Table 2.
Excluded Studies
| Study | Study Design | Participants | Intervention | Reason for Exclusion |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Saal & Saal7 | Prospective case series | n = 26 | Ice, rest, hard color for 2 wks, NSAIDS for 6–12 wks alongside 3 months of mechanical traction, home traction, exercise and postural education | No HVLA procedures were utilized in the cervical spine |
| Shin et al12 | Randomized clinical trial | n = 26 | Group 1: unspecified cervical traction Group 2: Chuna manipulative therapy (stated to be ‘analogous to chiropractic manipulation’) |
Manuscript was not peer-reviewed |
| Moretti et al14 | Randomized clinical trial | n = 80 | Group 1: Manipulative therapy and traditional physiotherapy Group 2: traditional physiotherapy |
Patient population suffered cervicobrachialgia of mechanical origin |
| Walker et al15 | Randomized clinical trial | n = 98 | Group 1: cervical joint thrust and non-thrust mobilization, muscle energy or stretching techniques and a standard home exercise program Group 2: postural advice, cervical ROM exercises, subtherapeutic ultrasound and encouragement to maintain daily activities. |
No subgroup specifically identified with CR was listed. |
| Honet & Puri16 | Prospective case series | n = 82 | Group 1: Cervical collar for 4 days, then over-the-door continuous traction at home with standard medication Group 2: received outpatient care, intermittent cervical traction Group 3: hospitalization, horizontal cervical bed traction, standard medication and surgical consultation after 10–21 days |
No HVLA procedures were utilized in the cervical spine |
| Rosomoff et al17 | Case series of undefined perspective | n = 30 | Aggressive physical medicine, behavioral medicine, vocational and recreational rehabilitation | No HVLA procedures were utilized in the cervical spine |
| Perrson et al18 | Randomized clinical trial | n = 81 | Group 1: surgical Group 2: 3 months with a hard collar Group 3: 3 months of physiotherapy |
No HVLA procedures were utilized in the cervical spine |
| Sampath et al19 | Prospective, multi-centre case series | n = 246 | No clear plan was outlined. Interventions included narcotics, NSAID’s, steroids, injections, bed rest, home exercise, cervical traction, bracing and surgery | No HVLA procedures were utilized in the cervical spine |
| Heckman et al20 | Retrospective clinical trial | n = 119 | Group 1: conservative therapy Group 2: surgery |
No HVLA procedures were utilized in the cervical spine |
| Moetti & Marchetti21 | Prospective case series | n = 15 | Postural education, aerobic exercise, deep neck flexor strengthening and moist heat | No HVLA procedures were utilized in the cervical spine |
| Allison et al22 | Randomized controlled trial | n = 30 | Group 1: segmental lateral glide techniques, shoulder-girdle oscillation, muscle re-education and home mobilization Group 2: Glenohumeral mobilization, thoracic joint mobilization and home exercises Group 3: Control for 8 weeks, then allocated to Group 1 for cross-over protocol |
No HVLA procedures were utilized in the cervical spine |
| Schliesser et al23 | Retrospective case series | n = 39 | Ultrasound, heat, ice and cervical spine flexion-distraction | No HVLA procedures were utilized in the cervical spine |
| Dougherty et al24 | Retrospective case series | n = 80 | HVLA procedures, flexion-distraction, stretching and stabilization exercises, NSAID’s and pre-treatment lidocaine injections | As epidural lidocaine was used prior to manipulative procedures, this practice is not representative of a general chiropractors regimen |
| Joghataei et al25 | Randomized clinical trial | n = 30 | Group 1: ultrasound and exercise Group 2: ultrasound, exercise and manual traction |
No HVLA procedures were utilized in the cervical spine |
| Dishman26 | Retrospective case series | n = 80 (20 with CR) | HVLA-SMT following the receipt of an imaging guided epidural injection | This practice is not representative of a general chiropractors regimen |
| Cleland et al27 | Prospective case series | n = 11 | Segmental lateral glide techniques, mechanical traction, deep neck flexor strengthening and thoracic manipulation | No HVLA procedures were utilized in the cervical spine |
| Cleland et al28 | Prospective (pragmatic) clinical case series | n = 96 | Techniques frequently employed included non-thrust manipulation to the cervical and thoracic spine, manual and mechanical traction, electrotherapeutic modalities and stretching/strengthening exercises | No HVLA procedures were utilized in the cervical spine |
| Christiansen et al29 | Retrospective case series | n = 162 | Within cases of cervical radiculopathy, low-velocity, low-amplitude procedures were utilized | No HVLA procedures were utilized in the cervical spine |
| Young et al30 | Randomized clinical trial | n = 81 | Manual and exercise therapy was combined with either intermittent cervical traction or sham traction | No HVLA procedures were utilized in the cervical spine |
| Kuijper et al31 | Randomized controlled trial | n = 205 | Group 1: Semi-rigid cervical collar and at-home rest Group 2: physiotherapy and home exercise Group 3: continuation of daily activities (control) |
No HVLA procedures were utilized in the cervical spine |
| Ragonese32 | Randomized clinical trial | n = 30 | Group 1: Manual therapy (segmental lateral gliding, thoracic mobilizations and neural dynamic techniques) Group 2: Strengthening of the deep neck flexors, lower and middle trapezius and serratus anterior muscles Group 3: Both manual and exercise therapy |
No HVLA procedures were utilized in the cervical spine |