The purpose of this study was to determine the effect of cervical manipulation only as compared to combined cervical and thoracic spine manipulation in the treatment of mechanical neck pain. A randomized, comparative, clinical trial was undertaken with 30 subjects diagnosed with mechanical neck pain without radiculopathy. The first treatment group (group A) received cervical manipulation only, while the second treatment group (group B) received both cervical and an upper thoracic manipulation. Patients were treated /assessed over a 3-week period, with no follow-up consultation. Both treatment groups were assessed using subjective (Numerical Pain Rating Scale 101, McGill Short-Form Pain Questionnaire, and the CMCC Neck Disability Index) and objective (goniometer and algometer) measurement parameters at specific intervals during the treatment period. The data were assessed using nonparametric paired and unpaired analysis, descriptive statistics, and power analysis of the data. The results indicated that both treatment protocols had an effect in terms of subjective and objective clinical findings, and that the treatments had equivalent effects. The data suggested that there was an increase in cervical range of motion immediately after manipulation, in both treatment groups, but this was not statistically supported. Manipulating both the cervical and thoracic spine in patients with mechanical neck pain did not seem to have any benefit over manipulating the cervical spine alone. The results suggest that manipulation may be effective in the treatment of mechanical neck pain as both treatment protocols had an effect on the participating subjects, but no conclusions may be drawn as a control/placebo group was not included in this study.

There are no links to full text for this record.