Whiplash InjuryWHIPLASH-RFvsANCT07535515
Radiofrequency Versus Cervical Fusion for Chronic Whiplash
An observational study of Whiplash Injury and Whiplash Injury of Cervical Spine, run by University of Valencia at 1 site in Spain.
Trial summary
Chronic neck pain after whiplash injury is a common and disabling condition that can significantly affect quality of life, daily activities, and psychological well-being. In some patients, pain persists for months or years despite conservative treatments, leading to consideration of more invasive therapeutic options. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 years and older
- Conditions the study is for
- Whiplash Injury, Whiplash Injury of Cervical Spine, Chronic Neck Pain
- How many people
- 170 participants
- Where
- 1 siteSpain
- Study dates
- Jan 2005to Dec 2025
- Phase
- Observational
- 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
Study population: The study population consists of adult patients with chronic post-traumatic cervical whiplash who were treated at a tertiary care hospital between 2005 and 2025. Eligible patients are those aged 18 years or older who developed persistent neck pain following a traumatic acceleration-deceleration injury and whose symptoms persisted for at least three months. All patients received either cervical medial branch radiofrequency or anterior cervical discectomy and fusion as part of routine clinical care, based on standard clinical indications. The population includes both male and female patients and represents a real-world cohort managed in specialized clinical practice. Only patients with sufficient clinical documentation and available follow-up data to assess pain, functional outcomes, and treatment durability are included.
Who may be able to join
- Adults aged 18 years or older at the time of treatment.
- Clinical diagnosis of chronic post-traumatic cervical whiplash, with symptoms persisting for at least 3 months following the traumatic event.
- Cervical pain attributed to a traumatic acceleration-deceleration mechanism (whiplash injury).
- Treatment with either:
- cervical medial branch radiofrequency, or
- anterior cervical discectomy and fusion performed as part of routine clinical care.
Who cannot join
- Cervical pain primarily attributable to non-traumatic conditions, including degenerative cervical disease, inflammatory disorders, neoplastic disease, infection, radiculopathy, or cervical myelopathy.
- History of previous cervical spine surgery before the index treatment, which could interfere with the assessment of treatment outcomes.
- Patients who received both cervical radiofrequency and anterior cervical discectomy and fusion for the same clinical episode of whiplash-related pain.
- Cervical procedures performed outside the Hospital General Universitario de Valencia or without verifiable technical documentation in the medical record.
- Insufficient clinical documentation to confirm the diagnosis of post-traumatic whiplash or to evaluate pain, functional, or psychological outcomes after treatment.
- Absence of clinical follow-up data after the index treatment.
- Age under 18 years at the time of treatment. Availability of clinical follow-up data after treatment that allows assessment of pain and/or functional outcomes.
- Treatment performed at the Hospital General Universitario de Valencia between 2005 and 2025.
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
Spain1 site
Consorcio Hospital General Universitario de Valencia
Valencia, Valencia, 46015
About this study
Official title: Comparative Effectiveness of Cervical Zygapophyseal Joint Radiofrequency Versus Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion in Chronic Post-Traumatic Whiplash: A Retrospective Cohort Study
Chronic neck pain after whiplash injury is a common and disabling condition that can significantly affect quality of life, daily activities, and psychological well-being. In some patients, pain persists for months or years despite conservative treatments, leading to consideration of more invasive therapeutic options. Two commonly used treatments in selected patients are cervical zygapophyseal (facet) joint radiofrequency and anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF), but their comparative long-term outcomes in routine clinical practice are not well defined.
This study aims to compare the clinical, functional, and psychological outcomes of patients with chronic post-traumatic cervical whiplash who were treated either with cervical medial branch radiofrequency or with anterior cervical discectomy and fusion. The study uses a retrospective observational design based on the review of medical records from a tertiary hospital over a 20-year period.
Read more
Adult patients diagnosed with chronic post-traumatic whiplash and treated between 2005 and 2025 are included. All treatments were performed as part of usual clinical care and were not assigned for research purposes. Data collected include patient characteristics, injury mechanism, type of treatment received, pain intensity, functional disability, psychological symptoms, need for repeat procedures or additional surgery, and clinical follow-up information.
The primary objective is to compare pain relief between the two treatment groups. Secondary objectives include comparison of functional recovery, duration of treatment benefit, recurrence of pain, psychological symptoms, need for further interventions, and return to daily activities or work.
By analyzing long-term real-world data, this study seeks to improve understanding of the relative effectiveness of cervical radiofrequency and surgical fusion for chronic whiplash pain, helping clinicians and patients make more informed treatment decisions. No new interventions are performed as part of this study, and all data are analyzed anonymously.
Read the detailed description
Chronic post-traumatic cervical whiplash is a frequent cause of persistent neck pain, functional disability, and psychological distress following acceleration-deceleration injuries. Although many patients recover with conservative management, a substantial proportion develop chronic symptoms lasting months or years. In these cases, identifying the predominant pain generator is essential for guiding treatment.
Previous studies have shown that the cervical zygapophyseal (facet) joints are a common source of chronic pain after whiplash injury, leading to the development of targeted interventional strategies. Cervical medial branch radiofrequency is a minimally invasive technique designed to interrupt nociceptive input from the facet joints and has been associated with meaningful pain relief and functional improvement in appropriately selected patients. In parallel, anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) has been used in selected patients with persistent post-traumatic neck pain, particularly when structural abnormalities are identified. However, ACDF is a more invasive intervention, associated with greater treatment burden and potential long-term consequences, and its role in isolated chronic whiplash without radiculopathy or myelopathy remains debated.
Despite the widespread clinical use of both approaches, there is limited evidence directly comparing their real-world effectiveness in patients with chronic post-traumatic whiplash. The present study addresses this gap by examining long-term outcomes in a large, single-center cohort treated as part of routine clinical practice over a 20-year period.
This study is designed as a retrospective observational cohort analysis conducted at a tertiary care hospital. Patients are categorized according to the definitive treatment they received as part of standard clinical care: cervical medial branch radiofrequency or anterior cervical discectomy and fusion. Treatment decisions were based on clinical judgment and available diagnostic information and were not determined by any research protocol.
Clinical data are obtained through review of electronic medical records and procedural documentation. The analysis focuses on comparative evaluation of outcomes between treatment groups, with attention to differences in patient characteristics and clinical context. Multivariable statistical methods, and where appropriate propensity-based adjustment, are used to account for potential confounding factors inherent to observational comparative research.
Because this is a retrospective observational study based on routine clinical care, all analyses are exploratory and hypothesis-generating in nature. By leveraging long-term real-world clinical data, this study seeks to improve understanding of the relative benefits and limitations of minimally invasive versus surgical treatment strategies for chronic post-traumatic whiplash, supporting more informed and evidence-based clinical decision-making.
- Conditions
- Whiplash Injury, Whiplash Injury of Cervical Spine, Chronic Neck Pain, Post-Traumatic Neck Pain
- Keywords
- Whiplash, Cervical Facet Joint Pain, Cervical Radiofrequency, Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion, Chronic Neck Pain, Post-Traumatic Neck Pain, Radiofrequency Neurotomy, Comparative Effectiveness, Retrospective Cohort
- Medical subject headings
- Whiplash Injuries
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Cervical Medial Branch Radiofrequency | Patients with chronic post-traumatic cervical whiplash who were treated with cervical zygapophyseal (facet) joint medial branch radiofrequency as part of routine clinical care. | |
| Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion (ACDF) | Patients with chronic post-traumatic cervical whiplash who were treated with anterior cervical discectomy and fusion as part of routine clinical care. |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Pain Relief After Treatment
Change in neck pain intensity following treatment measured using the Visual Analogue Scale for pain (VAS; 0-10 scale, where 0 indicates no pain and 10 indicates worst imaginable pain). Pain relief will be evaluated as absolute change from baseline and as the proportion of patients achieving a clinically meaningful reduction of at least 50% from baseline.
Measured: From baseline (pre-treatment) to last documented clinical follow-up, assessed up to 12 months after treatment.
Secondary outcomes (5)
Functional Disability of the Neck
Functional disability assessed using the Neck Disability Index (NDI; 0-50 points, where higher scores indicate greater disability), when available in the medical record. Outcomes will be analyzed as change from baseline and overall functional improvement after treatment.
Measured: From baseline to last documented clinical follow-up, assessed up to 12 months after treatment.
Duration of Pain Relief
Time from index treatment to recurrence of neck pain defined as a return to at least 50% of baseline pain intensity, based on clinical records.
Measured: From date of index treatment to documented recurrence of pain or last clinical follow-up, assessed up to 24 months after treatment.
Need for Additional Interventions
Proportion of patients requiring repeat cervical radiofrequency procedures, revision surgery, or additional cervical interventions due to recurrence or persistence of symptoms.
Measured: From treatment to additional intervention or last documented follow-up, assessed up to 24 months.
Psychological Symptoms Related to Chronic Pain
Presence and evolution of psychological symptoms assessed using standardized instruments such as the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS; 0-21 per subscale, where higher scores indicate worse symptoms) or the Symptom Checklist-90-Revised (SCL-90-R; higher scores indicate greater psychological distress), when available, or through structured clinical documentation.
Measured: From baseline to last documented clinical follow-up, assessed up to 12 months after treatment.
Return to Daily Activities or Work
Functional recovery assessed through clinical documentation of return to work or resumption of usual daily activities after treatment.
Measured: From treatment to documented return to work or resumption of usual daily activities, assessed up to 12 months after treatment.
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted17 Apr 2026
- Study startJan 2005
- Primary completionDec 2025
- Study completionDec 2025
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (16)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Whiplash InjuryStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by University of ValenciaThe 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
- Observational
- Observational model
- Cohort
- Time perspective
- Retrospective
- Enrolment
- 170 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- University of Valencia
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Vicente Vanaclocha, University of Valencia
- Investigators
- Vicente Vanaclocha Vanaclocha, MD PhD, Principal investigator, University of Valencia
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT07535515
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- CEIm PI 28-2026
- Acronym
- WHIPLASH-RFvsA
- Status last verified
- Apr 2026
- First submitted
- 7 Apr 2026
- Last updated
- 17 Apr 2026
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- No
Publications
Alomari A, Ferreira-Dos-Santos G, Singh M, Burnham T, Cao X, McCormick Z, Flamer D, Kumar P, Hoydonckx Y, Khan JS, Tumber PS, Alvares D, Bhatia A. End-on versus parallel radiofrequency lesioning for neurotomy of the cervical medial branch nerves: a study protocol of a prospective, randomized, double-blind clinical trial: the "EndPaRL" study. Trials. 2023 Nov 11;24(1):721. doi: 10.1186/s13063-023-07752-9.
PubMed 37951900Hurley RW, Adams MCB, Barad M, Bhaskar A, Bhatia A, Chadwick A, Deer TR, Hah J, Hooten WM, Kissoon NR, Lee DW, Mccormick Z, Moon JY, Narouze S, Provenzano DA, Schneider BJ, van Eerd M, Van Zundert J, Wallace MS, Wilson SM, Zhao Z, Cohen SP. Consensus practice guidelines on interventions for cervical spine (facet) joint pain from a multispecialty international working group. Pain Med. 2021 Nov 26;22(11):2443-2524. doi: 10.1093/pm/pnab281.
PubMed 34788462Manchikanti L, Knezevic NN, Knezevic E, Abdi S, Sanapati MR, Soin A, Wargo BW, Navani A, Atluri S, Gharibo CG, Simopoulos TT, Kosanovic R, Abd-Elsayed A, Kaye AD, Hirsch JA. A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of the Effectiveness of Radiofrequency Neurotomy in Managing Chronic Neck Pain. Pain Ther. 2023 Feb;12(1):19-66. doi: 10.1007/s40122-022-00455-0. Epub 2022 Nov 24.
PubMed 36422818Yen CY, Lin SM, Chen HY, Wang SW, Tsai YD, Chye CL, Chen TY, Wang HK, Wang KW. Sagittal alignment to predict efficiency in pulsed radiofrequency for cervical facet joint pain. Sci Rep. 2024 Nov 19;14(1):28563. doi: 10.1038/s41598-024-79181-w.
PubMed 39557962Burnham R, Trow R, Trow J, Smith A, Burnham T. Can ultrasound-guided medial branch blocks be used to select patients for cervical facet joint radiofrequency neurotomy? A matched retrospective cohort validation study. Pain Med. 2024 Nov 1;25(11):671-674. doi: 10.1093/pm/pnae054.
PubMed 38937279Sherwood D, Berlin E, Epps A, Gardner J, Schneider BJ. Cervical medial branch block progression to radiofrequency neurotomy: A retrospective clinical audit. N Am Spine Soc J. 2021 Nov 3;8:100091. doi: 10.1016/j.xnsj.2021.100091. eCollection 2021 Dec.
PubMed 35141655Shin WR, Kim HI, Shin DG, Shin DA. Radiofrequency neurotomy of cervical medial branches for chronic cervicobrachialgia. J Korean Med Sci. 2006 Feb;21(1):119-25. doi: 10.3346/jkms.2006.21.1.119.
PubMed 16479077MacVicar J, Borowczyk JM, MacVicar AM, Loughnan BM, Bogduk N. Cervical medial branch radiofrequency neurotomy in New Zealand. Pain Med. 2012 May;13(5):647-54. doi: 10.1111/j.1526-4637.2012.01351.x. Epub 2012 Mar 28.
PubMed 22458772Sapir DA, Gorup JM. Radiofrequency medial branch neurotomy in litigant and nonlitigant patients with cervical whiplash: a prospective study. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2001 Jun 15;26(12):E268-73. doi: 10.1097/00007632-200106150-00016.
PubMed 11426167Prushansky T, Pevzner E, Gordon C, Dvir Z. Cervical radiofrequency neurotomy in patients with chronic whiplash: a study of multiple outcome measures. J Neurosurg Spine. 2006 May;4(5):365-73. doi: 10.3171/spi.2006.4.5.365.
PubMed 16703903Smith AD, Jull G, Schneider G, Frizzell B, Hooper RA, Dunne-Proctor R, Sterling M. Cervical radiofrequency neurotomy reduces psychological features in individuals with chronic whiplash symptoms. Pain Physician. 2014 May-Jun;17(3):265-74.
PubMed 24850108Wallis BJ, Lord SM, Bogduk N. Resolution of psychological distress of whiplash patients following treatment by radiofrequency neurotomy: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Pain. 1997 Oct;73(1):15-22. doi: 10.1016/s0304-3959(97)00060-2.
PubMed 9414052Smith AD, Jull G, Schneider GM, Frizzell B, Hooper RA, Sterling M. Modulation of Cervical Facet Joint Nociception and Pain Attenuates Physical and Psychological Features of Chronic Whiplash: A Prospective Study. PM R. 2015 Sep;7(9):913-921. doi: 10.1016/j.pmrj.2015.03.014. Epub 2015 Mar 21.
PubMed 25805617McDonald GJ, Lord SM, Bogduk N. Long-term follow-up of patients treated with cervical radiofrequency neurotomy for chronic neck pain. Neurosurgery. 1999 Jul;45(1):61-7; discussion 67-8. doi: 10.1097/00006123-199907000-00015.
PubMed 10414567Lord SM, Barnsley L, Wallis BJ, McDonald GJ, Bogduk N. Percutaneous radio-frequency neurotomy for chronic cervical zygapophyseal-joint pain. N Engl J Med. 1996 Dec 5;335(23):1721-6. doi: 10.1056/NEJM199612053352302.
PubMed 8929263
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 17 Apr 2026. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Comparative Effectiveness of Cervical Zygapophyseal Joint Radiofrequency Versus Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion in Chronic Post-Traumatic Whiplash: A Retrospective Cohort Study
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT07535515
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- WHIPLASH-RFvsA / CEIm PI 28-2026
- Conditions
- Whiplash Injury, Whiplash Injury of Cervical Spine, Chronic Neck Pain, Post-Traumatic Neck Pain
- Keywords
- Whiplash, Cervical Facet Joint Pain, Cervical Radiofrequency, Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion, Chronic Neck Pain, Post-Traumatic Neck Pain, Radiofrequency Neurotomy, Comparative Effectiveness
- Study type
- Observational
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 170 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- University of ValenciaUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- Jan 2005 (actual)
- Primary completion
- Dec 2025 (actual)
- Study completion
- Dec 2025 (actual)
- First posted
- 17 Apr 2026 (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.
Chronic neck pain after whiplash injury is a common and disabling condition that can significantly affect quality of life, daily activities, and psychological well-being. In some patients, pain persists for months or years despite conservative treatments, leading to consideration of more invasive therapeutic options. Two commonly used treatments in selected patients are cervical zygapophyseal (facet) joint radiofrequency and anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF), but their comparative long-term outcomes in routine clinical practice are not well defined.
This study aims to compare the clinical, functional, and psychological outcomes of patients with chronic post-traumatic cervical whiplash who were treated either with cervical medial branch radiofrequency or with anterior cervical discectomy and fusion. The study uses a retrospective observational design based on the review of medical records from a tertiary hospital over a 20-year period.
Adult patients diagnosed with chronic post-traumatic whiplash and treated between 2005 and 2025 are included. All treatments were performed as part of usual clinical care and were not assigned for research purposes. Data collected include patient characteristics, injury mechanism, type of treatment received, pain intensity, functional disability, psychological symptoms, need for repeat procedures or additional surgery, and clinical follow-up information.
The primary objective is to compare pain relief between the two treatment groups. Secondary objectives include comparison of functional recovery, duration of treatment benefit, recurrence of pain, psychological symptoms, need for further interventions, and return to daily activities or work.
By analyzing long-term real-world data, this study seeks to improve understanding of the relative effectiveness of cervical radiofrequency and surgical fusion for chronic whiplash pain, helping clinicians and patients make more informed treatment decisions. No new interventions are performed as part of this study, and all data are analyzed anonymously.
Detailed description
Chronic post-traumatic cervical whiplash is a frequent cause of persistent neck pain, functional disability, and psychological distress following acceleration-deceleration injuries. Although many patients recover with conservative management, a substantial proportion develop chronic symptoms lasting months or years. In these cases, identifying the predominant pain generator is essential for guiding treatment.
Previous studies have shown that the cervical zygapophyseal (facet) joints are a common source of chronic pain after whiplash injury, leading to the development of targeted interventional strategies. Cervical medial branch radiofrequency is a minimally invasive technique designed to interrupt nociceptive input from the facet joints and has been associated with meaningful pain relief and functional improvement in appropriately selected patients. In parallel, anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) has been used in selected patients with persistent post-traumatic neck pain, particularly when structural abnormalities are identified. However, ACDF is a more invasive intervention, associated with greater treatment burden and potential long-term consequences, and its role in isolated chronic whiplash without radiculopathy or myelopathy remains debated.
Despite the widespread clinical use of both approaches, there is limited evidence directly comparing their real-world effectiveness in patients with chronic post-traumatic whiplash. The present study addresses this gap by examining long-term outcomes in a large, single-center cohort treated as part of routine clinical practice over a 20-year period.
This study is designed as a retrospective observational cohort analysis conducted at a tertiary care hospital. Patients are categorized according to the definitive treatment they received as part of standard clinical care: cervical medial branch radiofrequency or anterior cervical discectomy and fusion. Treatment decisions were based on clinical judgment and available diagnostic information and were not determined by any research protocol.
Clinical data are obtained through review of electronic medical records and procedural documentation. The analysis focuses on comparative evaluation of outcomes between treatment groups, with attention to differences in patient characteristics and clinical context. Multivariable statistical methods, and where appropriate propensity-based adjustment, are used to account for potential confounding factors inherent to observational comparative research.
Because this is a retrospective observational study based on routine clinical care, all analyses are exploratory and hypothesis-generating in nature. By leveraging long-term real-world clinical data, this study seeks to improve understanding of the relative benefits and limitations of minimally invasive versus surgical treatment strategies for chronic post-traumatic whiplash, supporting more informed and evidence-based clinical decision-making.
Study design
- Observational model
- Cohort
- Time perspective
- Retrospective
- Number of arms
- 2
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Cervical Medial Branch Radiofrequency | – | –Patients with chronic post-traumatic cervical whiplash who were treated with cervical zygapophyseal (facet) joint medial branch radiofrequency as part of routine clinical care. |
| Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion (ACDF) | – | –Patients with chronic post-traumatic cervical whiplash who were treated with anterior cervical discectomy and fusion as part of routine clinical care. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
- Study population
- The study population consists of adult patients with chronic post-traumatic cervical whiplash who were treated at a tertiary care hospital between 2005 and 2025. Eligible patients are those aged 18 years or older who developed persistent neck pain following a traumatic acceleration-deceleration injury and whose symptoms persisted for at least three months. All patients received either cervical medial branch radiofrequency or anterior cervical discectomy and fusion as part of routine clinical care, based on standard clinical indications. The population includes both male and female patients and represents a real-world cohort managed in specialized clinical practice. Only patients with sufficient clinical documentation and available follow-up data to assess pain, functional outcomes, and treatment durability are included.
Key inclusion criteria (6 listed)
- Adults aged 18 years or older at the time of treatment.
- Clinical diagnosis of chronic post-traumatic cervical whiplash, with symptoms persisting for at least 3 months following the traumatic event.
- Cervical pain attributed to a traumatic acceleration-deceleration mechanism (whiplash injury).
- Treatment with either:
- cervical medial branch radiofrequency, or
Key exclusion criteria (8 listed)
- Cervical pain primarily attributable to non-traumatic conditions, including degenerative cervical disease, inflammatory disorders, neoplastic disease, infection, radiculopathy, or cervical myelopathy.
- History of previous cervical spine surgery before the index treatment, which could interfere with the assessment of treatment outcomes.
- Patients who received both cervical radiofrequency and anterior cervical discectomy and fusion for the same clinical episode of whiplash-related pain.
- Cervical procedures performed outside the Hospital General Universitario de Valencia or without verifiable technical documentation in the medical record.
- Insufficient clinical documentation to confirm the diagnosis of post-traumatic whiplash or to evaluate pain, functional, or psychological outcomes after treatment.
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Primary outcome
Pain Relief After Treatment
Time frame: From baseline (pre-treatment) to last documented clinical follow-up, assessed up to 12 months after treatment.
Change in neck pain intensity following treatment measured using the Visual Analogue Scale for pain (VAS; 0-10 scale, where 0 indicates no pain and 10 indicates worst imaginable pain). Pain relief will be evaluated as absolute change from baseline and as the proportion of patients achieving a clinically meaningful reduction of at least 50% from baseline.
5 secondary outcomes
Functional Disability of the Neck
Time frame: From baseline to last documented clinical follow-up, assessed up to 12 months after treatment.
Duration of Pain Relief
Time frame: From date of index treatment to documented recurrence of pain or last clinical follow-up, assessed up to 24 months after treatment.
Need for Additional Interventions
Time frame: From treatment to additional intervention or last documented follow-up, assessed up to 24 months.
Psychological Symptoms Related to Chronic Pain
Time frame: From baseline to last documented clinical follow-up, assessed up to 12 months after treatment.
Return to Daily Activities or Work
Time frame: From treatment to documented return to work or resumption of usual daily activities, assessed up to 12 months after treatment.
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 17 Apr 2026.
- Background: PubMed 37951900Alomari A, Ferreira-Dos-Santos G, Singh M, Burnham T, Cao X, McCormick Z, Flamer D, Kumar P, Hoydonckx Y, Khan JS, Tumber PS, Alvares D, Bhatia A. End-on versus parallel radiofrequency lesioning for neurotomy of the cervical medial branch nerves: a study protocol of a prospective, randomized, double-blind clinical trial: the "EndPaRL" study. Trials. 2023 Nov 11;24(1):721. doi: 10.1186/s13063-023-07752-9.
- Background: PubMed 34788462Hurley RW, Adams MCB, Barad M, Bhaskar A, Bhatia A, Chadwick A, Deer TR, Hah J, Hooten WM, Kissoon NR, Lee DW, Mccormick Z, Moon JY, Narouze S, Provenzano DA, Schneider BJ, van Eerd M, Van Zundert J, Wallace MS, Wilson SM, Zhao Z, Cohen SP. Consensus practice guidelines on interventions for cervical spine (facet) joint pain from a multispecialty international working group. Pain Med. 2021 Nov 26;22(11):2443-2524. doi: 10.1093/pm/pnab281.
- Background: PubMed 36422818Manchikanti L, Knezevic NN, Knezevic E, Abdi S, Sanapati MR, Soin A, Wargo BW, Navani A, Atluri S, Gharibo CG, Simopoulos TT, Kosanovic R, Abd-Elsayed A, Kaye AD, Hirsch JA. A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of the Effectiveness of Radiofrequency Neurotomy in Managing Chronic Neck Pain. Pain Ther. 2023 Feb;12(1):19-66. doi: 10.1007/s40122-022-00455-0. Epub 2022 Nov 24.
- Background: PubMed 39557962Yen CY, Lin SM, Chen HY, Wang SW, Tsai YD, Chye CL, Chen TY, Wang HK, Wang KW. Sagittal alignment to predict efficiency in pulsed radiofrequency for cervical facet joint pain. Sci Rep. 2024 Nov 19;14(1):28563. doi: 10.1038/s41598-024-79181-w.
- Background: PubMed 38937279Burnham R, Trow R, Trow J, Smith A, Burnham T. Can ultrasound-guided medial branch blocks be used to select patients for cervical facet joint radiofrequency neurotomy? A matched retrospective cohort validation study. Pain Med. 2024 Nov 1;25(11):671-674. doi: 10.1093/pm/pnae054.
- Background: PubMed 35141655Sherwood D, Berlin E, Epps A, Gardner J, Schneider BJ. Cervical medial branch block progression to radiofrequency neurotomy: A retrospective clinical audit. N Am Spine Soc J. 2021 Nov 3;8:100091. doi: 10.1016/j.xnsj.2021.100091. eCollection 2021 Dec.
- Background: PubMed 16479077Shin WR, Kim HI, Shin DG, Shin DA. Radiofrequency neurotomy of cervical medial branches for chronic cervicobrachialgia. J Korean Med Sci. 2006 Feb;21(1):119-25. doi: 10.3346/jkms.2006.21.1.119.
- Background: PubMed 22458772MacVicar J, Borowczyk JM, MacVicar AM, Loughnan BM, Bogduk N. Cervical medial branch radiofrequency neurotomy in New Zealand. Pain Med. 2012 May;13(5):647-54. doi: 10.1111/j.1526-4637.2012.01351.x. Epub 2012 Mar 28.
- Background: PubMed 11426167Sapir DA, Gorup JM. Radiofrequency medial branch neurotomy in litigant and nonlitigant patients with cervical whiplash: a prospective study. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2001 Jun 15;26(12):E268-73. doi: 10.1097/00007632-200106150-00016.
- Background: PubMed 16703903Prushansky T, Pevzner E, Gordon C, Dvir Z. Cervical radiofrequency neurotomy in patients with chronic whiplash: a study of multiple outcome measures. J Neurosurg Spine. 2006 May;4(5):365-73. doi: 10.3171/spi.2006.4.5.365.
- Background: PubMed 24850108Smith AD, Jull G, Schneider G, Frizzell B, Hooper RA, Dunne-Proctor R, Sterling M. Cervical radiofrequency neurotomy reduces psychological features in individuals with chronic whiplash symptoms. Pain Physician. 2014 May-Jun;17(3):265-74.
- Background: PubMed 9414052Wallis BJ, Lord SM, Bogduk N. Resolution of psychological distress of whiplash patients following treatment by radiofrequency neurotomy: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Pain. 1997 Oct;73(1):15-22. doi: 10.1016/s0304-3959(97)00060-2.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: No
Related trials for Whiplash Injury
Active, not recruiting
Neck-specific Exercises Effectively Improves Whiplash-associated Disorders.
Whiplash-associated Disorders
Not yet recruiting
StressModex for Post-Traumatic Neck Pain
Post-Traumatic Neck Pain, Whiplash-associated Disorders
Recruiting
Transauricular Vagus Nerve Stimulation for Chronic Whiplash Associated Disorders
Whiplash Associated Disorder (WAD)
Recruiting
Virtual Reality Rehabilitation in Neck Pain Subjects
Neck Pain, Chronic Pain
Not yet recruiting
Effectiveness of Percutaneous Electrolysis and Dry Needling vs. Standard Therapy for Whiplash Syndrome
Whiplash Injuries
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.
Vicente Vanaclocha Vanaclocha, MD PhD principal investigator
University of Valencia
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
An observational study of Whiplash Injury and Whiplash Injury of Cervical Spine, run by University of Valencia at 1 site in Spain.
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 6 inclusion and 8 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 17 Apr 2026. 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 Spain. 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?
Pain Relief After Treatment (time frame: From baseline (pre-treatment) to last documented clinical follow-up, assessed up to 12 months after treatment.). 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 NCT07535515, which also lists 16 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 17 Apr 2026.