Neck PainNCT02036905
Cervical and Upper Thoracic Mobilization and Manipulation for Mechanical Neck Pain
A study testing Cervical and thoracic mobilization and cervical and thoracic manipulation in people with Neck Pain, run by Youngstown State University at 2 sites in United States.
Trial summary
The objective of this pilot study is to determine the feasibility of a large-scale trial. The primary objective is to determine if manipulation applied to the cervical and thoracic spines is more effective than mobilization applied to the cervical and thoracic spines for the management of patients with mechanical neck… Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 to 70 years
- Conditions the study is for
- Neck Pain
- What is being tested?
- Cervical and thoracic mobilization and cervical and thoracic manipulation
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 20 participants
- Where
- 2 sitesUnited States
- Study dates
- Jul 2013to Aug 2015
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 18 to 70 years
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- subjects aged 18-70 years old with a chief complaint of reproducible neck pain and an NDI score of 10 or greater.
Who cannot join
- Subjects are excluded if they have had recent whiplash or significant trauma, demonstrate red flag items such as malignancy, radiculopathy, myelopathy, fracture, metabolic disease, rheumatoid arthritis, long-term steroid use, or history of neck surgery. Additional exclusion criteria including neck pain of <2 on the NPRS, PSFS ≤ 8, no prior treatment within 6 weeks time, upper limb symptoms, or any pending litigation. Finally, if a therapist determines the patient has a neck condition that is highly irritable where the manipulation is not appropriate, they will be excluded.
Trial locations and contacts
2 sites in 1 country.
United States2 sites
Pain Relief and Physical Therapy
Havertown, Pennsylvania, 19083
Rehabilitex Inc.
Solon, Ohio, 44139
About this study
Official title: Comparing the Early Use of Cervical/Upper Thoracic Mobilization and Manipulation for Individuals With Mechanical Neck Pain.
The objective of this pilot study is to determine the feasibility of a large-scale trial. The primary objective is to determine if manipulation applied to the cervical and thoracic spines is more effective than mobilization applied to the cervical and thoracic spines for the management of patients with mechanical neck pain.
Read the detailed description
All potential subjects will be assessed for eligibility prior to signing the informed consent by filling out a demographic questionnaire and through a subjective interview that will include a health history examination performed by a physical therapist that has received additional training in orthopedic manual therapy. A physical therapist (PT) is a highly educated licensed health care professional that has graduated from an accredited university and has passed a national licensure exam. Physical therapists specialize in movement disorders and are well trained in the examination and treatment for primary and secondary medical conditions pertaining to the cardiovascular, neuromuscular, musculoskeletal, and integumentary body systems. Manual therapy interventions for the neck and thoracic spine including manipulations are taught in entry-level physical therapy programs. Continuing education courses are available for physical therapists to get advanced training in manual therapy. This training involves not only improving the skill set of the therapist but also focuses on enhancing the knowledge of the therapist concerning the safety of patients. Each of the treating therapists will have certifications in manual therapy. Screening for inclusion and exclusion criteria will be done by the treating PT by means of assessing subjective outcomes, patient demographic, and through their subjective history examine. Subjects will then be given the informed consent to be read and signed if they agree to participate. Subjects will be permitted to ask any questions relative to any study procedures they do not understand. Two physical therapists at each facility will be used in order to keep the outcome measures blinded. The treating therapist or clinic PT will perform the examination/evaluation and perform all manual therapy treatments during the first 2 visits of care. Pending there are no scheduling conflicts; the treating therapist will continue to provide the treatment. If there is a scheduling conflict, another physical therapist will provide the patient's care until the next available opening on the treating therapist. The recording therapist, or research therapist, will record all the dependent variables and will remain blinded to group allocation. This is the only assignment given to the research therapist. The treating therapist will be blinded to all results of the outcome data except in the case where data is needed for clinical decision making in order to optimize patient outcomes. After informed consent is attained, outcome data will then be collected by the recording physical therapist that is not aware of group allocation. The data collected will include the neck disability index (NDI), patient specific functional score (PSFS), numeric pain rating scale (NPRS), deep cervical flexion test (DCF), cervical range of motion (CROM) using a CROM, therapist equipoise, and patient preference. Following initial data collection, each subject will be randomized via concealed allocation to receive either mobilization or manipulation directed to the cervical and upper thoracic spine for the first two treatment visits. The patient will be treated on day 1 with their randomized treatment technique. The manual technique chosen for treatment by each clinician will be determined by the results of their physical examination. Other interventions included for both groups will include a standardized exercise program and advice, encouragement, and assurance. Immediately following the treatment procedures, data will be collected again and will include the NPRS, global rating of changes (GROC), cervical range of motion, and DCF. The therapist will determine the next appropriate follow-up visit. Data will again be collected at the beginning of the 2nd visit follow-up and will include NPRS, GROC, cervical range of motion, DCF, PSFS, and NDI by the blinded physical therapist. Treatments of cervical and thoracic mobilization or manipulation will occur again based on group allocation established prior. The technique used by the treating clinician will be based on their assessment of the patient and again will follow group allocation. After the 2nd visit (day 3), the treating physical therapist is able to add or remove treatments, as they deem necessary to improve the patient's condition. Orthopedic manual therapy (mobilization or manipulation) may be adjusted based on patient need as well. Subsequent visits and plan of care will continue under the direction of the physical therapist based on the patient's need. Final data collection performed at discharge will include the NDI, PSFS, GROC, and total number of visits, patient satisfaction, therapist equipoise, and total days of care.
Analysis: Baseline characteristics of all subjects will be compared using either a t-test or chi square as appropriate. A two way multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) will be used to compare outcomes of NDI, PSFS, and NPRS at baseline, at day 3, and at day 30.
- Conditions
- Neck Pain
- Being tested
- Cervical and thoracic mobilization, cervical and thoracic manipulation
- Keywords
- neck pain, orthopedic manual therapy
- Medical subject headings
- Neck Pain
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Cervical and thoracic mobilizationOther
Described in arm description
cervical and thoracic manipulationOther
described in arm description
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Cervical and thoracic mobilization | Experimental | Cervical and thoracic mobilization: described as a repetitive low-velocity oscillatory movement applied to a joint segment. It is graded 1-4 based on the size of the amplitude and where in range it is being applied. The mobilization technique chosen will be based on the examination and clinical reasoning process of the therapist. The cervical and thoracic mobilization will be applied to the most provocative level. Receives: Other: Cervical and thoracic mobilization |
| Cervical and thoracic manipulation | Experimental | Cervical and thoracic manipulation: is defined as high-velocity low-amplitude thrust at end range of a particular spinal segment. The therapist performs this technique by taking up all available slack at a particular segment and applying a high-velocity thrust through the end-range restriction. The manipulation technique will be chosen based on the examination and clinical reasoning process of the therapist. Receives: Other: cervical and thoracic manipulation |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Change in Neck Disability Index (NDI)
The NDI is a reliable and valid outcome tool for patients with neck pain. It is a self-report measurement tool that was specifically constructed to measure the degree of disability for persons with neck pain. There are 10 total items that are ranked from 0-5 giving a total possible number of 50 points. The larger the score, the greater the disability for that individual.
Measured: Initial evaluation, 2nd visit expected average day 3, and discharge expected average 4 weeks.
Secondary outcomes (5)
change in numeric pain rating scale (NPRS)
The NPRS is used to determine the patient's pain level. The patient is asked to rate their level of pain on an 11-point numerical scale 0-10 with 0 being "no pain" and 10 being the "worst possible pain."
Measured: initial evaluation, 2nd visit expected average day 3, discharge expected average 4 weeks
Change in patient specific functional scale (PSFS)
The PSFS is a three item questionnaire where the patient is asked to list 3 items they are having difficulty with and rate them on a 0-10 scale with 0 being unable to perform and 10 being able to perform with no limitation.
Measured: Initial evaluation, 2nd visit expected average day 3, and at discharge expected average 4 weeks.
Change in the global rating of change
The global rating of change is a 15-point scale where 0 is no change in condition, -7 is a very great deal worse and +7 is a very great deal better. The patient is asked to rate their overall current current condition compared with when they first started care.
Measured: after visit 2 (expected average day 3) and again at discharge expected average 4 weeks.
Percent recovery
The patient is asked to rate their overall improvement on a scale of 0% (no better) to 100% completely better
Measured: Measured at discharge expected average of 4 weeks into protocol
Change in deep cervical flexor endurance test
The patient lies in supine and maximally tucks chin to activate the deep cervical flexors. The patient then is asked to lift their head 0.5-1.0 inches off the table and maintain the chin tuck and hold for as long as possible. The investigator times the hold and records when the position cannot be maintained any longer.
Measured: Initial examination, after 2 visit (expected average day 3) and at discharge ( expected average 4 weeks),
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted15 Jan 2014 (estimated)
- Study startJul 2013
- Primary completionJun 2014
- Study completionAug 2015
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (5)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Neck PainStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Double blind
- Who is masked
- Care provider, Outcomes assessor
- Enrolment
- 20 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Youngstown State University
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Franklin Pierce University
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Kenneth Learman, Youngstown State University
- Investigators
- David W. Griswold, DPT, Principal investigator, Youngstown State UniversityDavid W Griswold, DPT, Principal investigator, Youngstown State University
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT02036905
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- 181-13
- Status last verified
- Jan 2016
- First submitted
- 15 Jul 2013
- Last updated
- 26 Jan 2016
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
Publications
Dunning JR, Cleland JA, Waldrop MA, Arnot CF, Young IA, Turner M, Sigurdsson G. Upper cervical and upper thoracic thrust manipulation versus nonthrust mobilization in patients with mechanical neck pain: a multicenter randomized clinical trial. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2012 Jan;42(1):5-18. doi: 10.2519/jospt.2012.3894. Epub 2011 Sep 30.
PubMed 21979312Cross KM, Kuenze C, Grindstaff TL, Hertel J. Thoracic spine thrust manipulation improves pain, range of motion, and self-reported function in patients with mechanical neck pain: a systematic review. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2011 Sep;41(9):633-42. doi: 10.2519/jospt.2011.3670. Epub 2011 Aug 31.
PubMed 21885904Lau HM, Wing Chiu TT, Lam TH. The effectiveness of thoracic manipulation on patients with chronic mechanical neck pain - a randomized controlled trial. Man Ther. 2011 Apr;16(2):141-7. doi: 10.1016/j.math.2010.08.003. Epub 2010 Sep 1.
PubMed 20813577Leaver AM, Refshauge KM, Maher CG, Latimer J, Herbert RD, Jull G, McAuley JH. Efficacy of manipulation for non-specific neck pain of recent onset: design of a randomised controlled trial. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2007 Feb 26;8:18. doi: 10.1186/1471-2474-8-18.
PubMed 17324291Miller J, Gross A, D'Sylva J, Burnie SJ, Goldsmith CH, Graham N, Haines T, Bronfort G, Hoving JL. Manual therapy and exercise for neck pain: A systematic review. Man Ther. 2010 Jun 1. doi: 10.1016/j.math.2010.02.007. Online ahead of print.
PubMed 20627797
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 26 Jan 2016. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Comparing the Early Use of Cervical/Upper Thoracic Mobilization and Manipulation for Individuals With Mechanical Neck Pain.
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT02036905
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- 181-13
- Conditions
- Neck Pain
- Keywords
- neck pain, orthopedic manual therapy
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 20 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Youngstown State UniversityUniversity, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Franklin Pierce University
- Study start
- Jul 2013
- Primary completion
- Jun 2014 (actual)
- Study completion
- Aug 2015 (actual)
- First posted
- 15 Jan 2014 (estimated)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
The objective of this pilot study is to determine the feasibility of a large-scale trial. The primary objective is to determine if manipulation applied to the cervical and thoracic spines is more effective than mobilization applied to the cervical and thoracic spines for the management of patients with mechanical neck pain.
Detailed description
All potential subjects will be assessed for eligibility prior to signing the informed consent by filling out a demographic questionnaire and through a subjective interview that will include a health history examination performed by a physical therapist that has received additional training in orthopedic manual therapy. A physical therapist (PT) is a highly educated licensed health care professional that has graduated from an accredited university and has passed a national licensure exam. Physical therapists specialize in movement disorders and are well trained in the examination and treatment for primary and secondary medical conditions pertaining to the cardiovascular, neuromuscular, musculoskeletal, and integumentary body systems. Manual therapy interventions for the neck and thoracic spine including manipulations are taught in entry-level physical therapy programs. Continuing education courses are available for physical therapists to get advanced training in manual therapy. This training involves not only improving the skill set of the therapist but also focuses on enhancing the knowledge of the therapist concerning the safety of patients. Each of the treating therapists will have certifications in manual therapy. Screening for inclusion and exclusion criteria will be done by the treating PT by means of assessing subjective outcomes, patient demographic, and through their subjective history examine. Subjects will then be given the informed consent to be read and signed if they agree to participate. Subjects will be permitted to ask any questions relative to any study procedures they do not understand. Two physical therapists at each facility will be used in order to keep the outcome measures blinded. The treating therapist or clinic PT will perform the examination/evaluation and perform all manual therapy treatments during the first 2 visits of care. Pending there are no scheduling conflicts; the treating therapist will continue to provide the treatment. If there is a scheduling conflict, another physical therapist will provide the patient's care until the next available opening on the treating therapist. The recording therapist, or research therapist, will record all the dependent variables and will remain blinded to group allocation. This is the only assignment given to the research therapist. The treating therapist will be blinded to all results of the outcome data except in the case where data is needed for clinical decision making in order to optimize patient outcomes. After informed consent is attained, outcome data will then be collected by the recording physical therapist that is not aware of group allocation. The data collected will include the neck disability index (NDI), patient specific functional score (PSFS), numeric pain rating scale (NPRS), deep cervical flexion test (DCF), cervical range of motion (CROM) using a CROM, therapist equipoise, and patient preference. Following initial data collection, each subject will be randomized via concealed allocation to receive either mobilization or manipulation directed to the cervical and upper thoracic spine for the first two treatment visits. The patient will be treated on day 1 with their randomized treatment technique. The manual technique chosen for treatment by each clinician will be determined by the results of their physical examination. Other interventions included for both groups will include a standardized exercise program and advice, encouragement, and assurance. Immediately following the treatment procedures, data will be collected again and will include the NPRS, global rating of changes (GROC), cervical range of motion, and DCF. The therapist will determine the next appropriate follow-up visit. Data will again be collected at the beginning of the 2nd visit follow-up and will include NPRS, GROC, cervical range of motion, DCF, PSFS, and NDI by the blinded physical therapist. Treatments of cervical and thoracic mobilization or manipulation will occur again based on group allocation established prior. The technique used by the treating clinician will be based on their assessment of the patient and again will follow group allocation. After the 2nd visit (day 3), the treating physical therapist is able to add or remove treatments, as they deem necessary to improve the patient's condition. Orthopedic manual therapy (mobilization or manipulation) may be adjusted based on patient need as well. Subsequent visits and plan of care will continue under the direction of the physical therapist based on the patient's need. Final data collection performed at discharge will include the NDI, PSFS, GROC, and total number of visits, patient satisfaction, therapist equipoise, and total days of care.
Analysis: Baseline characteristics of all subjects will be compared using either a t-test or chi square as appropriate. A two way multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) will be used to compare outcomes of NDI, PSFS, and NPRS at baseline, at day 3, and at day 30.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Double blind (care provider, outcomes assessor)
- Number of arms
- 2
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Cervical and thoracic mobilization | Experimental | Other: Cervical and thoracic mobilizationCervical and thoracic mobilization: described as a repetitive low-velocity oscillatory movement applied to a joint segment. It is graded 1-4 based on the size of the amplitude and where in range it is being applied. The mobilization technique chosen will be based on the examination and clinical reasoning process of the therapist. The cervical and thoracic mobilization will be applied to the most provocative level. |
| Cervical and thoracic manipulation | Experimental | Other: cervical and thoracic manipulationCervical and thoracic manipulation: is defined as high-velocity low-amplitude thrust at end range of a particular spinal segment. The therapist performs this technique by taking up all available slack at a particular segment and applying a high-velocity thrust through the end-range restriction. The manipulation technique will be chosen based on the examination and clinical reasoning process of the therapist. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 to 70 years
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (1 listed)
- subjects aged 18-70 years old with a chief complaint of reproducible neck pain and an NDI score of 10 or greater.
Key exclusion criteria (1 listed)
- Subjects are excluded if they have had recent whiplash or significant trauma, demonstrate red flag items such as malignancy, radiculopathy, myelopathy, fracture, metabolic disease, rheumatoid arthritis, long-term steroid use, or history of neck surgery. Additional exclusion criteria including neck pain of <2 on the NPRS, PSFS ≤ 8, no prior treatment within 6 weeks time, upper limb symptoms, or any pending litigation. Finally, if a therapist determines the patient has a neck condition that is highly irritable where the manipulation is not appropriate, they will be excluded.
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| Cervical and thoracic mobilizationDescribed in arm description | Other | Cervical and thoracic mobilization |
| cervical and thoracic manipulationdescribed in arm description | Other | Cervical and thoracic manipulation |
Primary outcome
Change in Neck Disability Index (NDI)
Time frame: Initial evaluation, 2nd visit expected average day 3, and discharge expected average 4 weeks.
The NDI is a reliable and valid outcome tool for patients with neck pain. It is a self-report measurement tool that was specifically constructed to measure the degree of disability for persons with neck pain. There are 10 total items that are ranked from 0-5 giving a total possible number of 50 points. The larger the score, the greater the disability for that individual.
5 secondary outcomes
change in numeric pain rating scale (NPRS)
Time frame: initial evaluation, 2nd visit expected average day 3, discharge expected average 4 weeks
Change in patient specific functional scale (PSFS)
Time frame: Initial evaluation, 2nd visit expected average day 3, and at discharge expected average 4 weeks.
Change in the global rating of change
Time frame: after visit 2 (expected average day 3) and again at discharge expected average 4 weeks.
Percent recovery
Time frame: Measured at discharge expected average of 4 weeks into protocol
Change in deep cervical flexor endurance test
Time frame: Initial examination, after 2 visit (expected average day 3) and at discharge ( expected average 4 weeks),
Results and safety
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 26 Jan 2016.
- Results publication: PubMed 21979312Dunning JR, Cleland JA, Waldrop MA, Arnot CF, Young IA, Turner M, Sigurdsson G. Upper cervical and upper thoracic thrust manipulation versus nonthrust mobilization in patients with mechanical neck pain: a multicenter randomized clinical trial. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2012 Jan;42(1):5-18. doi: 10.2519/jospt.2012.3894. Epub 2011 Sep 30.
- Results publication: PubMed 21885904Cross KM, Kuenze C, Grindstaff TL, Hertel J. Thoracic spine thrust manipulation improves pain, range of motion, and self-reported function in patients with mechanical neck pain: a systematic review. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2011 Sep;41(9):633-42. doi: 10.2519/jospt.2011.3670. Epub 2011 Aug 31.
- Results publication: PubMed 20813577Lau HM, Wing Chiu TT, Lam TH. The effectiveness of thoracic manipulation on patients with chronic mechanical neck pain - a randomized controlled trial. Man Ther. 2011 Apr;16(2):141-7. doi: 10.1016/j.math.2010.08.003. Epub 2010 Sep 1.
- Results publication: PubMed 17324291Leaver AM, Refshauge KM, Maher CG, Latimer J, Herbert RD, Jull G, McAuley JH. Efficacy of manipulation for non-specific neck pain of recent onset: design of a randomised controlled trial. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2007 Feb 26;8:18. doi: 10.1186/1471-2474-8-18.
- Results publication: PubMed 20627797Miller J, Gross A, D'Sylva J, Burnie SJ, Goldsmith CH, Graham N, Haines T, Bronfort G, Hoving JL. Manual therapy and exercise for neck pain: A systematic review. Man Ther. 2010 Jun 1. doi: 10.1016/j.math.2010.02.007. Online ahead of print.
Related trials for Neck Pain
Not yet recruiting
Effects of Muscle Energy Technique With and Without Scapulothoracic Mobilization on Neck Pain in Students
Non Psecific Neck Pain
RecruitingObservational study
The Association Between Smartphone Overuse and Mechanical Neck Pain Among Galala University Students
Mechanical Neck Pain, Forward Head Posture (FHP)
Active, not recruiting
Multimodal Manual Therapy vs. Maitland Mobilization for Chronic Non-Specific Neck Pain
Chronic Neck Pain
Not yet recruiting
Lumbar Erector Spinae Plane Block Versus PENG Block for Hip Fracture Surgery
Femur Neck Fracture, Hip Fractures
Not yet recruiting
Comparative Effects of Dynamic Cupping and Facilitated Positional Release in Cervicogenic Headache
Cervicogenic Headache
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
David W. Griswold, DPT principal investigator
Youngstown State University
David W Griswold, DPT principal investigator
Youngstown State University
2 sites in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Cervical and thoracic mobilization and cervical and thoracic manipulation in people with Neck Pain, run by Youngstown State University at 2 sites in United States.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 1 inclusion and 1 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 26 Jan 2016. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 2 sites in United States. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Change in Neck Disability Index (NDI) (time frame: Initial evaluation, 2nd visit expected average day 3, and discharge expected average 4 weeks.). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT02036905, which also lists 5 linked publications.
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 26 Jan 2016.