccipital inhibition technique (PMSIT).	VAS, NDI, cervical ROM, HIT-6, GROC scale	An approach including manual treatment to upper cervical dysfunction was the more effective in these patients. The PMSIT technique affected mostly the musculature, while the TDGM technique affected the joint.
The Manual Therapy and Strengthening for the Hip (MASH) Trial: Protocol for a Multisite Randomized Trial of a Subgroup of Older Adults With Chronic Back and Hip Pain.	JM Pugliese et al., 2022 [20]	Study protocol—180 people aged between 60 and 85 years with chronic LBP and hip pain were recruited. They underwent a comprehensive baseline assessment and are randomized into 1 of 2 intervention arms: hip-focused or spine-focused treatment.	QPBDS, 10MWT, PHQ-9, LOBACS, PCS, Movement-evoked pain, 6MWT, 30-Second Chair Stand Test, HOOS, PROMIS-29.	As a protocol, no results were available.
Optimising conservative management of chronic low back pain: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial.	KJ Simson et al., 2020 [21]	Study protocol—Forty participants, 25–45 years old with chronic non-specific LBP were randomized to undergo either motor control and manual therapy (n = 20) or general strength and conditioning (n = 20) exercise treatments for 6 months.	MRI, dual energy X-ray absorptiometry, transcranial magnetic stimulation, (SCQ-LBQ), VAS, Sciatica Frequency and Bothersomeness Index, CES-D 10, PANAS, Work Productivity and Activity Impairment Questionnaire, ODI, PSQI, TSK, EWPS, GROC scale.	As a protocol, no results were available.
Short term treatment versus long term management of neck and back disability in older adults utilizing spinal manipulative therapy and supervised exercise: a parallel-group randomized clinical trial evaluating relative effectiveness and harms	Corrie Vihstadt et al., 2014 [22]	Study protocol: 200 adults ≥ 65 years of age with back and neck disability lasting at least 12 weeks.	ODI version 2.0, NDI, 11-box scale, EQ-5D, single nine-point ordinal scale, Self-Efficacy Questionnaire, TSK, seven-point scale, hand grip strength, SPPB, accelerometry, qualitative interviews, Geriatric Depression Scale	As a protocol, no results were available.

The table explains the details of each selected study. The first and second columns list the title and authors of the study, respectively; the third column describes the sample and study design; the fourth column explains the intervention performed; the fifth column presents the results; and the sixth and final column outlines the study’s limitations. Numerical Pain Rating Scale (NPRS); Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire (RDQ); 11-point Numeric Rating Scale (NRS-11); McGill Pain Questionnaire (MPQ); EuroQol 5 Dimensions Questionnaire (EQ-5D); Neck Disability Index (NDI); Visual analog scale (VAS); Cervical inclinometer for Range Of Motion (CROM); Oswestry Disability Index (ODI); North American Spine Society (NASS); Mechanical Visual Analog Scale (MVAS); Fear Avoidance Belief Questionnaire (FABQ); Tampa Scale of Kinesiophobia (TSK); Pain Catastrophizing Scale (PCS); Sit To Stand (STS); Craniovertebral Angle (CVA); Hospital and Anxiety Depression Scale (HADS); Range Of Motion (ROM); Headache Impact Test (HIT-6); Global Rating Of Change scale (GROC scale); Quebec Back Pain Disability Scale (QBPDS); 10-Meter Walk Test (10MWT); Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9); Low Back Activity Confidence Scale (LOBACS); 6-Minute Walk Test (6MWT); Hip Disability Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (HOOS); Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS); Subjective Complaints Questionnaire for low back pain (SCQ-LBQ); Centre for Epidemiologic Studies Short Depression Scale (CES-D 10); Positive and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS); Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index Questionnaire (PSQI); Endicott Work Productivity Scale (EWPS); Short Physical Performance Battery (SPPB).