Neck PainNCT05680753
Stratified Physiotherapeutic (Blended) Care in Neck and Shoulder Complaints
A study testing Physiotherapy in people with Neck Pain and Shoulder Pain, run by Mark van Tilburg at 1 site in Netherlands.
Trial summary
The aim of this cluster RCT is to investigate the clinical effectiveness of a Stratified Blended Approach for patients with neck and/or shoulder complaints on pain and disability over 9 months, compared to usual physiotherapy care. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 years and older
- Conditions the study is for
- Neck Pain, Shoulder Pain
- What is being tested?
- Physiotherapy
- Type of treatment
- Lifestyle or therapy programme
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 139 participants
- Where
- 1 siteNetherlands
- Study dates
- 13 Jan 2020to 1 Nov 2023
- 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 years and older
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult, Older adult
Inclusion criteria: Patients with neck and/or shoulder complaints will be recruited within participating physiotherapy practices. In order to be eligible to participate in the data collection for the trial, a patient must meet all of the following criteria:
- consulting for physiotherapy for neck and/or shoulder complaints;
- one of the following physiotherapeutic diagnoses: subacromial complaints, biceps tendinosis, shoulder instability or non-specific musculoskeletal complaints of the neck and/or shoulder (not caused by acute trauma (fracture or rupture) or by any systemic disease);
- 18 years or older;
- sufficient mastery of the Dutch language.
Exclusion criteria: A patient who meets any of the following criteria will not be suitable to take part in the data collection for the trial:
- neck and/or shoulder complaints caused by specific pathology (e.g. shoulder pain with loss of active and passive range of motion (frozen shoulder), vertebral fracture, tendon rupture, Parkinson's disease, hernia nucleus pulposus, cervical stenosis), except for subacromial impingement, biceps tendinosis and shoulder instability.
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
Netherlands1 site
HU University of applied sciences Utrecht
Utrecht, 3584CS
About this study
Official title: A Stratified Approach Integrated With eHealth in Primary Care Physiotherapy for Patients With Neck and/or Shoulder Complaints
The aim of this cluster RCT is to investigate the clinical effectiveness of a Stratified Blended Approach for patients with neck and/or shoulder complaints on pain and disability over 9 months, compared to usual physiotherapy care.
Our secondary aims are twofold:
Read more
- to investigate the effectiveness of the Stratified Blended Approach for patients with neck and/or shoulder complaints on pain intensity, health-related quality of life, illness perceptions, self-management skills, physical activity, exercise adherence, self-perceived effect and satisfaction at 3 and 9 months, compared to usual physiotherapy care;
- to investigate the cost-effectiveness and cost-utility of the Stratified Blended Approach for patients with neck and/or shoulder complaints, compared to usual physiotherapy care.
In the Stratified Blended Approach arm, physiotherapists will match I) the content and intensity of physiotherapy care to the patient's risk of persistent disabling pain, categorized as low, medium or high (using the Keele STarT MSK Tool) and II) the mode of care delivery to the patient's suitability and willingness to receive blended care. The control arm will receive physiotherapy as usual.
This study is financially supported by the Scientific College Physiotherapy (WCF), part of the Royal Dutch Association for Physiotherapy (KNGF). WCF has no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscripts. External peer-review took place during the funding process. The results will be publicly disclosed unreservedly.
Read the detailed description
Intervention:
According to the Stratified Blended approach, patients will be matched to an appropriate treatment based on their risk of persistent disabling pain (assessed with the Keele STarT MSK Tool - either low, medium or high risk) and their suitability for blended care (assessed with the Dutch Blended Physiotherapy Checklist - either suitable or unsuitable for blended care). Based on patients risk profile, the physiotherapy treatment will be targeted to patients' individual needs. If considered suitable for blended care, the patient will receive a digital and face-to-face blend of physiotherapy treatment (e-Exercise) in which an app with personalized information, exercises and physical activity modules is integrated with face-to-face physiotherapy care. If patients are considered unsuitable for blended care, they will receive an information workbook with similar content as the app will be integrated with face-to-face physiotherapy. The app and the information workbook aims to support adherence to physical activity and exercise recommendations. Content of care was based on the Dutch KNGF Clinical Practice Guidelines for Physiotherapy Neck pain, Complaints of Arm, Neck and Shoulder (CANS) and Subacromial complaints.
Control group:
Usual physiotherapy. Content of care was based on the Dutch KNGF Clinical Practice Guidelines for Physiotherapy Neck pain, Complaints of Arm, Neck and Shoulder (CANS) and Subacromial complaints.
- Conditions
- Neck Pain, Shoulder Pain
- Being tested
- Physiotherapy
- Keywords
- Stratified care, Physiotherapy, Blended care
- Medical subject headings
- Neck Pain, Shoulder Pain
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
PhysiotherapyBehavioural
Physiotherapy
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Stratified Blended Approach arm | Experimental | First, physiotherapists will use two stratification tools to decide the most suitable content and intensity as well as mode of care delivery of primary care physiotherapy. The content and intensity of physiotherapy will be matched to the patient's risk of persistent disabling pain as assessed with the Keele STarT MSK tool. The mode of care delivery of physiotherapy will be matched to the patient's suitability for blended care as assessed using the Dutch Blended Physiotherapy Checklist (i.e. yes or no). Second, physiotherapists will receive two practical tools to provide the matched treatment of the mode of care delivery. If considered suitable for blended care, the patient will receive a blended physiotherapy treatment (e-Exercise), in which a smartphone app with personalized information, exercises and physical activity modules is an integral part of physiotherapy treatment. If patients are considered not to be suitable for blended care, a paper-based workbook will be integrated. Receives: Behavioral: Physiotherapy |
| Usual physiotherapy arm | Active comparator | Patients in the usual physiotherapy arm will be offered usual care (face-to-face or video consults) based upon the recommendations of the guidelines of the Royal Dutch Association for Physiotherapy (KNGF). The clinical guideline for neck pain, recommends categorization in treatment profiles based on: the severity of neck pain, the course of symptoms (normal vs. deviant) and the presence of psychosocial factors that may hinder recovery (yes vs. no). The clinical guideline for complaints of the arm, neck and shoulder recommends categorization in treatment profiles based on the region of complaints indicated as most problematic and the relationship between complaints, disabilities, and limitations in participation. No stratification tools to identify patient subgroups and subsequently match them to a treatment are recommended by the guidelines. Receives: Behavioral: Physiotherapy |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Neck pain and disability score (NPAD; for patients with neck pain)
The primary outcome is the combined region-specific pain and disability score over 9 months follow-up, assessed by the Neck Pain and Disability Scale (NPAD) for patients with primarily neck complaints and by the Shoulder Pain and Disability Index (SPADI) for patients with primarily shoulder complaints. A higher total score (0-100 for both outcome measures) indicates increased pain and functional limitations.
Measured: 9 months
Shoulder pain and disability index (SPADI; for patients with shoulder pain)
The primary outcome is the combined region-specific pain and disability score over 9 months follow-up, assessed by the Neck Pain and Disability Scale (NPAD) for patients with primarily neck complaints and by the Shoulder Pain and Disability Index (SPADI) for patients with primarily shoulder complaints. A higher total score (0-100 for both outcome measures) indicates increased pain and functional limitations.
Measured: 9 months
Secondary outcomes (19)
Neck and/or shoulder pain intensity
The average neck and/or shoulder pain intensity in the last week will be measured with an 11-point Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) (0 = no pain; 10 = worst pain imaginable)
Measured: 3 months
Neck and/or shoulder pain intensity
The average neck and/or shoulder pain intensity in the last week will be measured with an 11-point Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) (0 = no pain; 10 = worst pain imaginable)
Measured: 9 months
Health-related quality of life
Health-related quality of life will be measured with the 36-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36). The questionnaire consists of eight subscales (physical functioning, role limitations due to physical health, role limitations due to emotional problems, energy/fatigue, emotional well-being, social functioning, pain (over the last 4 weeks) and general health). Scores for each subscale will be calculated (0-100). Higher scores indicate a better health-related quality of life.
Measured: 3 months
Health-related quality of life
Health-related quality of life will be measured with the 36-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36). The questionnaire consists of eight subscales (physical functioning, role limitations due to physical health, role limitations due to emotional problems, energy/fatigue, emotional well-being, social functioning, pain (over the last 4 weeks) and general health). Scores for each subscale will be calculated (0-100). Higher scores indicate a better health-related quality of life.
Measured: 9 months
Illness perceptions
Illness perceptions will be measured with the Brief Illness Perception Questionnaire (IPQ-K). This questionnaire is an eight-item scale designed to assess cognitive and emotional representations of illness on an ordinal scale (0-10)
Measured: 3 months
Illness perceptions
Illness perceptions will be measured with the Brief Illness Perception Questionnaire (IPQ-K). This questionnaire is an eight-item scale designed to assess cognitive and emotional representations of illness on an ordinal scale (0-10)
Measured: 9 months
Patients' self-management skills
Patients' self-management skills are assessed with the Dutch version of the short form Patient Activation Measure (PAM13-Dutch). The PAM 13-Dutch is a reliable 13-item instrument and assesses patient (or consumer) self-reported knowledge, skills and confidence for self-management of one's health or chronic condition. The answering categories per item are 4-point Likert scales, ranging from totally disagree to totally agree and 'non applicable'. A higher score (range 1-100) indicates a higher level of self-management.
Measured: 3 months
Patients' self-management skills
Patients' self-management skills are assessed with the Dutch version of the short form Patient Activation Measure (PAM13-Dutch). The PAM 13-Dutch is a reliable 13-item instrument and assesses patient (or consumer) self-reported knowledge, skills and confidence for self-management of one's health or chronic condition. The answering categories per item are 4-point Likert scales, ranging from totally disagree to totally agree and 'non applicable'. A higher score (range 1-100) indicates a higher level of self-management.
Measured: 9 months
Physical activity
Physical activity will be objectively measured with an Actigraph accelerometer. The Actigraph accelerometer is a reliable tool for measuring physical activity in adults. Participants will be instructed to wear the accelerometer on their waist for five consecutive days, except when sleeping, showering, bathing or swimming. Average amount of moderate or vigorous physical activity (MVPA) per day will be calculated.
Measured: 3 months
Physical activity
Physical activity will be objectively measured with an Actigraph accelerometer. The Actigraph accelerometer is a reliable tool for measuring physical activity in adults. Participants will be instructed to wear the accelerometer on their waist for five consecutive days, except when sleeping, showering, bathing or swimming. Average amount of moderate or vigorous physical activity (MVPA) per day will be calculated.
Measured: 9 months
Exercise adherence
Exercise adherence will be measured with the Exercise Adherence Rating Scale (EARS). The EARS is a 6 item self-reported questionnaire with items scored on a 5-point Likert scale (0 = completely agree; 4 = completely disagree). A higher score (0-24) indicates better adherence to prescribed home-exercises.
Measured: 3 months
Exercise adherence
Exercise adherence will be measured with the Exercise Adherence Rating Scale (EARS). The EARS is a 6 item self-reported questionnaire with items scored on a 5-point Likert scale (0 = completely agree; 4 = completely disagree). A higher score (0-24) indicates better adherence to prescribed home-exercises.
Measured: 9 months
Global perceived effect
Global perceived effect will be measured with the 7-point Likert global perceived effect score (GPE). Categories 1 (very much improved) to 3 (a little improved) are classified as 'improved'. Categories 4 (no change) to 7 (very much worse) are classified as 'not improved'.
Measured: 3 months
Global perceived effect
Global perceived effect will be measured with the 7-point Likert global perceived effect score (GPE). Categories 1 (very much improved) to 3 (a little improved) are classified as 'improved'. Categories 4 (no change) to 7 (very much worse) are classified as 'not improved'.
Measured: 9 months
Satisfaction with treatment
Satisfaction with treatment outcome will be measured with an 8-point Likert scale question: 'All things considered, how satisfied are you with the results of the treatment for your neck and/or shoulder complaints? (1 = extremely satisfied, 7 = extremely dissatisfied, 8 = not sure/no opinion)
Measured: 3 months
Neck pain and disability score (NPAD; for patients with neck pain)
This outcome will be combined to a region-specific pain and disability score over 3 months follow-up, assessed by the Neck Pain and Disability Scale (NPAD) for patients with primarily neck complaints and by the Shoulder Pain and Disability Index (SPADI) for patients with primarily shoulder complaints. A higher total score (0-100 for both outcome measures) indicates increased pain and functional limitations.
Measured: 3 months
Shoulder pain and disability index (SPADI; for patients with shoulder pain)
This outcome will be combined to a region-specific pain and disability score over 3 months follow-up, assessed by the Neck Pain and Disability Scale (NPAD) for patients with primarily neck complaints and by the Shoulder Pain and Disability Index (SPADI) for patients with primarily shoulder complaints. A higher total score (0-100 for both outcome measures) indicates increased pain and functional limitations.
Measured: 3 months
Cost-effectiveness (assessed with a cost questionnaire)
A cost-utility analysis (CUA) will be performed for QALYs and a cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) for the combined region-specific pain and disability score, both of which will be performed from the societal and the healthcare perspective. From the societal perspective all costs will be taken into account, irrespective of who pays or benefits, whereas solely those borne by the healthcare sector will be included if the healthcare perspective is applied.
Measured: 9 months
Cost-utility (assessed with a cost questionnaire)
A cost-utility analysis (CUA) will be performed for QALYs and a cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) for the combined region-specific pain and disability score, both of which will be performed from the societal and the healthcare perspective. From the societal perspective all costs will be taken into account, irrespective of who pays or benefits, whereas solely those borne by the healthcare sector will be included if the healthcare perspective is applied.
Measured: 9 months
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted11 Jan 2023
- Study start13 Jan 2020
- Primary completion2 Oct 2023
- Study completion1 Nov 2023
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- 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
- Model description
- A multicenter, pragmatic, two-arm, parallel-group, cluster randomized controlled trial (cRCT) will be conducted.
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Enrolment
- 139 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Mark van Tilburg
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Sponsor-investigator, Mark van Tilburg, University of Applied Sciences Utrecht
- Investigators
- Cindy Veenhof, Prof. dr., Principal investigator, HU University of applied sciences Utrecht
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT05680753
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- NL69963.041.19
- Other IDs
- NL8249
- Status last verified
- Mar 2025
- First submitted
- 12 Dec 2022
- Last updated
- 25 Mar 2025
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- Yes: all IPD that underlie results in a publication.
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 25 Mar 2025. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- A Stratified Approach Integrated With eHealth in Primary Care Physiotherapy for Patients With Neck and/or Shoulder Complaints
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT05680753
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- NL69963.041.19
- Conditions
- Neck Pain, Shoulder Pain
- Keywords
- Stratified care, Physiotherapy, Blended care
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 139 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Mark van TilburgUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- 13 Jan 2020 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 2 Oct 2023 (actual)
- Study completion
- 1 Nov 2023 (actual)
- First posted
- 11 Jan 2023 (actual)
- 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 aim of this cluster RCT is to investigate the clinical effectiveness of a Stratified Blended Approach for patients with neck and/or shoulder complaints on pain and disability over 9 months, compared to usual physiotherapy care.
Our secondary aims are twofold:
- to investigate the effectiveness of the Stratified Blended Approach for patients with neck and/or shoulder complaints on pain intensity, health-related quality of life, illness perceptions, self-management skills, physical activity, exercise adherence, self-perceived effect and satisfaction at 3 and 9 months, compared to usual physiotherapy care;
- to investigate the cost-effectiveness and cost-utility of the Stratified Blended Approach for patients with neck and/or shoulder complaints, compared to usual physiotherapy care.
In the Stratified Blended Approach arm, physiotherapists will match I) the content and intensity of physiotherapy care to the patient's risk of persistent disabling pain, categorized as low, medium or high (using the Keele STarT MSK Tool) and II) the mode of care delivery to the patient's suitability and willingness to receive blended care. The control arm will receive physiotherapy as usual.
This study is financially supported by the Scientific College Physiotherapy (WCF), part of the Royal Dutch Association for Physiotherapy (KNGF). WCF has no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscripts. External peer-review took place during the funding process. The results will be publicly disclosed unreservedly.
Detailed description
Intervention:
According to the Stratified Blended approach, patients will be matched to an appropriate treatment based on their risk of persistent disabling pain (assessed with the Keele STarT MSK Tool - either low, medium or high risk) and their suitability for blended care (assessed with the Dutch Blended Physiotherapy Checklist - either suitable or unsuitable for blended care). Based on patients risk profile, the physiotherapy treatment will be targeted to patients' individual needs. If considered suitable for blended care, the patient will receive a digital and face-to-face blend of physiotherapy treatment (e-Exercise) in which an app with personalized information, exercises and physical activity modules is integrated with face-to-face physiotherapy care. If patients are considered unsuitable for blended care, they will receive an information workbook with similar content as the app will be integrated with face-to-face physiotherapy. The app and the information workbook aims to support adherence to physical activity and exercise recommendations. Content of care was based on the Dutch KNGF Clinical Practice Guidelines for Physiotherapy Neck pain, Complaints of Arm, Neck and Shoulder (CANS) and Subacromial complaints.
Control group:
Usual physiotherapy. Content of care was based on the Dutch KNGF Clinical Practice Guidelines for Physiotherapy Neck pain, Complaints of Arm, Neck and Shoulder (CANS) and Subacromial complaints.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Number of arms
- 2
- Model description
- A multicenter, pragmatic, two-arm, parallel-group, cluster randomized controlled trial (cRCT) will be conducted.
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Stratified Blended Approach arm | Experimental | Behavioral: PhysiotherapyFirst, physiotherapists will use two stratification tools to decide the most suitable content and intensity as well as mode of care delivery of primary care physiotherapy. The content and intensity of physiotherapy will be matched to the patient's risk of persistent disabling pain as assessed with the Keele STarT MSK tool. The mode of care delivery of physiotherapy will be matched to the patient's suitability for blended care as assessed using the Dutch Blended Physiotherapy Checklist (i.e. yes or no). Second, physiotherapists will receive two practical tools to provide the matched treatment of the mode of care delivery. If considered suitable for blended care, the patient will receive a blended physiotherapy treatment (e-Exercise), in which a smartphone app with personalized information, exercises and physical activity modules is an integral part of physiotherapy treatment. If patients are considered not to be suitable for blended care, a paper-based workbook will be integrated. |
| Usual physiotherapy arm | Active comparator | Behavioral: PhysiotherapyPatients in the usual physiotherapy arm will be offered usual care (face-to-face or video consults) based upon the recommendations of the guidelines of the Royal Dutch Association for Physiotherapy (KNGF). The clinical guideline for neck pain, recommends categorization in treatment profiles based on: the severity of neck pain, the course of symptoms (normal vs. deviant) and the presence of psychosocial factors that may hinder recovery (yes vs. no). The clinical guideline for complaints of the arm, neck and shoulder recommends categorization in treatment profiles based on the region of complaints indicated as most problematic and the relationship between complaints, disabilities, and limitations in participation. No stratification tools to identify patient subgroups and subsequently match them to a treatment are recommended by the guidelines. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
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 |
|---|---|---|
| PhysiotherapyPhysiotherapy | Behavioural | Stratified Blended Approach arm, Usual physiotherapy arm |
Primary outcome
Neck pain and disability score (NPAD; for patients with neck pain)
Time frame: 9 months
The primary outcome is the combined region-specific pain and disability score over 9 months follow-up, assessed by the Neck Pain and Disability Scale (NPAD) for patients with primarily neck complaints and by the Shoulder Pain and Disability Index (SPADI) for patients with primarily shoulder complaints. A higher total score (0-100 for both outcome measures) indicates increased pain and functional limitations.
Shoulder pain and disability index (SPADI; for patients with shoulder pain)
Time frame: 9 months
The primary outcome is the combined region-specific pain and disability score over 9 months follow-up, assessed by the Neck Pain and Disability Scale (NPAD) for patients with primarily neck complaints and by the Shoulder Pain and Disability Index (SPADI) for patients with primarily shoulder complaints. A higher total score (0-100 for both outcome measures) indicates increased pain and functional limitations.
19 secondary outcomes
Neck and/or shoulder pain intensity
Time frame: 3 months
Neck and/or shoulder pain intensity
Time frame: 9 months
Health-related quality of life
Time frame: 3 months
Health-related quality of life
Time frame: 9 months
Illness perceptions
Time frame: 3 months
Illness perceptions
Time frame: 9 months
Patients' self-management skills
Time frame: 3 months
Patients' self-management skills
Time frame: 9 months
Physical activity
Time frame: 3 months
Physical activity
Time frame: 9 months
Exercise adherence
Time frame: 3 months
Exercise adherence
Time frame: 9 months
Global perceived effect
Time frame: 3 months
Global perceived effect
Time frame: 9 months
Satisfaction with treatment
Time frame: 3 months
Neck pain and disability score (NPAD; for patients with neck pain)
Time frame: 3 months
Shoulder pain and disability index (SPADI; for patients with shoulder pain)
Time frame: 3 months
Cost-effectiveness (assessed with a cost questionnaire)
Time frame: 9 months
Cost-utility (assessed with a cost questionnaire)
Time frame: 9 months
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 25 Mar 2025.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: Yes. all IPD that underlie results in a publication.
Related trials for Neck Pain
Not yet recruiting
Effects of Whole-Body Vibration and Cervical Stabilization With Core Stabilization in Young Adults With Non-Specific Low Back Pain
Nonspecific Low Back Pain
Recruiting
Strain Counter Strain and Conventional Stretching in School-aged Children With Mechanical Neck Pain Due to Prolong Screen Use
Mechanical Neck Pain
Recruiting
Effects of Alexander Technique Versus Feldenkrais Somatic Training in Patients With Text Neck Syndrome
Text Neck Syndrome
Recruiting
Longitudinal Stripping Massage vs. Percussion Device for Neck Pain: Ultrasound Study.
Chronic Neck Pain
RecruitingPhase 2
Effectiveness of Phenotype-based Pain Management Guidelines for Head and Neck Cancer Related Pain: a Pilot Study
Cancer Pain, Orofacial Pain
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.
Cindy Veenhof, Prof. dr. principal investigator
HU University of applied sciences Utrecht
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Physiotherapy in people with Neck Pain and Shoulder Pain, run by Mark van Tilburg at 1 site in Netherlands.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
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 25 Mar 2025. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in Netherlands. 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?
Neck pain and disability score (NPAD; for patients with neck pain) (time frame: 9 months). The study lists 2 primary outcomes in all. It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
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 25 Mar 2025.