Neck PainNCT07042230
Proprioceptive Neuromuscular Facilitation And Passive Vertebral Mobilization For Neck Disability In Patients With Mechanical Neck Pain
A study testing Proprioceptive Neuromuscular Facilitation (PNF) and Passive Vertebral Mobilization (PVM) in people with Neck Pain and Neck Pain Musculoskeletal, run by University of Lahore at 1 site in Pakistan.
Trial summary
Mechanical neck pain is a common musculoskeletal condition that affects many people, especially those with poor posture or repetitive neck movements. It can cause discomfort, reduce the ability to move the neck, and affect daily functioning. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 to 35 years
- Conditions the study is for
- Neck Pain, Neck Pain Musculoskeletal, Mechanical Neck Pain
- What is being tested?
- Proprioceptive Neuromuscular Facilitation (PNF) and Passive Vertebral Mobilization (PVM)
- Type of treatment
- Injection or infusion
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 62 participants
- Where
- 1 sitePakistan
- Study dates
- 17 Aug 2024to 6 Jun 2025
- 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 35 years
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult
Who may be able to join
- Participants aged between 18 and 35 years were included in the study (Ashfaq et al., 2022).
- Participants diagnosed with pain localized in the neck region for at least 4 weeks were included.
- Participants diagnosed with no radiating pain beyond the shoulder or fingers were included (Cohen, 2015).
- Participants diagnosed with no identified neurological deficits were included.
- Participants having no history of major trauma or surgery to the cervical spine were included (Rodríguez-Huguet et al., 2020).
Who cannot join
- Participants who were diagnosed with ankylosing spondylitis, rheumatoid arthritis, fracture of spine, cancer or congenital anomaly of the cervical spine, positive neurological findings (Ashfaq et al., 2022).
- Patients with any other contraindication to manual therapy (Ashfaq et al., 2022).
- Neurological conditions affecting the cervical spine.
- Uncontrolled dizziness or vertigo (Cohen, 2015).
- Known malignancy or any pregnancy (Cohen, 2015).
- Current use of medications that could affect pain perception (e.g., opioids, high-dose antidepressants) (Rodríguez-Huguet et al., 2020)
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
About this study
Mechanical neck pain is a common musculoskeletal condition that affects many people, especially those with poor posture or repetitive neck movements. It can cause discomfort, reduce the ability to move the neck, and affect daily functioning. This study aimed to compare the effects of two physiotherapy treatments-Proprioceptive Neuromuscular Facilitation (PNF) and Passive Vertebral Mobilization (PVM)-on neck pain, disability, and movement.
This randomized controlled trial was conducted at the University of Lahore Teaching Hospital over nine months. A total of 62 participants, aged 18 to 35 years, who had mechanical neck pain for at least four weeks, were recruited and randomly assigned to one of two groups: Group A received PNF, while Group B received PVM. Both treatments were delivered by physiotherapists three times per week for four weeks.
Read more
PNF is an active therapy that involves specific movement patterns to improve muscle coordination and flexibility. PVM is a passive manual therapy technique where the therapist gently moves the neck vertebrae to improve joint mobility and reduce pain.
Outcomes were measured using the Neck Disability Index (NDI), the Numeric Pain Rating Scale (NPRS), and measurements of neck movement (Active Cervical Range of Motion, or ACROM) at the start of the study, at two weeks, and at the end of the four-week treatment. The study was single-blinded-meaning the person assessing the outcomes did not know which treatment the patient received.
The results showed that both treatments significantly improved pain, movement, and function. However, the group that received PNF showed slightly greater reduction in pain scores by the end of the treatment. There were no significant differences between the groups in terms of disability or movement range.
This study concluded that both PNF and PVM are beneficial treatments for mechanical neck pain. PNF may offer slightly faster pain relief, while both interventions are effective at improving mobility and reducing neck-related disability. These findings can help guide physiotherapists and patients in choosing suitable treatment options for neck pain.
Read the detailed description
Mechanical neck pain is a common musculoskeletal condition often caused by poor posture, repetitive stress, or mechanical strain involving cervical joints, ligaments, and muscles. It is typically localized and not associated with radiating symptoms. This condition leads to functional disability, reduced cervical range of motion (ROM), and increased pain, significantly affecting individuals' quality of life and work productivity. While various physiotherapeutic approaches are employed in its management, the comparative efficacy of Proprioceptive Neuromuscular Facilitation (PNF) and Passive Vertebral Mobilization (PVM) remains inadequately explored in controlled settings.
This randomized controlled trial aimed to evaluate and compare the effectiveness of PNF and PVM techniques in improving neck-related disability, reducing pain, and enhancing active cervical ROM in individuals diagnosed with mechanical neck pain. The study was conducted at the University of Lahore Teaching Hospital and followed ethical approval and informed consent protocols. The trial design was single-blinded, with the assessor unaware of group allocation.
A total of 62 participants aged 18-35 years with clinically diagnosed mechanical neck pain of at least 4 weeks duration were included using purposive sampling. Participants were randomly allocated (via lottery method) into two equal groups (n = 31 per group): Group A received PNF techniques, and Group B received Maitland-based passive vertebral mobilization.
Group A (PNF) intervention involved rhythmic initiation, dynamic reversals, and contract-relax patterns performed across diagonal cranio-cervical movement patterns. Group B (PVM) received graded Maitland mobilizations (Grades I-IV) targeting the cervical vertebrae. Both groups received physiotherapy three times per week for four consecutive weeks. Each treatment session lasted 15-30 minutes.
Outcome measures were recorded at baseline, week 2, and week 4 and included:
Neck Disability Index (NDI): to assess functional limitation
Numeric Pain Rating Scale (NPRS): to measure subjective pain intensity
Active Cervical Range of Motion (ACROM): measured using a goniometer
Statistical analysis using SPSS Version 24 revealed that both groups experienced statistically significant improvements over time in all outcome measures:
NDI (F = 355.163, p < .001)
NPRS (F = 544.090, p < .001)
ACROM (F = 33.413, p < .001)
Between-group comparisons showed no significant difference for NDI (p = .769) or ACROM (p = .987). However, PNF demonstrated significantly greater pain reduction at baseline (p = .039) and at week four (p = .043), suggesting superior short-term analgesic effects.
This trial demonstrated that both PNF and PVM are effective in reducing neck disability and improving cervical mobility and pain. PNF may offer enhanced short-term pain relief due to its neuromuscular activation mechanisms, while PVM remains an effective passive intervention for joint mobilization.
The study's findings provide clinicians with evidence supporting both interventions, allowing treatment selection based on individual patient presentation, therapist skill, and rehabilitation goals. Future studies with larger samples and longer follow-up periods are recommended to assess long-term efficacy, retention of benefits, and cost-effectiveness.
- Conditions
- Neck Pain, Neck Pain Musculoskeletal, Mechanical Neck Pain, Proprioceptive Neuromuscular Facilitation, Mobilization
- Being tested
- Proprioceptive Neuromuscular Facilitation (PNF), Passive Vertebral Mobilization (PVM)
- Keywords
- Articular, Cervical Vertebrae, Manual Therapy, Neck Pain, Proprioception, Range of Motion
- Medical subject headings
- Neck Pain
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Proprioceptive Neuromuscular Facilitation (PNF)Other
Also called PNF Stretching, PNF Cervical Patterns
Proprioceptive Neuromuscular Facilitation (PNF) techniques were applied to the cervical region using rhythmic initiation, dynamic reversals, and contract-relax methods. Movements followed diagonal cranio-cervical patterns including flexion/extension with rotational components. Each session lasted 15-30 minutes, delivered three times per week for four weeks. Repetitions and sets were progressively increased based on patient tolerance. The goal was to enhance neuromuscular coordination, improve cervical range of motion, and reduce pain through active facilitation techniques.
Passive Vertebral Mobilization (PVM)Other
Also called Cervical Maitland Mobilization, Spinal Mobilization Techniques
Passive Vertebral Mobilization (PVM) was administered using Maitland mobilization techniques applied to the cervical spine. Posteroanterior central and unilateral glides were performed with the participant in a prone position. Mobilizations started with Grades I-II during Weeks 1-2 and progressed to Grades III-IV in Weeks 3-4, depending on patient response. Each session lasted 15-20 minutes and was conducted three times weekly over four weeks. This passive manual therapy aimed to improve joint mobility, reduce muscle stiffness, and alleviate mechanical neck pain.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Proprioceptive Neuromuscular Facilitation (PNF) | Experimental | Participants in this arm received Proprioceptive Neuromuscular Facilitation (PNF) techniques aimed at improving neck mobility, pain, and function. The intervention included rhythmic initiation, dynamic reversals, and contract-relax techniques performed across four cranio-cervical diagonal movement patterns (e.g., extension with left rotation, flexion with right rotation). Each session lasted 15-30 minutes and was delivered three times per week for four weeks. Techniques were progressed based on patient tolerance, with repetitions increased in the third and fourth weeks. All sessions were administered by licensed physiotherapists following standardized protocols. Receives: Other: Proprioceptive Neuromuscular Facilitation (PNF) |
| Passive Vertebral Mobilization (PVM) | Experimental | Participants in this arm received Maitland-based Passive Vertebral Mobilization (PVM) techniques targeting cervical vertebrae to improve joint mobility and reduce neck pain. Mobilizations were applied in prone lying using posteroanterior central and unilateral glides. Treatment began with Grades I-II oscillatory mobilizations in Weeks 1-2, progressing to Grades III-IV in Weeks 3-4, based on patient response and tolerance. Each session lasted 15-20 minutes and was conducted three times per week for four weeks. Interventions were performed by trained physiotherapists using standardized procedures. Receives: Other: Passive Vertebral Mobilization (PVM) |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Neck Disability
The Neck Disability Index (NDI) is a validated, self-reported questionnaire that assesses disability related to neck pain. It contains 10 items, each scored from 0 to 5, with higher scores indicating greater disability. The total score ranges from 0 to 50 and is converted into a percentage. This outcome will assess improvement in neck-related function and disability following 4 weeks of intervention with either PNF or PVM.
Measured: Baseline, Week 2, and Week 4
Secondary outcomes (2)
Cervical Pain
The Numeric Pain Rating Scale (NPRS) is an 11-point self-reported scale ranging from 0 ("no pain") to 10 ("worst imaginable pain"). It is used to quantify the patient's subjective pain intensity. Changes in NPRS scores will be recorded to assess the effectiveness of the interventions in reducing neck pain.
Measured: Baseline, Week 2, and Week 4
Active Cervical Range of Motion (ACROM)
ACROM will be measured using a universal goniometer in degrees across cervical flexion, extension, lateral flexion, and rotation. This measure will assess the improvement in neck mobility and functional range following intervention.
Measured: Baseline, Week 2, and Week 4
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted27 Jun 2025
- Study start17 Aug 2024
- Primary completion16 Apr 2025
- Study completion6 Jun 2025
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.
- More trials run by University of LahoreThe sponsor's other registered studies.
- 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
- Single blind
- Who is masked
- Outcomes assessor
- Enrolment
- 62 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- University of Lahore
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Umaima Naeem, University of Lahore
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT07042230
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- Rec-UOL-/506/08/24
- Status last verified
- Jun 2025
- First submitted
- 18 Jun 2025
- Last updated
- 27 Jun 2025
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- Yes
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- No
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 27 Jun 2025. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Proprioceptive Neuromuscular Facilitation And Passive Vertebral Mobilization For Neck Disability In Patients With Mechanical Neck Pain
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT07042230
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- Rec-UOL-/506/08/24
- Conditions
- Neck Pain, Neck Pain Musculoskeletal, Mechanical Neck Pain, Proprioceptive Neuromuscular Facilitation, Mobilization
- Keywords
- Articular, Cervical Vertebrae, Manual Therapy, Neck Pain, Proprioception, Range of Motion
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 62 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- University of LahoreUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- 17 Aug 2024 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 16 Apr 2025 (actual)
- Study completion
- 6 Jun 2025 (actual)
- First posted
- 27 Jun 2025 (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.
Mechanical neck pain is a common musculoskeletal condition that affects many people, especially those with poor posture or repetitive neck movements. It can cause discomfort, reduce the ability to move the neck, and affect daily functioning. This study aimed to compare the effects of two physiotherapy treatments-Proprioceptive Neuromuscular Facilitation (PNF) and Passive Vertebral Mobilization (PVM)-on neck pain, disability, and movement.
This randomized controlled trial was conducted at the University of Lahore Teaching Hospital over nine months. A total of 62 participants, aged 18 to 35 years, who had mechanical neck pain for at least four weeks, were recruited and randomly assigned to one of two groups: Group A received PNF, while Group B received PVM. Both treatments were delivered by physiotherapists three times per week for four weeks.
PNF is an active therapy that involves specific movement patterns to improve muscle coordination and flexibility. PVM is a passive manual therapy technique where the therapist gently moves the neck vertebrae to improve joint mobility and reduce pain.
Outcomes were measured using the Neck Disability Index (NDI), the Numeric Pain Rating Scale (NPRS), and measurements of neck movement (Active Cervical Range of Motion, or ACROM) at the start of the study, at two weeks, and at the end of the four-week treatment. The study was single-blinded-meaning the person assessing the outcomes did not know which treatment the patient received.
The results showed that both treatments significantly improved pain, movement, and function. However, the group that received PNF showed slightly greater reduction in pain scores by the end of the treatment. There were no significant differences between the groups in terms of disability or movement range.
This study concluded that both PNF and PVM are beneficial treatments for mechanical neck pain. PNF may offer slightly faster pain relief, while both interventions are effective at improving mobility and reducing neck-related disability. These findings can help guide physiotherapists and patients in choosing suitable treatment options for neck pain.
Detailed description
Mechanical neck pain is a common musculoskeletal condition often caused by poor posture, repetitive stress, or mechanical strain involving cervical joints, ligaments, and muscles. It is typically localized and not associated with radiating symptoms. This condition leads to functional disability, reduced cervical range of motion (ROM), and increased pain, significantly affecting individuals' quality of life and work productivity. While various physiotherapeutic approaches are employed in its management, the comparative efficacy of Proprioceptive Neuromuscular Facilitation (PNF) and Passive Vertebral Mobilization (PVM) remains inadequately explored in controlled settings.
This randomized controlled trial aimed to evaluate and compare the effectiveness of PNF and PVM techniques in improving neck-related disability, reducing pain, and enhancing active cervical ROM in individuals diagnosed with mechanical neck pain. The study was conducted at the University of Lahore Teaching Hospital and followed ethical approval and informed consent protocols. The trial design was single-blinded, with the assessor unaware of group allocation.
A total of 62 participants aged 18-35 years with clinically diagnosed mechanical neck pain of at least 4 weeks duration were included using purposive sampling. Participants were randomly allocated (via lottery method) into two equal groups (n = 31 per group): Group A received PNF techniques, and Group B received Maitland-based passive vertebral mobilization.
Group A (PNF) intervention involved rhythmic initiation, dynamic reversals, and contract-relax patterns performed across diagonal cranio-cervical movement patterns. Group B (PVM) received graded Maitland mobilizations (Grades I-IV) targeting the cervical vertebrae. Both groups received physiotherapy three times per week for four consecutive weeks. Each treatment session lasted 15-30 minutes.
Outcome measures were recorded at baseline, week 2, and week 4 and included:
Neck Disability Index (NDI): to assess functional limitation
Numeric Pain Rating Scale (NPRS): to measure subjective pain intensity
Active Cervical Range of Motion (ACROM): measured using a goniometer
Statistical analysis using SPSS Version 24 revealed that both groups experienced statistically significant improvements over time in all outcome measures:
NDI (F = 355.163, p < .001)
NPRS (F = 544.090, p < .001)
ACROM (F = 33.413, p < .001)
Between-group comparisons showed no significant difference for NDI (p = .769) or ACROM (p = .987). However, PNF demonstrated significantly greater pain reduction at baseline (p = .039) and at week four (p = .043), suggesting superior short-term analgesic effects.
This trial demonstrated that both PNF and PVM are effective in reducing neck disability and improving cervical mobility and pain. PNF may offer enhanced short-term pain relief due to its neuromuscular activation mechanisms, while PVM remains an effective passive intervention for joint mobilization.
The study's findings provide clinicians with evidence supporting both interventions, allowing treatment selection based on individual patient presentation, therapist skill, and rehabilitation goals. Future studies with larger samples and longer follow-up periods are recommended to assess long-term efficacy, retention of benefits, and cost-effectiveness.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Single blind (outcomes assessor)
- Number of arms
- 2
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Proprioceptive Neuromuscular Facilitation (PNF) | Experimental | Other: Proprioceptive Neuromuscular Facilitation (PNF)Participants in this arm received Proprioceptive Neuromuscular Facilitation (PNF) techniques aimed at improving neck mobility, pain, and function. The intervention included rhythmic initiation, dynamic reversals, and contract-relax techniques performed across four cranio-cervical diagonal movement patterns (e.g., extension with left rotation, flexion with right rotation). Each session lasted 15-30 minutes and was delivered three times per week for four weeks. Techniques were progressed based on patient tolerance, with repetitions increased in the third and fourth weeks. All sessions were administered by licensed physiotherapists following standardized protocols. |
| Passive Vertebral Mobilization (PVM) | Experimental | Other: Passive Vertebral Mobilization (PVM)Participants in this arm received Maitland-based Passive Vertebral Mobilization (PVM) techniques targeting cervical vertebrae to improve joint mobility and reduce neck pain. Mobilizations were applied in prone lying using posteroanterior central and unilateral glides. Treatment began with Grades I-II oscillatory mobilizations in Weeks 1-2, progressing to Grades III-IV in Weeks 3-4, based on patient response and tolerance. Each session lasted 15-20 minutes and was conducted three times per week for four weeks. Interventions were performed by trained physiotherapists using standardized procedures. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 to 35 years
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult
Key inclusion criteria (5 listed)
- Participants aged between 18 and 35 years were included in the study (Ashfaq et al., 2022).
- Participants diagnosed with pain localized in the neck region for at least 4 weeks were included.
- Participants diagnosed with no radiating pain beyond the shoulder or fingers were included (Cohen, 2015).
- Participants diagnosed with no identified neurological deficits were included.
- Participants having no history of major trauma or surgery to the cervical spine were included (Rodríguez-Huguet et al., 2020).
Key exclusion criteria (6 listed)
- Participants who were diagnosed with ankylosing spondylitis, rheumatoid arthritis, fracture of spine, cancer or congenital anomaly of the cervical spine, positive neurological findings (Ashfaq et al., 2022).
- Patients with any other contraindication to manual therapy (Ashfaq et al., 2022).
- Neurological conditions affecting the cervical spine.
- Uncontrolled dizziness or vertigo (Cohen, 2015).
- Known malignancy or any pregnancy (Cohen, 2015).
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 |
|---|---|---|
| Proprioceptive Neuromuscular Facilitation (PNF)Also: PNF Stretching, PNF Cervical PatternsProprioceptive Neuromuscular Facilitation (PNF) techniques were applied to the cervical region using rhythmic initiation, dynamic reversals, and contract-relax methods. Movements followed diagonal cranio-cervical patterns including flexion/extension with rotational components. Each session lasted 15-30 minutes, delivered three times per week for four weeks. Repetitions and sets were progressively increased based on patient tolerance. The goal was to enhance neuromuscular coordination, improve cervical range of motion, and reduce pain through active facilitation techniques. | Other | Proprioceptive Neuromuscular Facilitation (PNF) |
| Passive Vertebral Mobilization (PVM)Also: Cervical Maitland Mobilization, Spinal Mobilization TechniquesPassive Vertebral Mobilization (PVM) was administered using Maitland mobilization techniques applied to the cervical spine. Posteroanterior central and unilateral glides were performed with the participant in a prone position. Mobilizations started with Grades I-II during Weeks 1-2 and progressed to Grades III-IV in Weeks 3-4, depending on patient response. Each session lasted 15-20 minutes and was conducted three times weekly over four weeks. This passive manual therapy aimed to improve joint mobility, reduce muscle stiffness, and alleviate mechanical neck pain. | Other | Passive Vertebral Mobilization (PVM) |
Primary outcome
Neck Disability
Time frame: Baseline, Week 2, and Week 4
The Neck Disability Index (NDI) is a validated, self-reported questionnaire that assesses disability related to neck pain. It contains 10 items, each scored from 0 to 5, with higher scores indicating greater disability. The total score ranges from 0 to 50 and is converted into a percentage. This outcome will assess improvement in neck-related function and disability following 4 weeks of intervention with either PNF or PVM.
2 secondary outcomes
Cervical Pain
Time frame: Baseline, Week 2, and Week 4
Active Cervical Range of Motion (ACROM)
Time frame: Baseline, Week 2, and Week 4
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 27 Jun 2025.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: No
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.
The record lists no contact. Use the official record to reach the sponsor.
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Proprioceptive Neuromuscular Facilitation (PNF) and Passive Vertebral Mobilization (PVM) in people with Neck Pain and Neck Pain Musculoskeletal, run by University of Lahore at 1 site in Pakistan.
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 5 inclusion and 6 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 27 Jun 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 Pakistan. 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 Disability (time frame: Baseline, Week 2, and Week 4). 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 27 Jun 2025.