Spinal manipulation for the management of cervicogenic headache: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Fernandez, M; Moore, C; Tan, J; Lian, D; Nguyen, J; Bacon, A; Christie, B; Shen, I; Waldie, T; Simonet, D; Bussières, A

Spinal manipulation for the management of cervicogenic headache: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Fernandez, M Moore, C

Tan, J Lian, D Nguyen, J Bacon, A Christie, B Shen, I Waldie, T Simonet, D Bussières, A

Permalink

Publisher:: WILEY
Publication Type:: Journal Article
Citation:: European journal of pain (London, England), 2020, 24, (9), pp. 1687-1702
Issue Date:: 2020-07-04

Closed Access

	Filename	Description	Size
	ejp.1632.pdf	Published version	750.76 kB	Adobe PDF	View/Open

Copyright Clearance Process

Recently Added
In Progress
Closed Access

This item is closed access and not available.

Full metadata record

Field	Value	Language
dc.contributor.author	Fernandez, M
dc.contributor.author	Moore, C https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7966-5229
dc.contributor.author	Tan, J
dc.contributor.author	Lian, D
dc.contributor.author	Nguyen, J
dc.contributor.author	Bacon, A
dc.contributor.author	Christie, B
dc.contributor.author	Shen, I
dc.contributor.author	Waldie, T
dc.contributor.author	Simonet, D
dc.contributor.author	Bussières, A
dc.date.accessioned	2020-11-24T05:04:03Z
dc.date.available	2020-06-29
dc.date.available	2020-11-24T05:04:03Z
dc.date.issued	2020-07-04
dc.identifier.citation	European journal of pain (London, England), 2020, 24, (9), pp. 1687-1702
dc.identifier.issn	1090-3801
dc.identifier.issn	1532-2149
dc.identifier.uri	http://hdl.handle.net/10453/144315
dc.description.abstract	BACKGROUND:Spinal manipulative therapy (SMT) is frequently used to manage cervicogenic headache (CGHA). No meta-analysis has investigated the effectiveness of SMT exclusively for CGHA. OBJECTIVE:To evaluate the effectiveness of SMT for CGHA. DATABASES AND DATA TREATMENT:Five databases identified randomized controlled trials comparing SMT with other manual therapies. The PEDro scale assessed the risk-of-bias. Pain and disability data were extracted and converted to a common scale. A random effects model was used for several follow-up periods. GRADE described the quality of evidence. RESULTS:Seven trials were eligible. At short-term follow-up, there was a significant, small effect favouring SMT for pain intensity (mean difference [MD] -10.88 [95% CI, -17.94, -3.82]) and small effects for pain frequency (standardized mean difference [SMD] -0.35 [95% CI, -0.66, -0.04]). There was no effect for pain duration (SMD - 0.08 [95% CI, -0.47, 0.32]). There was a significant, small effect favouring SMT for disability (MD - 13.31 [95% CI, -18.07, -8.56]). At intermediate follow-up, there was no significant effects for pain intensity (MD - 9.77 [-24.21 to 4.68]) and a significant, small effect favouring SMT for pain frequency (SMD - 0.32 [-0.63 to - 0.00]). At long-term follow-up, there was no significant effects for pain intensity (MD - 0.76 [-5.89 to 4.37]) and for pain frequency (SMD - 0.37 [-0.84 to 0.10]). CONCLUSION:For CGHA, SMT provides small, superior short-term benefits for pain intensity, frequency and disability, but not pain duration, however, high-quality evidence in this field is lacking. The long-term impact is not significant. SIGNIFICANCE:CGHA are a common headache disorder. SMT can be considered an effective treatment modality, with this review suggesting it providing superior, small, short-term effects for pain intensity, frequency and disability when compared with other manual therapies. These findings may help clinicians in practice better understand the treatment effects of SMT alone for CGHA.
dc.format	Print-Electronic
dc.language	eng
dc.publisher	WILEY
dc.relation.ispartof	European journal of pain (London, England)
dc.relation.isbasedon	10.1002/ejp.1632
dc.rights	info:eu-repo/semantics/restrictedAccess
dc.subject	1103 Clinical Sciences, 1109 Neurosciences, 1115 Pharmacology and Pharmaceutical Sciences
dc.subject.classification	Anesthesiology
dc.title	Spinal manipulation for the management of cervicogenic headache: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
dc.type	Journal Article
utslib.citation.volume	24
utslib.location.activity	England
utslib.for	1103 Clinical Sciences
utslib.for	1109 Neurosciences
utslib.for	1115 Pharmacology and Pharmaceutical Sciences
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney/Faculty of Health
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney
utslib.copyright.status	closed_access	*
pubs.consider-herdc	false
dc.date.updated	2020-11-24T05:03:56Z
pubs.issue	9
pubs.publication-status	Published
pubs.volume	24
utslib.citation.issue	9

Abstract:

BACKGROUND:Spinal manipulative therapy (SMT) is frequently used to manage cervicogenic headache (CGHA). No meta-analysis has investigated the effectiveness of SMT exclusively for CGHA. OBJECTIVE:To evaluate the effectiveness of SMT for CGHA. DATABASES AND DATA TREATMENT:Five databases identified randomized controlled trials comparing SMT with other manual therapies. The PEDro scale assessed the risk-of-bias. Pain and disability data were extracted and converted to a common scale. A random effects model was used for several follow-up periods. GRADE described the quality of evidence. RESULTS:Seven trials were eligible. At short-term follow-up, there was a significant, small effect favouring SMT for pain intensity (mean difference [MD] -10.88 [95% CI, -17.94, -3.82]) and small effects for pain frequency (standardized mean difference [SMD] -0.35 [95% CI, -0.66, -0.04]). There was no effect for pain duration (SMD - 0.08 [95% CI, -0.47, 0.32]). There was a significant, small effect favouring SMT for disability (MD - 13.31 [95% CI, -18.07, -8.56]). At intermediate follow-up, there was no significant effects for pain intensity (MD - 9.77 [-24.21 to 4.68]) and a significant, small effect favouring SMT for pain frequency (SMD - 0.32 [-0.63 to - 0.00]). At long-term follow-up, there was no significant effects for pain intensity (MD - 0.76 [-5.89 to 4.37]) and for pain frequency (SMD - 0.37 [-0.84 to 0.10]). CONCLUSION:For CGHA, SMT provides small, superior short-term benefits for pain intensity, frequency and disability, but not pain duration, however, high-quality evidence in this field is lacking. The long-term impact is not significant. SIGNIFICANCE:CGHA are a common headache disorder. SMT can be considered an effective treatment modality, with this review suggesting it providing superior, small, short-term effects for pain intensity, frequency and disability when compared with other manual therapies. These findings may help clinicians in practice better understand the treatment effects of SMT alone for CGHA.

Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:

http://hdl.handle.net/10453/144315