Skip to main content
NCBI home page
The Journal of the Canadian Chiropractic Association logoLink to The Journal of the Canadian Chiropractic Association
. 1999 Jun;43(2):111–119.

The effect of spinal manipulative therapy (SMT) on pain reduction and range of motion in patients with acute unilateral neck pain: a pilot study

John R Pikula
PMCID: PMC2485362

Abstract

Objective:

This experiment evaluated the response of acute neck pain patients to an intervention utilizing a single manipulation to either a) the same side of pain (ipsilateral) or b) opposite side (contralateral) and compared the results to a placebo group.

Design:

In this pre-test — post-test study, 36 subjects were randomly allocated to one of the three groups:

(1) SMT applied to the same side as the pain (ipsilateral)

(2) SMT applied to the side opposite the pain (contralateral)

(3) A placebo group receiving only detuned ultrasound therapy

Subjects:

In a private chiropractic office, patients with acute unilateral neck pain and stiffness were studied. Inclusion criteria included the presence of acute unilateral neck pain, no prior similar history, no history of trauma, and no neurological deficit. Subjects had no previous chiropractic treatment of the cervical spine.

Intervention:

Patients in the two manipulation groups received a single cervical manipulation. Patients in the placebo group received detuned ultrasound therapy over the area of pain.

Main Outcome Measures:

There were two outcome measures. Pain intensity was rated on the 100 mm. visual analog scale (VAS) prior to and immediately following the intervention. Pre and Post test measurements of cervical spine range of motion utilizing the CROM instrument were also taken.

Results:

Degrees of ipsilateral lateral flexion, contralateral flexion, and VAS improved when ipsilateral versus contralateral spinal manipulative therapy was applied.

Conclusions:

Immediately following a single manipulation to acute neck pain patients there is less pain intensity and a greater range of motion when spinal manipulative therapy is applied to the side of neck pain versus manipulation on the side opposite the pain or to a placebo group.

Keywords: cervical spine, acute pain, manipulation, CROM, chiropractic

Full text

PDF
111

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.

  1. Beneliyahu D. J. Chiropractic management and manipulative therapy for MRI documented cervical disk herniation. J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 1994 Mar-Apr;17(3):177–185. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Bogduk N., Aprill C. On the nature of neck pain, discography and cervical zygapophysial joint blocks. Pain. 1993 Aug;54(2):213–217. doi: 10.1016/0304-3959(93)90211-7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Bovim G., Schrader H., Sand T. Neck pain in the general population. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 1994 Jun 15;19(12):1307–1309. doi: 10.1097/00007632-199406000-00001. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Cassidy J. D., Lopes A. A., Yong-Hing K. The immediate effect of manipulation versus mobilization on pain and range of motion in the cervical spine: a randomized controlled trial. J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 1992 Nov-Dec;15(9):570–575. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Cassidy J. D., Quon J. A., LaFrance L. J., Yong-Hing K. The effect of manipulation on pain and range of motion in the cervical spine: a pilot study. J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 1992 Oct;15(8):495–500. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Dartigues J. F., Henry P., Puymirat E., Commenges D., Peytour P., Gagnon M. Prevalence and risk factors of recurrent cervical pain syndrome in a working population. Neuroepidemiology. 1988;7(2):99–105. doi: 10.1159/000110141. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Duncan G. H., Bushnell M. C., Lavigne G. J. Comparison of verbal and visual analogue scales for measuring the intensity and unpleasantness of experimental pain. Pain. 1989 Jun;37(3):295–303. doi: 10.1016/0304-3959(89)90194-2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Gore D. R., Sepic S. B., Gardner G. M., Murray M. P. Neck pain: a long-term follow-up of 205 patients. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 1987 Jan-Feb;12(1):1–5. doi: 10.1097/00007632-198701000-00001. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Haldeman S. Spinal manipulative therapy in sports medicine. Clin Sports Med. 1986 Apr;5(2):277–293. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Hasvold T., Johnsen R. Headache and neck or shoulder pain--frequent and disabling complaints in the general population. Scand J Prim Health Care. 1993 Sep;11(3):219–224. doi: 10.3109/02813439308994834. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Huskisson E. C. Measurement of pain. J Rheumatol. 1982 Sep-Oct;9(5):768–769. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Kirkaldy-Willis W. H., Cassidy J. D. Spinal manipulation in the treatment of low-back pain. Can Fam Physician. 1985 Mar;31:535–540. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Nansel D. D., Cremata E., Carlson J., Szlazak M. Effect of unilateral spinal adjustments on goniometrically-assessed cervical lateral-flexion end-range asymmetries in otherwise asymptomatic subjects. J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 1989 Dec;12(6):419–427. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Nordemar R., Thörner C. Treatment of acute cervical pain--a comparative group study. Pain. 1981 Feb;10(1):93–101. doi: 10.1016/0304-3959(81)90050-6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Osterbauer P. J., Derickson K. L., Peles J. D., DeBoer K. F., Fuhr A. W., Winters J. M. Three-dimensional head kinematics and clinical outcome of patients with neck injury treated with spinal manipulative therapy: a pilot study. J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 1992 Oct;15(8):501–511. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Reggars J. W., Pollard H. P. Analysis of zygapophyseal joint cracking during chiropractic manipulation. J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 1995 Feb;18(2):65–71. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. Rundcrantz B. L., Johnsson B., Moritz U. Pain and discomfort in the musculoskeletal system among dentists. A prospective study. Swed Dent J. 1991;15(5):219–228. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  18. Scott P. J., Ansell B. M., Huskisson E. C. Measurement of pain in juvenile chronic polyarthritis. Ann Rheum Dis. 1977 Apr;36(2):186–187. doi: 10.1136/ard.36.2.186. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  19. Sloop P. R., Smith D. S., Goldenberg E., Doré C. Manipulation for chronic neck pain. A double-blind controlled study. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 1982 Nov-Dec;7(6):532–535. doi: 10.1097/00007632-198211000-00003. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  20. Terrett A. C., Vernon H. Manipulation and pain tolerance. A controlled study of the effect of spinal manipulation on paraspinal cutaneous pain tolerance levels. Am J Phys Med. 1984 Oct;63(5):217–225. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  21. Youdas J. W., Carey J. R., Garrett T. R. Reliability of measurements of cervical spine range of motion--comparison of three methods. Phys Ther. 1991 Feb;71(2):98–106. doi: 10.1093/ptj/71.2.98. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  22. Youdas J. W., Garrett T. R., Suman V. J., Bogard C. L., Hallman H. O., Carey J. R. Normal range of motion of the cervical spine: an initial goniometric study. Phys Ther. 1992 Nov;72(11):770–780. doi: 10.1093/ptj/72.11.770. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from The Journal of the Canadian Chiropractic Association are provided here courtesy of The Canadian Chiropractic Association

RESOURCES