Cervical spine manipulation alters sensorimotor integration: A somatosensory evoked potential study

Further studies are needed to assess the competing therapies for neck pain

Response to – Adverse events associated with the use of cervical spine manipulation or mobilization and patient characteristics: A systematic review

Adverse events associated with the use of cervical spine manipulation or mobilization and patient characteristics: A systematic review

Use of cervical spine manipulation under anesthesia for management of cervical disk herniation, cervical radiculopathy, and associated cervicogenic headache syndrome

Episodic Tension–type headache (ETTH), which has a high prevalence, is the most common headache. Manual therapeutic approaches towards Episodic Tension-Type Headaches (ETTHs) have not been fully explored. However, cervical spine manipulation (CSM) and dry needling are found to be successful modalities for the treatment of tension-type headache (TTH). Therefore, this study aims to determine the effectiveness of CSM alone, dry needling alone and CSM combined with dry needling in the treatment of ETTHs. Objectives The objectives of this study include: determining the effectiveness of CSM alone, dry needling alone and CSM combined with dry needling in terms of objective and subjective data for the treatment of ETTHs. Method Forty five participants suffering from ETTHs, between the ages of eighteen and fifty, were recruited through convenience sampling and were randomly allocated to one of three equal groups (15 per group). The three different groups were: (A); CSM alone, (B); dry needling alone and (C); CSM in addition to dry needling. The study took place over a period of four weeks involving six consultations. Each participant received a headache diary for the duration of the study. At the first consultation the participant received the headache diary and was monitored for one week before the treatments commenced. Thereafter, four treatments were administered over the next two weeks, depending on group allocation. Participants were also monitored with the headache diary for one week after the last treatment. The objective data for each participant consisted of cervical range of motion (CROM) and pressure–pain threshold readings, measured using a CROM goniometer and an algometer respectively. The subjective data for each participant was collected using a headache diary and a headache questionnaire/disability index. SAS version 9.1.3 was used to analyse the data. A p value of <0.05 was considered as statistically significant. Results A decrease in headache duration, frequency, intensity and severity and increases in CROM and algometer measurements were observed in all groups. However, no statistically significant differences were found between the three groups in terms of objective and subjective measurements although, a statistically significant improvement from consultation five to six was found in Group C in terms of headache disability. Conclusion CSM and dry needling, used in isolation or in combination are effective in the treatment of ETTHs although Group C did show superiority over the other groups in the long term with respect to the disability index.

Objectives: Cervical spinal manipulation (CSM) has been shown to be effective in treating cervicogenic headache (CGH) by reducing pain and disability. There is a paucity of research investigating whether changes in muscle activity account for the changes in patient reported outcomes in patients with CGH following CSM. The aim of this study was to determine the effect of upper CSM compared to a placebo and a control intervention in terms of subjective (pain and disability rating) and objective measures (muscle activity and force output of the trapezius, posterior cervical and sternocleidomastoid muscles) in the treatment of CGH. Methods: A randomized, controlled, pre-test, post-test, experimental design allowed for 45 participants, aged 18-50, with CGH to be allocated to a CSM, placebo or control group. Pain and disability were measured before and telephonically 48 hours after the intervention. Muscle activity and force output of the trapezius, posterior cervical and sternocleidomastoid (SCM) muscles were measured before and immediately after the intervention. IBM SPSS was used to analyse the data with significance set at p=0.05. The subjective and objective measures were not normally distributed and this resulted in nonparametric statistical tests being utilised to analyse the data. Wilcoxon Signed Rank Tests were used to determine significance within groups and Independent-samples KruskalWallis Tests and Pairwise multiple comparison tests were used to determine significance between groups. Results: No significant differences were found between the three groups for age (p=0.460) and gender (p=0.566), with a marginally significant finding for race (p=0.046). Subjective measure assessment found only a significant decrease in pain (p=0.001) and disability (p=0.001) from pre- post-test within the CSM group. Intergroup analysis found that the CSM group experienced the greatest reduction in pain (p=0.001) and disability (p=0.001) when compared to the placebo and control groups. Clinically, only pain in the CSM group decreased significantly. Objective findings showed significant intragroup increases in muscle activity, found bilaterally in the SCM (p=0.017 SCMR) (p=0.012 SCML) and trapezius muscles (p=0.041 TrapR) (p=0.041 TrapL) in the CSM group and only in the trapezius muscle (p=0.031 TrapR) (p=0.027 TrapL) bilaterally in the placebo group. Force output only increased in the trapezius muscle on the left (p=0.027) in the placebo group and bilaterally in the control group (p=0.031 TrapR) (p=0.041 TrapL) There were no significant intergroup differences between the groups for muscle activity and force output in the trapezius, posterior cervicals and SCM

Vertebral artery dissections (VAD) pose a significant risk for strokes, particularly in young adults. This case report details the presentation and management of a 48-year-old patient who was diagnosed with an extracranial VAD following cervical spine manipulation (CSM). The patient's symptoms included acute right-sided ataxia, giddiness, vertigo, nausea, vomiting, and persistent pain behind the right ear, prompting immediate evaluation. After ruling out acute intracerebral hemorrhages, a computed tomography angiogram (CTA) of the head and neck identified a severe narrowing of the right distal vertebral artery with a string sign at the level of the right C1 loop (V3 segment), indicating an extracranial VAD. This finding was further supported when ultrasound (US) imaging revealed a high resistance flow pattern in the right distal vertebral artery.Furthermore, T2 and diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) confirmed a 1.8 cm VAD/hematoma and a 1.4 cm acute/subacute infarct in the right posterior inferior cerebellar artery (PICA) territory. This research accentuates the importance of recognizing and addressing that neck pain can be a symptom of musculoskeletal dysfunction or could have neurovascular origins. In this case, the patient's neck pain may have been musculoskeletal or could have been due to a previous dissection. Thus, differentiation should be considered before cervical spine manipulation.

Review of nine malpractice cases with allegations of causation of cervical artery dissection by cervical spine manipulation: No evidence for causation

Objective: To access the effectiveness and safety of cervical spine manipulation for cervical radiculopathy. Data sources: PubMed, the Cochrane Central Registry of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) in the Cochrane Library, EMBASE, Chinese Biomedical Literature Database (CBM), Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Chinese Scientific Journal Database (VIP), Wanfang data, the website of Chinese clinical trial registry and international clinical trial registry by US National Institutes of Health. Review methods: Randomized controlled trials that investigated the effects of cervical manipulation compared with no treatment, placebo or conventional therapies on pain measurement in patients with degenerative cervical radiculopathy were searched. Two authors independently evaluated the quality of the trials according to the risk of bias assessment provided by the PEDro (physiotherapy evidence database) scale. RevMan V.5.2.0 software was employed for data analysis. The GRADE approach was used to evaluate the overall quality of the evidence. Results: Three trials with 502 participants were included. Meta-analysis suggested that cervical spine manipulation (mean difference 1.28, 95% confidence interval 0.80 to 1.75; P < 0.00001; heterogeneity: Chi2 = 8.57, P = 0.01, I2 = 77%) improving visual analogue scale for pain showed superior immediate effects compared with cervical computer traction. The overall strength of evidence was judged to be moderate quality. One out of three trials reported the adverse events and none with a small sample size. Conclusion: There was moderate level evidence to support the immediate effectiveness of cervical spine manipulation in treating people with cervical radiculopathy. The safety of cervical manipulation cannot be taken as an exact conclusion so far.

Movement-related gating of cerebral somatosensory evoked potentials (SEPs) occurs during active and passive movements of both the upper and the lower limbs. The general hypothesis was tested that the brain participates in setting the gain of the ascending path from somatosensory receptors of the human leg to the somatosensory cortex. In experiment 1, SEPs from Cz' and soleus H-reflexes were evoked by electrical stimulation of the tibial nerve in the popliteal fossa during passive movement about the right ankle. Early SEPs and H-reflexes sampled during simple passive movement were significantly attenuated when compared with stationary controls (P<0.05). The additional requirement of tracking the passive ankle movement with the other foot led to a significant relative facilitation of mean SEP, but not H-reflex amplitude, compared with means from passive movement alone (P<0.05). In experiment 2, SEPs were evoked in the active (tracking) leg during a forewarned reaction-time task. Subjects were required to move in a preferred direction or to track the passive movement of their right foot with their left. Significant attenuation of early SEP components occurred 100 ms prior to EMG onset (P<0.05), with no apparent effect due to tracking. In the 3rd experiment, SEPs and H-reflexes were evoked in the passively moved leg (the target for active movement of the left leg) during the same forewarned reaction-time task. During the warning period, SEPs were significantly attenuated compared with stationary controls for non-tracking movements, but not for movements involving tracking (P<0.05). It is concluded that centrifugal factors are important in modulating SEP gain required by the kinaesthetic demands of the task.

Introduction: Cervical joint dysfunction may interfere with the sensorimotor afferent response, interfering with neck neck Joint Position Sense error (JPS). Objective: The aim of this study was to evaluate the influence of Cervical Spine Manipulation (CSM) on neck JPS error in patients with chronic neck pain. Method: 21 patients with chronic neck pain were divided into 2 groups: Spinal Manipulation Group (MG) or Sham Group (SG) who received 4 sessions of CSM and Sham CSM respectively. JPS was assessed in three different time frames: 1) pre-intervention; 2) Right after the first intervention (post-intervention 1); and 3) After a chronic intervention (post-intervention 2). The outcome measured in this study was the head reposition accuracy test with the Revel’s Test. Results: The JPS showed no significant differences between pre- and post-intervention 1 and 2 for any of the assessed groups. Conclusion: We conclude that, for this sample, neither the CSM nor the Sham CSM statistically changed the JPS error for neither groups. We believe that the changes in JPS after CSM were concealed because the ability of other sensory system information to compensate for inadequacies in any other component. Therefore, more studies have to be done with a stronger methodological rigor, clinical prediction rule for spinal manipulation, bigger sample and a blind assessment.

Randomized clinical trial. To investigate the short-term effects of thoracic spine thrust manipulation combined with cervical spine nonthrust manipulation (experimental group) versus cervical spine nonthrust manipulation alone (comparison group) in individuals with mechanical neck pain. Research has demonstrated improved outcomes with both nonthrust manipulation directed at the cervical spine and thrust manipulation directed at the thoracic spine in patients with neck pain. Previous studies have not determined if thoracic spine thrust manipulation may increase benefits beyond those provided by cervical nonthrust manipulation alone. Sixty-four participants with mechanical neck pain were randomized into 1 of 2 groups, an experimental or comparison group. Both groups received 2 treatment sessions of cervical spine nonthrust manipulation and a home exercise program consisting of active range-of-motion exercises, and the experimental group received additional thoracic spine thrust manipulations. Outcome measures were collected at baseline and at a 1-week follow-up, and included the numeric pain rating scale, the Neck Disability Index, and the global rating of change. Participants in the experimental group demonstrated significantly greater improvements (P<.001) on both the numeric pain rating scale and Neck Disability Index at the 1-week follow-up compared to those in the comparison group. In addition, 31 of 33 (94%) participants in the experimental group, compared to 11 of 31 participants (35%) in the comparison group, indicated a global rating of change score of +4 or higher at the 1-week follow-up, with an associated number needed to treat of 2. Individuals with neck pain who received a combination of thoracic spine thrust manipulation and cervical spine nonthrust manipulation plus exercise demonstrated better overall short-term outcomes on the numeric pain rating scale, the Neck Disability Index, and the global rating of change.

F111. Isolating C8 nerve root technique with focal digital stimulation

The authors have found that some of the data contained in this manuscript are categorized inappropriately. Many of the cases included from two case-control studies (Rothwell et al. and Stevinson et al.) should be omitted from the paper’s calculations as they were reported originally as cervical artery dissection cases in general, but not cervical artery dissection cases that occurred prior to cervical manipulation. The total number of cases where cervical manipulation was reported to have occurred prior to the onset of cervical artery dissection should be reduced from 902 to 322. With this adjustment, the time to onset of symptoms can now be reported to be a smaller percentage of cases (89%) compared to the original paper (93%). Similarly, the percentage of cases that named the involved vessel increased from 71% to 77%. Finally, the percentage of cases reporting the profession of the involved clinician performing the manipulation decreased from 99% to 80%. Excluding these three variables, the other 15 variables in the paper remain unchanged. This reclassification of cases does not alter the conclusions of the paper.

Complications of cervical spine manipulation (CSM) have been documented in the literature for over half a century. Most incidents involve neurovascular compromise resulting from trauma of the vertebral artery or less frequently the internal carotid artery. The determination of the incidence rate or degree of risk of this complication is of crucial importance in clinical decision making regarding CSM. To this end a critical review of published case reports and studies investigating the event rate of stroke associated with CSM is undertaken. It is concluded that the case reports in the literature are not representative of the frequency of neurovascular complications. Methodological limitations of past research on this topic are discussed, as is the need for a prospective study. Despite these considerations it is found that marked neurological sequelae to CSM are an uncommon event for which the level of risk may be further reduced by prudent practice.