To unlock this feature and to subscribe to our weekly evidence emails, please create a FREE orthoEvidence account.

SIGNUP

Already Have an Account?

Loading...
Visit our Evidence-Based Covid-19 Website and Stay Up to Date with the latest Research.
Ace Report Cover

Cervical manipulation vs thoracic or cervicothoracic manipulations for the management of neck pain

Share
Reprints
Cite This
About
+ Favorites
Share
Reprints
Cite This
About
+ Favorites
Ace Report Cover
November 2024

Cervical manipulation vs thoracic or cervicothoracic manipulations for the management of neck pain

Vol: 306| Issue: 11| Number:62| ISSN#: 2564-2537
Study Type:Therapy
OE Level Evidence:1
Journal Level of Evidence:1

Cervical manipulation versus thoracic or cervicothoracic manipulations for the management of neck pain. A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Musculoskelet Sci Pract. 2024 01-Jun;():. 10.1016/j.msksp.2024.102927

Contributing Authors:
A Carrasco-Uribarren P Pardos-Aguilella S Jimenez-Del-Barrio S Cabanillas-Barea S Perez-Guillen L Ceballos-Laita

Did you know you're eligible to earn 0.5 CME credits for reading this report? Click Here

Synopsis

Six studies involving 517 patients with neck pain were included in this systematic review and meta-analysis, comparing cervical manipulations to thoracic or cervicothoracic manipulations. Pooled outcomes of interest included pain intensity, neck disability, and cervical range of motion. The analysis revealed no significant differences in pain reduction, disability improvement, or cervical range of...

CME Image

Did you know that you’re eligible to earn 0.5 CME credits for reading this report!

LEARN MORE

Join the Conversation

Please Login or Join to leave comments.

Learn about our AI Driven
High Impact Search Feature

High Impact Icon

Our AI driven High Impact metric calculates the impact an article will have by considering both the publishing journal and the content of the article itself. Built using the latest advances in natural language processing, OE High Impact predicts an article’s future number of citations better than impact factor alone.

Continue