Repository logo
 
Publication

Is a Combined Programme of Manual Therapy and Exercise More Effective than Usual Care in Patients with Non-Specific Chronic Neck Pain? A Randomized Controlled Trial

dc.contributor.authorDomingues, L
dc.contributor.authorPimentel-Santos, FM
dc.contributor.authorBrazete Cruz, E
dc.contributor.authorSousa, AC
dc.contributor.authorSantos, A
dc.contributor.authorCordovil, A
dc.contributor.authorCorreia, A
dc.contributor.authorSá Torres, L
dc.contributor.authorSilva, A
dc.contributor.authorSoares Branco, P
dc.contributor.authorCunha Branco, J
dc.date.accessioned2023-02-20T15:28:04Z
dc.date.available2023-02-20T15:28:04Z
dc.date.issued2019
dc.description.abstractObjective: The aim of this study was to compare the effectiveness of a combined intervention of manual therapy and exercise (MET) versus usual care (UC), on disability, pain intensity and global perceived recovery, in patients with non-specific chronic neck pain (CNP). Design: Randomized controlled trial. Setting: Outpatient care units. Subjects: Sixty-four non-specific CNP patients were randomly allocated to MET (n = 32) or UC (n = 32) groups. Interventions: Participants in the MET group received 12 sessions of mobilization and exercise, whereas the UC group received 15 sessions of usual care in physiotherapy. Main measures: The primary outcome was disability (Neck Disability Index). The secondary outcomes were pain intensity (Numeric Pain Rating Scale) and global perceived recovery (Patient Global Impression Change). Patients were assessed at baseline, three weeks, six weeks (end of treatment) and at a three-month follow-up. Results: Fifty-eight participants completed the study. No significant between-group difference was observed on disability and pain intensity at baseline. A significant between-group difference was observed on disability at three-week, six-week and three-month follow-up (median (P25-P75): 6 (3.25-9.81) vs. 15.5 (11.28-20.75); P < 0.001), favouring the MET group. Regarding pain intensity, a significant between-group difference was observed at six-week and three-month follow-up (median (P25-P75): 2 (1-2.51) vs. 5 (3.33-6); P < 0.001), with superiority of effect in MET group. Concerning the global perceived recovery, a significant between-group difference was observed only at the three-month follow-up (P = 0.001), favouring the MET group. Conclusion: This study's findings suggest that a combination of manual therapy and exercise is more effective than usual care on disability, pain intensity and global perceived recovery.pt_PT
dc.description.versioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionpt_PT
dc.identifier.citationClin Rehabil . 2019 Dec;33(12):1908-1918.pt_PT
dc.identifier.doi10.1177/0269215519876675pt_PT
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10400.17/4414
dc.language.isoengpt_PT
dc.peerreviewedyespt_PT
dc.publisherSagept_PT
dc.subjectHCC MFRpt_PT
dc.subjectAgedpt_PT
dc.subjectAdultpt_PT
dc.subjectChronic Pain / therapy*pt_PT
dc.subjectHumanspt_PT
dc.subjectFemalept_PT
dc.subjectMalept_PT
dc.subjectExercise Therapy*pt_PT
dc.subjectMiddle Agedpt_PT
dc.subjectMusculoskeletal Manipulations*pt_PT
dc.subjectNeck Pain / therapy*pt_PT
dc.subjectPain Measurementpt_PT
dc.subjectProspective Studiespt_PT
dc.subjectSingle-Blind Methodpt_PT
dc.subjectTreatment Outcomept_PT
dc.titleIs a Combined Programme of Manual Therapy and Exercise More Effective than Usual Care in Patients with Non-Specific Chronic Neck Pain? A Randomized Controlled Trialpt_PT
dc.typejournal article
dspace.entity.typePublication
oaire.citation.endPage1918pt_PT
oaire.citation.startPage1908pt_PT
oaire.citation.titleClinical Rehabilitationpt_PT
oaire.citation.volume33pt_PT
rcaap.rightsopenAccesspt_PT
rcaap.typearticlept_PT

Files

Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Name:
Clin Rehabilit 2019.pdf
Size:
287.48 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
License bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
No Thumbnail Available
Name:
license.txt
Size:
1.71 KB
Format:
Item-specific license agreed upon to submission
Description:

Collections