Cost-effectiveness of conservative treatments for neck pain: a systematic review on economic evaluations

Elastic Taping Application on the Neck: Immediate and Short-Term Impacts on Pain and Mobility of Cervical Spine

The aim of this study was to measure the effects on three-planar active cervical range of motion (ACROM) and self-perceived pain of elastic taping (ET) application in the cervical area. Thirty participants (n: 22-M and 8-F, age 35.4 ± 4.4 years; body height 173.1 ± 8.4 cm; body mass 73.5 ± 12.8 kg) in the study group (SG) and twenty participants (n: 11-M and 9-F, age 32.6 ± 3.9 years; body height 174.9 ± 10.9 cm; body mass 71.2 ± 12.9 kg) in the control group (CG) were recruited. All subjects had neck and cervical pain in baseline condition. Each group performed an ACROM test and measured the perceived pain in the neck based on the Numerical Rating Scale (NRS 0--10, a.u.) at the baseline (T0), after 20' from the ET application (T1), and after three days of wearing the ET application (T2). Between T0 and T1, an ET was applied to the cervical area of the SG participants. Statistical analysis did not show any significant change in CG in any measurement session for ACROM and neck pain parameters. Conversely, the SG showed significant improvements for ACROM rotation to the left (T0 64.8 ± 7.7°-T2 76.0 ± 11.1° p < 0.000) and right (T0 66.0 ± 11.9°-T2 74.2 ± 9.6° p < 0.000), lateral inclination to the left (T0 37.5 ± 6.9°-T2 40.6 ± 10.8° p < 0.000) and right (T0 36.5 ± 7.9°-T2 40.9 ± 5.2° p < 0.000), extension (T0 47.0 ± 12.9°-T2 55.1 ± 12.3° p < 0.001), and flexion (T0 55.0 ± 3.6°-T2 62.9 ± 12.0° p < 0.006). A significant decrease was also measured in SG for pain NRS between T0 and T2 (T0 7.5 ± 1.0°-T1 5.5 ± 1.4-T2 1.4 ± 1.5° p < 0.000). In conclusion, a bilateral and symmetrical ET cervical application is useful to enhance multiplanar ACROM and reduce subjective self-perceived cervical pain when it is needed. Based on the evidence, the use of ET on the neck is recommended for managing neck motion restrictions and pain in adult individuals.

Effectiveness of warm-up interventions on work-related musculoskeletal disorders, physical and psychosocial functions among workers: a systematic review

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this systematic review was to identify from published literature the available evidence regarding the effects of warm-up intervention implemented in the workplace on work -related musculoskeletal disorders (WMSDs) and physical and psychosocial functions.

DESIGN

Systematic review.

DATA SOURCES

The following four electronic databases were searched (from inception onwards to October 2022): Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), PubMed (Medline), Web of Science and Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro).

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

Randomised and non-randomised controlled studies were included in this review. Interventions should include a warm-up physical intervention in real-workplaces.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

The primary outcomes were pain, discomfort, fatigue and physical functions. This review followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines and used the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation evidence synthesis. To assess the risk of bias, the Cochrane ROB2 was used for randomised controlled trial (RCT) and the Risk Of Bias In Non-randomised Studies-of Interventions was used for the non-RCT studies.

RESULTS

Three studies met the inclusion criterion, one cluster RCT and two non-RCTs. There was an important heterogeneity in the included studies principally concerning population and warm-up intervention exercises. There were important risks of bias in the four selected studies, due to blinding and confounding factors. Overall certainty of evidence was very low.

CONCLUSION

Due to the poor methodological quality of studies and conflicting results, there was no evidence supporting the use of warm-up to prevent WMSDs in the workplace. The present findings highlighted the need of good quality studies targeting the effects of warm-up intervention to prevent WMSDs.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42019137211.

CDC Clinical Practice Guideline for Prescribing Opioids for Pain - United States, 2022

This guideline provides recommendations for clinicians providing pain care, including those prescribing opioids, for outpatients aged ≥18 years. It updates the CDC Guideline for Prescribing Opioids for Chronic Pain - United States, 2016 (MMWR Recomm Rep 2016;65[No. RR-1]:1-49) and includes recommendations for managing acute (duration of <1 month), subacute (duration of 1-3 months), and chronic (duration of >3 months) pain. The recommendations do not apply to pain related to sickle cell disease or cancer or to patients receiving palliative or end-of-life care. The guideline addresses the following four areas: 1) determining whether or not to initiate opioids for pain, 2) selecting opioids and determining opioid dosages, 3) deciding duration of initial opioid prescription and conducting follow-up, and 4) assessing risk and addressing potential harms of opioid use. CDC developed the guideline using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) framework. Recommendations are based on systematic reviews of the scientific evidence and reflect considerations of benefits and harms, patient and clinician values and preferences, and resource allocation. CDC obtained input from the Board of Scientific Counselors of the National Center for Injury Prevention and Control (a federally chartered advisory committee), the public, and peer reviewers. CDC recommends that persons with pain receive appropriate pain treatment, with careful consideration of the benefits and risks of all treatment options in the context of the patient's circumstances. Recommendations should not be applied as inflexible standards of care across patient populations. This clinical practice guideline is intended to improve communication between clinicians and patients about the benefits and risks of pain treatments, including opioid therapy; improve the effectiveness and safety of pain treatment; mitigate pain; improve function and quality of life for patients with pain; and reduce risks associated with opioid pain therapy, including opioid use disorder, overdose, and death.

Some conservative interventions are more effective than others for people with chronic non-specific neck pain: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

QUESTION

Which is the most effective conservative intervention for patients with non-specific chronic neck pain (CNSNP)?

DESIGN

A systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomised clinical trials.

PARTICIPANTS

Adults with CNSNP of at least 3 months duration.

INTERVENTIONS

All available pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions.

OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcomes were pain intensity and disability. The secondary outcome was adverse events.

RESULTS

Overall, 119 RCTs (12,496 patients; 32 interventions) were included. Risk of bias was low in 50.4% of trials, unclear in 22.7% and high in 26.9%. Compared with inert treatment, a combination of active and/or passive multimodal non-pharmacological inventions (eg, exercise and manual therapy) were effective for pain on a 0-to-10 scale at 1 month (MD range 0.84 to 3.74) and at 3 to 6 months (MD range 1.06 to 1.49), and effective on disability on a 0-to-100 scale at 1 month (MD range 10.26 to 14.09) and 3 to 6 months (MD range 5.60 to 16.46). These effects ranged from possible to definite clinical relevance. Compared with inert treatment, anti-inflammatory drugs alone or in combination with another non-pharmacological treatment did not reduce pain at 1 month or 3 to 6 months. At 12 months, no superiority was found over inert treatment on both outcomes. Most mild adverse events were experienced following acupuncture/dry needling intervention. On average, the evidence varied from low to very low certainty.

CONCLUSIONS

While multimodal non-pharmacological interventions may reduce pain and disability for up to 3 to 6 months of follow-up when compared with inert treatment, the evidence was very uncertain about their effects. Better quality and larger trials are needed to improve the certainty of evidence.

REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42019124501.

Proprioceptive Disturbance in Chronic Neck Pain: Discriminate Validity and Reliability of Performance of the Clinical Cervical Movement Sense Test

Chronic neck pain is associated with sensorimotor dysfunctions, which may develop symptoms, affect daily activities, and prevent recovery. Feasible, reliable, and valid objective methods for the assessment of sensorimotor functions are important to identify movement impairments and guide interventions. The aim of this study was to investigate the discriminative validity of a clinical cervical movement sense test, using a laser pointer and an automatic video-based scoring system. Individuals with chronic neck pain of idiopathic onset (INP), traumatic onset (TNP), and healthy controls (CON) were tested. Associations between movement sense and neck disability were examined and the repeatability of the test was investigated. A total of 106 participants (26 INP, 28 TNP, and 52 CON) were included in a cross-sectional study. Acuity, Speed, Time, and NormAcuity (i.e., normalized acuity by dividing acuity with movement time) were used as outcome measures. ANOVAs were used for group comparisons and Pearson correlations for associations between movement sense variables and neck disability index (NDI). Notably, 60 of the participants (30 CON, 17 INP, and 13 TNP) performed the test on a second occasion to explore test-retest reliability. Results revealed a reduced NormAcuity for both INP and TNP compared with CON (p < 0.05). The neck pain groups had similar Acuity but longer Time compared with CON. Among TNP, there was a fair positive correlation between Acuity and NDI, while there was a negative correlation between Acuity and NDI among INP. Reliability measures showed good to excellent ICC values between tests, but standard error of measurements (SEM) and minimal detectable change (MDC) scores were high. The results showed that NormAcuity is a valuable measure to identify disturbed cervical movement sense among INP and TNP. While Acuity was similar between the groups, different strategies, such as longer Time, to perform the task among neck patient groups were used. Few differences were identified between the neck pain groups, but altered strategies may exist. Reliability was acceptable, and the test is feasible to perform in the clinic. However, the technical complexity of the automated image analysis is a concern. Future developments will provide more feasible solutions.

Cost-Utility Analysis of Chuna Manual Therapy and Usual Care for Chronic Neck Pain: A Multicenter Pragmatic Randomized Controlled Trial

This study aimed to compare the cost-effectiveness of manual therapy and usual care for patients with chronic neck pain. A cost-utility analysis alongside a pragmatic randomized controlled trial was conducted in five South Korean hospitals. Data were procured from surveys and nationally representative data. Participants were 108 patients aged between 19 and 60 years, with chronic neck pain persisting for at least 3 months and a pain intensity score of ≥5 on the numerical rating scale in the last 3 days. The study was conducted for 1 year, including 5 weeks of intervention and additional observational periods. Participants were divided into a manual therapy (Chuna) group and a usual care group, and quality-adjusted life-years, costs, and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio were calculated. The quality-adjusted life-years of the manual therapy group were 0.024 higher than that of the usual care group. From the societal perspective, manual therapy incurred a lower cost—at $2,131—and was, therefore, the more cost-effective intervention. From a healthcare system perspective, the cost of manual therapy was higher, with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio amount of $11,217. Manual therapy is more cost-effective for non-specific chronic neck pain management from both a healthcare system and societal perspective.

Manual therapy versus advice to stay active for nonspecific back and/or neck pain: a cost-effectiveness analysis

BACKGROUND

Low back and neck pain are the most common musculoskeletal disorders worldwide, and imply suffering and substantial societal costs, hence effective interventions are crucial. The aim of this study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of manual therapy compared with advice to stay active for working age persons with nonspecific back and/or neck pain.

METHODS

The two interventions were: a maximum of 6 manual therapy sessions within 6 weeks, including spinal manipulation/mobilization, massage and stretching, performed by a naprapath (index group), respectively information from a physician on the importance to stay active and on how to cope with pain, according to evidence-based advice, at 2 occasions within 3 weeks (control group). A cost-effectiveness analysis with a societal perspective was performed alongside a randomized controlled trial including 409 persons followed for one year, in 2005. The outcomes were health-related Quality of Life (QoL) encoded from the SF-36 and pain intensity. Direct and indirect costs were calculated based on intervention and medication costs and sickness absence data. An incremental cost per health related QoL was calculated, and sensitivity analyses were performed.

RESULTS

The difference in QoL gains was 0.007 (95% CI - 0.010 to 0.023) and the mean improvement in pain intensity was 0.6 (95% CI 0.068-1.065) in favor of manual therapy after one year. Concerning the QoL outcome, the differences in mean cost per person was estimated at - 437 EUR (95% CI - 1302 to 371) and for the pain outcome the difference was - 635 EUR (95% CI - 1587 to 246) in favor of manual therapy. The results indicate that manual therapy achieves better outcomes at lower costs compared with advice to stay active. The sensitivity analyses were consistent with the main results.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results indicate that manual therapy for nonspecific back and/or neck pain is slightly less costly and more beneficial than advice to stay active for this sample of working age persons. Since manual therapy treatment is at least as cost-effective as evidence-based advice from a physician, it may be recommended for neck and low back pain. Further health economic studies that may confirm those findings are warranted. Trial registration Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN56954776. Retrospectively registered 12 September 2006, http://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN56954776 .

Using cervical movement velocity to assist the prediction of pain and functional recovery for people with chronic mechanical neck pain

BACKGROUND

Impaired cervical kinematics particularly the movement velocity had been consistently found in people with neck pain. The recovery and potential of cervical movement velocity in assisting the prediction of recovery in individuals with chronic neck pain remained unknown. This study investigated the application of cervical movement velocity to predict the outcomes of pain intensity and functional disability for a cohort of participants with chronic mechanical pain after completion of a 12-week intervention program.

METHODS

Cervical movement velocity when performing neck motions in the anatomical planes, pain intensity and functional disability score were assessed before and after the physiotherapy program. Correlations between kinematic and clinical outcomes, and validity of applying the peak velocity values of the cervical spine measured at baseline for prediction of recovery of pain and function after the physiotherapy program were examined (n = 68).

FINDINGS

Significant improvements were found in the peak values of cervical velocity in all movement planes, pain intensity and functional disability score at post-program reassessment (p < 0.001). Significant negative correlations between peak values of cervical movement velocity and pain intensity (for specific directions, r = -0.163 to -0.191), and functional disability were found (for all directions, r = -0.158 to -0.282). Area under the Receiver Operating Characteristics curve was >0.6 for cervical extension, flexion and right rotation velocity for predicting functional recovery post-program.

INTERPRETATION

These findings suggest that cervical velocity of selected planes measured at baseline may inform the prediction of recovery of functional disability but not pain intensity in people with chronic mechanical neck pain.

Evaluation of Local Skeletal Muscle Blood Flow in Manipulative Therapy by Diffuse Correlation Spectroscopy

Manipulative therapy (MT) is applied to motor organs through a therapist’s hands. Although MT has been utilized in various medical treatments based on its potential role for increasing the blood flow to the local muscle, a quantitative validation of local muscle blood flow in MT remains challenging due to the lack of appropriate bedside evaluation techniques. Therefore, we investigated changes in the local blood flow to the muscle undergoing MT by employing diffuse correlation spectroscopy, a portable and emerging optical measurement technology that non-invasively measures blood flow in deep tissues. This study investigated the changes in blood flow, heart rate, blood pressure, and autonomic nervous activity in the trapezius muscle through MT application in 30 volunteers without neck and shoulder injury. Five minutes of MT significantly increased the median local blood flow relative to that of the pre-MT period (p &lt; 0.05). The post-MT local blood flow increase was significantly higher in the MT condition than in the control condition, where participants remained still without receiving MT for the same time (p &lt; 0.05). However, MT did not affect the heart rate, blood pressure, or cardiac autonomic nervous activity. The post-MT increase in muscle blood flow was significantly higher in the participants with muscle stiffness in the neck and shoulder regions than in those without (p &lt; 0.05). These results suggest that MT could increase the local blood flow to the target skeletal muscle, with minimal effects on systemic circulatory function.

Criterion validation and interpretability of the Single Assessment Numerical Evaluation (SANE) of self-reported recovery in patients with neck pain

BACKGROUND

The SANE is a PROM of recovery, which may assist clinicians in clinical decision-making and discharge planning. The psychometric measurement properties of the SANE have yet to be determined for neck pain.

OBJECTIVES

Threefold objectives included: 1)determine the numerical threshold for the SANE at which patients with neck pain determine their symptoms are acceptable; 2)determine the association between scores for the NDI and VAS, with the SANE; 3)determine the average number of visits, costs and value associated with the management of neck pain.

DESIGN

Longitudinal repeated measures cohort design.

METHODS

Threshold measures for self-reported recovery with the SANE anchored to the PASS were examined using ROC. PCC determined the relationship between the VAS/pain and NDI raw/percentage change scores and the SANE at discharge. Descriptive statistics were used for number of visits and cost. Value was calculated as the proportion of change on the NDI and VAS/$100 US dollars spent.

RESULTS

57 subjects completed full observation. ROC analysis indicates a threshold value of 82.5%(Sn = 56.0, Sp = 85.7,+LR = 1.68,-LR = 0.29) on the SANE with an AUC of 0.820(95%CI = 0.638, 1.00). A weak correlation was found between raw NDI(r = 0.39 p < 0.05)/Pain(r = 0.45 p < 0.05) scores and the SANE with a moderate correlation between percent change scores of NDI(r = 0.52 p < 0.05)/PAIN(r = 0.54 p < 0.05) and the SANE. The value proposition indicated cost of care amounted to a 10.5% and 12.9%; improvement in the NDI and pain scores/$100 spent.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients reporting greater than 82.5% on the SANE are likely to find their present status acceptable and potentially stop seeking care.

Evaluation of the EQ-5D-3L and 5L versions in low back pain patients

Background

The EuroQol EQ-5D is one of the most widely researched and applied patient-reported outcome measures worldwide. The original EQ-5D-3L and more recent EQ-5D-5L include three and five response categories respectively. Evidence from healthy and sick populations shows that the additional two response categories improve measurement properties but there has not been a concurrent comparison of the two versions in patients with low back pain (LBP).

Methods

LBP patients taking part in a multicenter randomized controlled trial of lumbar total disc replacement and conservative treatment completed the EQ-5D-3L and 5L in an eight-year follow-up questionnaire. The 3L and 5L were assessed for aspects of data quality including missing data, floor and ceiling effects, response consistency, and based on a priori hypotheses, associations with the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), Pain-Visual Analogue Scales and Hopkins Symptom Checklist (HSCL-25).

Results

At the eight-year follow-up, 151 (87%) patients were available and 146 completed both the 3L and 5L. Levels of missing data were the same for the two versions. Compared to the EQ-5D-5L, the 3L had significantly higher floor (pain discomfort) and ceiling effects (mobility, self-care, pain/discomfort, anxiety/depression). For these patients the EQ-5D-5L described 73 health states compared to 28 for the 3L. Shannon’s indices showed the 5L outperformed the 3L in tests of classification efficiency. Correlations with the ODI, Pain-VAS and HSCL-25 were largely as hypothesized, the 5L having slightly higher correlations than the 3L.

Conclusion

The EQ-5D assesses important aspect of health in LBP patients and the 5L improves upon the 3L in this respect. The EQ-5D-5L is recommended in preference to the 3L version, however, further testing in other back pain populations together with additional measurement properties, including responsiveness to change, is recommended.

Trial registration: retrospectively registered: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01704677.

Regional differences in prolonged non-operative therapy utilization prior to primary ACDF surgery

There is a paucity of data characterizing regional variations in the utilization and costs of conservative management in patients suffering from cervical stenosis prior to anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) surgery. An understating of these regional trends becomes critical as outcomes-based reimbursement strategies become standard. The objective of this investigation was to evaluate for regional differences in the utilization and overall costs of maximal non-operative therapy (MNT) prior to ACDF surgery. Medical records from patients with symptomatic cervical stenosis undergoing a ≤3-level index ACDF procedure between 2007 and 2016 were accessed from a large insurance database. Geographic regions (Midwest, Northeast, South, and West) reflected U.S. Census Bureau definitions. MNT utilization within 2-years prior to ACDF surgery was analyzed. An index ACDF surgery was performed in 15,825 patients. Patient regional breakdown was as follows: South (67.6% of patients), Midwest (21.8% of patients), West (8.9% of patients), Northeast (1.6% of patients). Regional variations were identified in the number of patients utilizing NSAIDs (p < 0.001), opioids (p < 0.001), muscle relaxants (p < 0.001), cervical epidural steroid injections (p = 0.001), physical therapy/occupational therapy treatments (p < 0.001), and chiropractor visits (p < 0.001). The West (64.5%) and South (63.5%) had the greatest proportion of patients utilizing narcotics. When normalized by the number of opioid using-patients however, the Northeast (691.4 pills/patient) and South (674.4 pills/patient) billed for the most opioid pills. The total direct cost associated with all MNT prior to index ACDF was $17,255,828. The Midwest ($1,277.72 per patient) and South ($1,047.86 per patient) had the greatest average dollars billed.

A comparison of prolonged nonoperative management strategies in cervical stenosis patients: Successes versus failures

A paucity of evidence exists regarding the optimal composition of conservative therapies to best treat patients diagnosed with cervical stenosis prior to consideration of surgery. The purpose of this study was to compare the nonoperative therapy utilization strategies in cervical stenosis patients successfully managed with conservative treatments versus those that failed medical management and opted for an anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) surgery. Medical records from adult patients with a diagnosis of cervical stenosis from 2007 to 2017 were collected retrospectively from a large insurance database. Patients were divided into two cohorts: patients treated successfully with nonoperative therapies and patients that failed conservative management and opted for ACDF surgery. Nonoperative therapies utilized by the two cohorts were collected over a 2-year surveillance window. A total of 90,037 adult patients with cervical stenosis comprised the base population. There were 83,384 patients (92.6%) successfully treated with nonoperative therapies alone, while 6,653 patients (7.4%) ultimately failed conservative management and received an ACDF. Failure rates of non-operative therapies were higher in smokers (11.2%), patients receiving cervical epidural steroid injections (11.2%), and male patients (8.1%). A greater percentage of patients who failed conservative management utilized opioid medications (p < 0.001), muscle relaxants (p < 0.001), and CESIs (p < 0.001). The costs of treating patients that failed conservative management was double the amount of the successfully treated group (failed cohort: $1,215.73 per patient; successful cohort: $659.58 per patient). A logistic regression analysis demonstrated that male patients, smokers, opioid utilization, and obesity were independent predictors of conservative treatment failure.

Gender differences in use of prolonged non-operative therapies prior to index ACDF surgery

Prior to anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) surgery, patients suffering from cervical stenosis traditionally trial non-operative treatments for pain management. There is a paucity of data evaluating gender disparities in the prolonged utilization of conservative therapy prior to ACDF surgery. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to assess for gender-based differences in the utilization and cost of maximal non-operative therapy (MNT) for cervical stenosis prior to ACDF surgery. Medical records from patients with symptomatic cervical stenosis undergoing 1, 2, or 3-level index ACDF procedures between 2007 and 2016 were gathered from an insurance database consisting of 20.9 million covered lives. The utilization of MNTs within 5 years prior to index ACDF surgery was assessed. A total of 2254 patients (females: 53.1%) underwent an index ACDF surgery. There were a significantly greater percentage of female patients that utilized NSAIDs (p < 0.0001), opioids (p = 0.0019), muscle relaxants (p < 0.0001), cervical epidural steroid injections (p = 0.0428), and physical therapy/occupational therapy treatments (p < 0.0001). The total direct cost associated with all MNT prior to index ACDF was $4,833,384. On average, $2028.01 was spent per male patient while $2247.29 was spent per female patient. When normalized by number of pills billed per patient utilizing therapy, female patients utilized more NSAIDs (males: 591.8 pills, females: 669.3 pills), opioids (male: 1342.0 pills, female: 1650.1 pills), and muscle relaxants (males: 823.7 pills, females: 1211.1 pills). The results suggest that there may be gender differences in the utilization of non-operative therapies for symptomatic cervical stenosis prior to ACDF surgery.

Deep tissue massage, strengthening and stretching exercises, and a combination of both compared with advice to stay active for subacute or persistent non-specific neck pain: A cost-effectiveness analysis of the Stockholm Neck trial (STONE)

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of deep tissue massage ('massage'), strengthening and stretching exercises ('exercises') or a combination of both ('combined therapy') in comparison with advice to stay active ('advice') for subacute and persistent neck pain, from a societal perspective.

METHODS

We conducted a cost-effectiveness analysis alongside a four-arm randomized controlled trial of 619 participants followed-up for one year. Health-related quality of life was measured using EQ-5D-3L and costs were calculated from baseline to one year. The interventions were ranked according to quality adjusted life years (QALYs) in a cost-consequence analysis. Thereafter, an incremental cost per QALY was calculated.

RESULTS

In the cost-consequence analysis, in comparison with advice, exercises resulted in higher QALY gains, and massage and the combined therapy were more costly and less beneficial. Exercises may be a cost-effective treatment compared with advice to stay active if society is willing to pay 17 640 EUR per QALY. However, differences in QALY gains were minimal; on average, participants in the massage group, spent a year in a state of health valued at 0.88, exercises: 0.89, combined therapy: 0.88 and, advice: 0.88.

CONCLUSIONS

Exercises are cost-effective compared to advice given that the societal willingness to pay is above 17 640 EUR per year in full health gained. Massage and a combined therapy are not cost-effective. While exercise appeared to have the best cost/benefit profile, even this treatment had only a modest benefit and treatment innovation is needed. Advice to stay active remains as a good therapeutic alternative from an economical perspective.

Visceral Origin: An Underestimated Source of Neck Pain. A Systematic Scoping Review

The diagnosis of neck pain is challenging. Many visceral disorders are known to cause it, and clinical practice guidelines recommend to rule them out during neck pain diagnosis. However, the absence of suspicion of any cause impedes one from establishing that specific aetiology as the final diagnosis. To investigate the degree of consideration given to visceral aetiology, a systematic search of trials about neck pain was carried out to evaluate their selection criteria. The search yielded 309 eligible articles, which were screened by two independent reviewers. The PEDro scale score was used to assess the methodological quality of the studies. The following information was retrieved: number of authors affiliated to a clinical or non-clinical institution, number of citations in the Web of Science, study aims, characteristics of participants, and eligibility criteria. The top 15 most cited trials, and the 15 most recent studies about treatment efficacy in neck pain, published in first quartile journals of the Journal Citation Reports, were selected. Females represented 67.5% of participants. A single study was of poor methodological quality (4/10). Based on the eligibility criteria of the articles that were systematically reviewed, it would appear that visceral aetiology was not considered in eighty percent of the trials on neck pain, showing a low level of suspicion both in research and clinical settings.

Local and Widespread Pressure Pain Hyperalgesia Is Not Side Specific in Females with Unilateral Neck Pain that Can Be Reproduced during Passive Neck Rotation

Current evidence for widespread hyperalgesia in non-specific neck pain (NSNP) is unclear. It is currently recommended to group NSNP patients according to pain-provoking movements. The aim of this study was to investigate local and widespread pain sensitivity in females with unilateral NSNP that is reproducible during passive neck rotation compared with matched controls, and to compare the side specific effect of pain location on pressure pain sensitivity among females with unilateral NSNP. Thirty-six females with unilateral NSNP evoked during passive ipsilateral (n = 20) or contralateral (n = 16) rotation toward the painful side were compared with 20 controls. Participants reported their pain intensity at rest and during passive neck rotation and completed the Neck Disability Index. Pressure pain thresholds (PPTs) were assessed bilaterally over the anterior scalene; the sternocleidomastoid; the levator scapulae; lateral to the spinous process of C6; the median, ulnar, and radial nerves; and the tibialis anterior. The ANOVA revealed lower PPTs in females with unilateral NSNP compared with the controls (all at p < 0.001), but no differences were found between the sides, nor was there any Group × side interaction. Among females with NSNP, those with higher pain intensity during ipsilateral rotation toward the painful side showed lower PPTs over the anterior scalene, median nerve, ulnar nerve, and tibialis anterior (all, p < 0.05) than females with higher pain intensity during contralateral rotation toward the painful side. These findings demonstrated bilateral local and widespread pressure pain hyperalgesia in females with unilateral NSNP that was reproducible during passive neck rotation compared with controls. There was no side specific effect of pain location on PPTs among females with unilateral NSNP.

Prognostic factors for recovery and non-recovery in patients with non-specific neck pain: a protocol for a systematic literature review

INTRODUCTION

Neck pain is a common musculoskeletal disorder worldwide. It can result in significant disability and impaired quality of life. More than 50% of patients with neck pain still report symptoms 1 year later despite receiving different forms of non-pharmacological and pharmacological treatment. Identifying patient characteristics that are modifiable or predict recovery and non-recovery for an individual patient might identify ways of improving outcomes. This systematic review aims to comprehensively summarise the existing evidence regarding baseline patient characteristics associated with recovery and non-recovery, as defined by measures of pain intensity, disability and global perceived improvement.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

Six electronic databases, PubMed, CINAHL, PEDro Database, EMBASE, Cochrane Library and Web of Science, will be searched, with terms related to the review question such as neck pain, prognostic or predictive research, from inception to 28 September of 2018. Studies will be included if they have investigated an association between patient characteristics and outcomes, with at least one follow-up time point. Two independent reviewers will screen the titles and abstracts followed by a full-text review to assess papers regarding their eligibility. Data from included papers will be extracted using standardised forms, including study and participants' characteristics, outcomes, prognostic factors and effect size of the association. The risk of bias of each study will be assessed using the Quality in Prognostic Studies tool. A narrative synthesis will be conducted considering the strength, consistency of results and the methodological quality.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This systematic review does not require ethical approval. The results will be disseminated through publication in a peer-review journal, as a chapter of a doctoral thesis and through presentations at national and international conferences.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42018091183.

Cervical Lateral Glide Neural Mobilization Is Effective in Treating Cervicobrachial Pain: A Randomized Waiting List Controlled Clinical Trial

Background

Cervicobrachial pain (CP) is a high-incidence and prevalent condition. Cervical lateral glide (CLG) is a firstline treatment of CP. There is a current lack of enough high-quality randomized controlled double-blind clinical trials that measure the effectiveness of neural tissue mobilization techniques such as the CLG and its specific effect over CP.

Objectives

The aim of the present study was to assess the effect of CLG neural mobilization in treating subjects who suffer from CP, compared with the complete absence of treatment.

Study Design

This investigation was a single-center, blinded, parallel randomized controlled clinical trial (RCT).

Setting

One hundred forty-seven individuals were screened in a medical center from July to November 2015. Fifty-eight participants were diagnosed with CP.

Methods

Participants were recruited and randomly assigned into two groups of 29 subjects. The intervention group received CLG treatment, and the control group (CG) was assigned to a six-week waiting list to receive treatment. Randomization was carried out by concealed computer software randomized printed cards. The primary outcome was pain intensity, reported through the Numeric Rating Scale for Pain (NRSP). Secondary outcomes were physical function involving the affected upper limb using the Quick DASH scale and ipsilateral cervical rotation (ICR) using a CROM device. Assessments were made at baseline and one hour after treatment.

Results

The CLG group NRSP mean value was significantly (P < 0.0001) superior to those obtained by the CG. Subjects treated with CLG reported an average NRSP decrease of 2.16 points (35%). CROM device and Quick DASH outcome values also reported significant (P < 0.0001) improvements only in the CLG group. Cohen's d showed a very large effect of the CLG intervention at subject discharge.

Limitations

Due to the lack of dipper subgroup analysis and additional reproductions of the applied protocol, the authors considered the generalization of the study results to be impossible.

Conclusions

CLG is superior to the absence of treatment in reducing pain and increasing the affected upper limb function of subjects who suffer from CP. CLG may be considered an effective treatment in specific cases of CP.

Cost-effectiveness of exercise therapy in the treatment of non-specific neck pain and low back pain: a systematic review with meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the cost-effectiveness of exercise therapy in the treatment of patients with non-specific neck pain and low back pain.

DESIGN

Systematic review of economic evaluations.

DATA SOURCES

The search was performed in 5 clinical and 3 economic electronic databases.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES

We included economic evaluations performed alongside randomised controlled trials. Differences in costs and effects were pooled in a meta-analysis, if possible, and incremental cost-utility ratios (ICUR) were descriptively analysed.

RESULTS

Twenty-two studies were included. On average, exercise therapy was associated with lower costs and larger effects for quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) in comparison with usual care for subacute and chronic low back pain from a healthcare perspective (based on ICUR). Exercise therapy had similar costs and effect for QALY in comparison with other interventions for neck pain from a societal perspective, and subacute and chronic low back pain from a healthcare perspective. There was limited or inconsistent evidence on the cost-effectiveness of exercise therapy compared with usual care for neck pain and acute low back pain, other interventions for acute low back pain and different types of exercise therapy for neck pain and low back pain.

CONCLUSIONS

Exercise therapy seems to be cost-effective compared with usual care for subacute and chronic low back pain. Exercise therapy was not (more) cost-effective compared with other interventions for neck pain and low back pain. The cost-utility estimates are rather uncertain, indicating that more economic evaluations are needed.

REGISTRATION

PROSPERO, CRD42017059025.

Clinical Practice Guideline for Physical Therapy Assessment and Treatment in Patients With Nonspecific Neck Pain

The Royal Dutch Society for Physical Therapy (KNGF) issued a clinical practice guideline for physical therapists that addresses the assessment and treatment of patients with nonspecific neck pain, including cervical radiculopathy, in Dutch primary care. Recommendations were based on a review of published systematic reviews.During the intake, the patient is screened for serious pathologies and corresponding patterns. Patients with cervical radiculopathy can be included or excluded through corresponding signs and symptoms and possibly diagnostic tests (Spurling test, traction/distraction test, and Upper Limb Tension Test). History taking is done to gather information about patients' limitations, course of pain, and prognostic factors (eg, coping style) and answers to health-related questions.In case of a normal recovery (treatment profile A), management should be hands-off, and patients should receive advice from the physical therapist and possibly some simple exercises to supplement "acting as usual."In case of a delayed/deviant recovery (treatment profile B), the physical therapist is advised to use, in addition to the recommendations for treatment profile A, forms of mobilization and/or manipulation in combination with exercise therapy. Other interventions may also be considered. The physical therapist is advised not to use dry needling, low-level laser, electrotherapy, ultrasound, traction, and/or a cervical collar.In case of a delayed/deviant recovery with clear and/or dominant psychosocial prognostic factors (treatment profile C), these factors should first be addressed by the physical therapist, when possible, or the patient should be referred to a specialist, when necessary.In case of neck pain grade III (treatment profile D), the therapy resembles that for profile B, but the use of a cervical collar for pain reduction may be considered. The advice is to use it sparingly: only for a short period per day and only for a few weeks.

An economic evaluation of Alexander Technique lessons or acupuncture sessions for patients with chronic neck pain: A randomized trial (ATLAS)

Objectives

To assess the cost-effectiveness of acupuncture and usual care, and Alexander Technique lessons and usual care, compared with usual GP care alone for chronic neck pain patients.

Methods

An economic evaluation was undertaken alongside the ATLAS trial, taking both NHS and wider societal viewpoints. Participants were offered up to twelve acupuncture sessions or twenty Alexander lessons (equivalent overall contact time). Costs were in pounds sterling. Effectiveness was measured using the generic EQ-5D to calculate quality adjusted life years (QALYs), as well as using a specific neck pain measure–the Northwick Park Neck Pain Questionnaire (NPQ).

Results

In the base case analysis, incremental QALY gains were 0.032 and 0.025 in the acupuncture and Alexander groups, respectively, in comparison to usual GP care, indicating moderate health benefits for both interventions. Incremental costs were £451 for acupuncture and £667 for Alexander, mainly driven by intervention costs. Acupuncture was likely to be cost-effective (ICER = £18,767/QALY bootstrapped 95% CI £4,426 to £74,562) and was robust to most sensitivity analyses. Alexander lessons were not cost-effective at the lower NICE threshold of £20,000/QALY (£25,101/QALY bootstrapped 95% CI -£150,208 to £248,697) but may be at £30,000/QALY, however, there was considerable statistical uncertainty in all tested scenarios.

Conclusions

In comparison with usual care, acupuncture is likely to be cost-effective for chronic neck pain, whereas, largely due to higher intervention costs, Alexander lessons are unlikely to be cost-effective. However, there were high levels of missing data and further research is needed to assess the long-term cost-effectiveness of these interventions.

Health economic evidence gaps and methodological constraints in low back pain and neck pain: Results of the Research Agenda for Health Economic Evaluation (RAHEE) project

Despite the increased interest in economic evaluations, there are difficulties in applying the results of such studies in practice. Therefore, the "Research Agenda for Health Economic Evaluation" (RAHEE) project was initiated, which aimed to improve the use of health economic evidence in practice for the 10 highest burden conditions in the European Union (including low back pain [LBP] and neck pain [NP]). This was done by undertaking literature mapping and convening an Expert Panel meeting, during which the literature mapping results were discussed and evidence gaps and methodological constraints were identified. The current paper is a part of the RAHEE project and aimed to identify economic evidence gaps and methodological constraints in the LBP and NP literature, in particular. The literature mapping revealed that economic evidence was unavailable for various commonly used LBP and NP treatments (e.g., injections, traction, and discography). Even if economic evidence was available, many treatments were only evaluated in a single study or studies for the same intervention were highly heterogeneous in terms of their patient population, control condition, follow-up duration, setting, and/or economic perspective. Up until now, this has prevented economic evaluation results from being statistically pooled in the LBP and NP literature, and strong conclusions about the cost-effectiveness of LBP and NP treatments can therefore not be made. The Expert Panel identified the need for further high-quality economic evaluations, especially on surgery versus conservative care and competing treatment options for chronic LBP. Handling of uncertainty and reporting quality were considered the most important methodological challenges.

PNF and manual therapy treatment results of patients with cervical spine osteoarthritis

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of PNF and manual therapy methods in the treatment of patients with cervical spine osteoarthritis, especially their efficacy in reducing pain and improving functionality in everyday life. Long-term results were also compared in order to determine which method of treatment is more effective.

SUBJECTS AND METHODS

Eighty randomly selected females aged 45-65 were included in the study. They were randomly divided into two groups of 40 persons. One group received PNF treatment and the other received manual therapy (MAN.T). To evaluate functional capabilities, the Functional Rating Index was used. To evaluate changes in pain, a shortened version of the McGill Questionnaire was used.

RESULT

The PNF group achieved a greater reduction in pain than the MAN.T group. The PNF group showed a greater improvement in performing daily activities such as sleeping, personal care, travelling, work, recreation, lifting, walking and standing as well as decreased intensity and frequency of pain compared to the MAN.T group.

CONCLUSION

The PNF method proved to be more effective in both short (after two weeks) and long (after three months) term.

A commentary review of the cost effectiveness of manual therapies for neck and low back pain

BACKGROUND & PURPOSE

Neck and low back pain (NLBP) are global health problems, which diminish quality of life and consume vast economic resources. Cost effectiveness in healthcare is the minimal amount spent to obtain acceptable outcomes. Studies on manual therapies often fail to identify which manual therapy intervention or combinations with other interventions is the most cost effective. The purpose of this commentary is to sample the dialogue within the literature on the cost effectiveness of evidence-based manual therapies with a particular focus on the neck and low back regions.

METHODS

This commentary identifies and presents the available literature on the cost effectiveness of manual therapies for NLBP. Key words searched were neck and low back pain, cost effectiveness, and manual therapy to select evidence-based articles. Eight articles were identified and presented for discussion.

RESULTS

The lack of homogeneity, in the available literature, makes difficult any valid comparison among the various cost effectiveness studies.

DISCUSSION

Potential outcome bias in each study is dependent upon the lens through which it is evaluated. If evaluated from a societal perspective, the conclusion slants toward "adequate" interventions in an effort to decrease costs rather than toward the most efficacious interventions with the best outcomes. When cost data are assessed according to a healthcare (or individual) perspective, greater value is placed on quality of life, the patient's beliefs, and the "willingness to pay."

Assessment of in vivo 3D kinematics of cervical spine manipulation: Influence of practitioner experience and occurrence of cavitation noise

BACKGROUND

Investigations on 3D kinematics during spinal manipulation are widely reported for assessing motion data, task reliability and clinical effects. However the link between cavitation occurrence and specific kinematics remains questionable.

OBJECTIVES

This paper investigates the 3D head-trunk kinematics during high velocity low amplitude (HVLA) manipulation for different practitioners with respect to the occurrence of cavitation.

METHODS

Head-trunk 3D motions were sampled during HVLA manipulation in twenty asymptomatic volunteers manipulated by four practitioners with different seniority (years of experience). Four target levels were selected, C3 and C5 on each side, and were randomly allocated to the different practitioners. The data was recorded before, during and after each set of trial in each anatomical plane. The number of trials with cavitation occurrence was collected for each practitioner.

RESULTS

The manipulation task was performed using extension, ipsilateral side bending and contra-lateral axial rotation independent of side or target level. The displayed angular motion magnitudes did not exceed normal active ROM. Regardless cavitation occurrence, wide variations were observed between practitioners, especially in terms of velocity and acceleration. Cavitation occurrence was related to several kinematics features (i.e. frontal ROM and velocity, sagittal acceleration) and practitioner experience. In addition, multilevel cavitation was observed regularly.

CONCLUSIONS

Kinematics of cervical manipulation is dependent on practitioner and years of experience. Cavitation occurrence could be related to particular kinematics features. These aspects should be further investigated in order to improve teaching and learning of cervical manipulation technique.

The effects of neck mobilization in patients with chronic neck pain: A randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVE

To determine the effect of mobilization and routine physiotherapy on pain, disability, neck range of motion (ROM) and neck muscle endurance (NME) in patients having chronic mechanical neck pain (NP).

METHODS

Sixty eight patients with chronic mechanical NP were randomly allocated into two groups by using a computer generated random sequence table with 34 patients in the multi-modal mobilization group and 34 patients in the routine physiotherapy group. Baseline values for pain, disability, NME, and neck ROM were recorded using visual analogue scale (VAS), neck disability index (NDI), neck flexor muscle endurance test and universal goniometer respectively, before the treatment. Each patient received 10 treatment sessions over a period of four weeks and at the end of four weeks all the outcome measures were recorded again.

RESULTS

A paired t-test revealed significant pre to post treatment differences for all outcome measures in both groups (p ≤ 0.001 in all instances). An independent t-test revealed statistically significant differences for pain, disability, NME, and neck ROM in favor of the multi-modal mobilization group with a between group difference of 1.57 cm for VAS (p < 0.001), 11.74 points for NDI (p = 0.001), 18.45 s for NME (p < 0.001) and 6.06-8.24° for neck ROM (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

The results suggest that a combination of cervical mobilization with routine physiotherapy is more effective for reducing pain and disability and improving NME and neck ROM in patients with chronic mechanical NP compared to routine physiotherapy alone.

Cost Utility Analysis of Cervical Therapeutic Medial Branch Blocks in Managing Chronic Neck Pain

Background: Controlled diagnostic studies have established the prevalence of cervical facet joint pain to range from 36% to 67% based on the criterion standard of ≥ 80% pain relief. Treatment of cervical facet joint pain has been described with Level II evidence of effectiveness for therapeutic facet joint nerve blocks and radiofrequency neurotomy and with no significant evidence for intraarticular injections. However, there have not been any cost effectiveness or cost utility analysis studies performed in managing chronic neck pain with or without headaches with cervical facet joint interventions. Study Design: Cost utility analysis based on the results of a double-blind, randomized, controlled trial of cervical therapeutic medial branch blocks in managing chronic neck pain. Objectives: To assess cost utility of therapeutic cervical medial branch blocks in managing chronic neck pain. Methods: A randomized trial was conducted in a specialty referral private practice interventional pain management center in the United States. This trial assessed the clinical effectiveness of therapeutic cervical medial branch blocks with or without steroids for an established diagnosis of cervical facet joint pain by means of controlled diagnostic blocks. Cost utility analysis was performed with direct payment data for the procedures for a total of 120 patients over a period of 2 years from this trial based on reimbursement rates of 2016. The payment data provided direct procedural costs without inclusion of drug treatments. An additional 40% was added to procedural costs with multiplication of a factor of 1.67 to provide estimated total costs including direct and indirect costs, based on highly regarded surgical literature. Outcome measures included significant improvement defined as at least a 50% improvement with reduction in pain and disability status with a combined 50% or more reduction in pain in Neck Disability Index (NDI) scores. Results: The results showed direct procedural costs per one-year improvement in quality adjusted life year (QALY) of United States Dollar (USD) of $2,552, and overall costs of USD $4,261. Overall, each patient on average received 5.7 ± 2.2 procedures over a period of 2 years. Average significant improvement per procedure was 15.6 ± 12.3 weeks and average significant improvement in 2 years per patient was 86.0 ± 24.6 weeks. Limitations: The limitations of this cost utility analysis are that data are based on a single center evaluation. Only costs of therapeutic interventional procedures and physician visits were included, with extrapolation of indirect costs. Conclusion: The cost utility analysis of therapeutic cervical medial branch blocks in the treatment of chronic neck pain non-responsive to conservative management demonstrated clinical effectiveness and cost utility at USD $4,261 per one year of QALY.

Cost-effectiveness of spinal manipulative therapy, supervised exercise, and home exercise for older adults with chronic neck pain

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

Chronic neck pain is a prevalent and disabling condition among older adults. Despite the large burden of neck pain, little is known regarding the cost-effectiveness of commonly used treatments.

PURPOSE

This study aimed to estimate the cost-effectiveness of home exercise and advice (HEA), spinal manipulative therapy (SMT) plus HEA, and supervised rehabilitative exercise (SRE) plus HEA.

STUDY DESIGN/SETTING

Cost-effectiveness analysis conducted alongside a randomized clinical trial (RCT) was performed.

PATIENT SAMPLE

A total of 241 older adults (≥65 years) with chronic mechanical neck pain comprised the patient sample.

OUTCOME MEASURES

The outcome measures were direct and indirect costs, neck pain, neck disability, SF-6D-derived quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) over a 1-year time horizon.

METHODS

This work was supported by grants from the National Center for Complementary and Integrative Health (#F32AT007507), National Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases (#P60AR062799), and Health Resources and Services Administration (#R18HP01425). The RCT is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (#NCT00269308). A societal perspective was adopted for the primary analysis. A healthcare perspective was adopted as a sensitivity analysis. Cost-effectivenesswas a secondary aim of the RCT which was not powered for differences in costs or QALYs. Differences in costs and clinical outcomes were estimated using generalized estimating equations and linear mixed models, respectively. Cost-effectiveness acceptability curves were calculated to assess the uncertainty surrounding cost-effectiveness estimates.

RESULTS

Total costs for SMT+HEA were 5% lower than HEA (mean difference: -$111; 95% confidence interval [CI] -$1,354 to $899) and 47% lower than SRE+HEA (mean difference: -$1,932; 95% CI -$2,796 to -$1,097). SMT+HEA also resulted in a greater reduction of neck pain over the year relative to HEA (0.57; 95% CI 0.23 to 0.92) and SRE+HEA (0.41; 95% CI 0.05 to 0.76). Differences in disability and QALYs favored SMT+HEA. The probability that adding SMT to HEA is cost-effective at willingness to pay thresholds of $50,000 to $200,000 per QALY gained ranges from 0.75 to 0.81. If adopting a health-care perspective, costs for SMT+HEA were 66% higher than HEA (mean difference: $515; 95% CI $225 to $1,094), resulting in an ICER of $55,975 per QALY gained.

CONCLUSION

On average, SMT+HEA resulted in better clinical outcomes and lower total societal costs relative to SRE+HEA and HEA alone, with a 0.75 to 0.81 probability of cost-effectiveness for willingness to pay thresholds of $50,000 to $200,000 per QALY.

Comparison Between the Effects of Passive and Active Soft Tissue Therapies on Latent Trigger Points of Upper Trapezius Muscle in Women: Single-Blind, Randomized Clinical Trial

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to investigate the effects of passive versus active soft tissue therapies on pain and ranges of motion in women with latent myofascial trigger points.

METHODS

Forty-two female patients, aged 18 to 64 years, with a history of neck pain and latent myofascial trigger points in the upper trapezius muscle were randomly assigned to 3 groups: group A received passive soft tissue therapy, group B received active soft tissue therapy, and a control group C received a sham procedure. The treatment consisted of 3 sessions in a 1-week period with 1-day break between each session. The local pain intensity, measured with a visual analog scale and pain pressure threshold (PPT) using algometry, and active cervical contralateral flexion (ACLF) measured with goniometry, were obtained at baseline, after the third session, and a week after the third session.

RESULTS

The results indicated a significant decrease in local pain intensity on the visual analog scale within each group (A and B) compared with the control group (C) (P < .05). The passive group had significant improvement in PPT compared with the control group (P < .05). There were no significant differences in ACLF after treatment between the 3 groups (P > .05).

CONCLUSION

Both passive and active soft tissue therapies were determined to reduce pain intensity and increase ACLF range of motion, although passive therapy was more effective in increasing PPT in these patients compared with the control group.

Cost-Effectiveness of Physical Therapy Only and of Usual Care for Various Health Conditions: Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Given continually rising health care costs, interventions of health care providers should be cost-effective.

PURPOSE

This review aimed to summarize current cost-effectiveness of physical therapy. Specific aims were: (1) to analyze cost-effectiveness of physical therapy only compared with usual care only, (2) to analyze cost-effectiveness of physical therapy added to usual care compared with usual care only, and (3) to specify in which health conditions physical therapy only or physical therapy added to usual care was cost-effective.

DATA SOURCES

Topic-related systematic reviews were searched in MEDLINE, CINAHL, PEDro, and Cochrane Library and manually.

STUDY SELECTION

Studies published between 1998 and 2014 that investigated the cost-effectiveness of interventions carried out by physical therapists were reviewed. The methodological quality was assessed with the Cochrane risk of bias assessment for intervention studies and with the Quality of Health Economic Analyses Scale.

DATA EXTRACTION

Effectiveness and cost data for calculating incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) and the original authors' conclusions were extracted.

DATA SYNTHESIS

The 18 included studies presented low risk of bias and contained 8 comparisons of physical therapy only with usual care only and 11 comparisons of physical therapy added to usual care with usual care only. Based on ICERs, physical therapy only or added to usual care was cost-effective in 9 out of the 19 comparisons and in 10 comparisons according to the original authors' conclusions.

CONCLUSION

Physical therapy only or added to usual care implies improved health in almost all studies. The cost-effectiveness of such interventions was demonstrated in half of the studies. This result might have been influenced by the fact that different definitions of the notion of "cost-effectiveness" exist.

Economic evaluation of manual therapy for musculoskeletal diseases: a protocol for a systematic review and narrative synthesis of evidence

INTRODUCTION

Manual therapy is the non-surgical conservative management of musculoskeletal disorders using the practitioner's hands on the patient's body for diagnosing and treating disease. The aim of this study is to systematically review trial-based economic evaluations of manual therapy relative to other interventions used for the management of musculoskeletal diseases.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

Randomised clinical trials (RCTs) on the economic evaluation of manual therapy for musculoskeletal diseases will be included in the review. The following databases will be searched from their inception: Medline, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), Econlit, Mantis, Index to Chiropractic Literature, Science Citation Index, Social Science Citation Index, Allied and Complementary Medicine Database (AMED), Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (CDSR), National Health Service Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (NHS DARE), National Health Service Health Technology Assessment Database (NHS HTA), National Health Service Economic Evaluation Database (NHS EED), CENTRAL, five Korean medical databases (Oriental Medicine Advanced Searching Integrated System (OASIS), Research Information Service System (RISS), DBPIA, Korean Traditional Knowledge Portal (KTKP) and KoreaMed) and three Chinese databases (China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), VIP and Wanfang). The evidence for the cost-effectiveness, cost-utility and cost-benefit of manual therapy for musculoskeletal diseases will be assessed as the primary outcome. Health-related quality of life and adverse effects will be assessed as secondary outcomes. We will critically appraise the included studies using the Cochrane risk of bias tool and the Drummond checklist. Results will be summarised using Slavin's qualitative best-evidence synthesis approach.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The results of the study will be disseminated via a peer-reviewed journal and/or conference presentations.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

PROSPERO CRD42015026757.

Variations in Patterns of Utilization and Charges for the Care of Neck Pain in North Carolina, 2000 to 2009: A Statewide Claims' Data Analysis

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of the study was to compare utilization and charges generated by medical doctors (MD), doctors of chiropractic (DC) and physical therapists (PT) by provider patterns of care for the treatment of neck pain in North Carolina.

METHODS

This was an analysis of neck-pain-related closed claim data from the North Carolina State Health Plan for Teachers and State Employees (NCSHP) from 2000 to 2009. Data were extracted from Blue Cross Blue Shield of North Carolina for the NCSHP using ICD-9 diagnostic codes for uncomplicated neck pain (UNP) and complicated neck pain (CNP).

RESULTS

Care patterns with single-provider types and no referrals incurred the least average charges for both UNP and CNP. When care did not include referral providers or services, for either UNP or CNP, MD care with PT was generally less expensive than MD care with DC care. However, when care involved referral providers or services, MD and PT care was on average more expensive than MD and DC care for either UNP or CNP. Risk-adjusted charges for patients in the middle quintile of risk (available 2006-2009) were lower for chiropractic patients with or without medical care or referral care to other providers.

CONCLUSIONS

Chiropractic care alone or DC with MD care incurred appreciably fewer charges for UNP or CNP compared to MD care with or without PT care, when care included referral providers or services. This finding was reversed when care did not include referral providers or services. Risk-adjusted charges for UNP and CNP patients were lower for DC care patterns.

Cost-effectiveness of manual therapy versus physiotherapy in patients with sub-acute and chronic neck pain: a randomised controlled trial

PURPOSE

To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of manual therapy according to the Utrecht School (MTU) in comparison with physiotherapy (PT) in sub-acute and chronic non-specific neck pain patients from a societal perspective.

METHODS

An economic evaluation was conducted alongside a 52-week randomized controlled trial, in which 90 patients were randomized to the MTU group and 91 to the PT group. Clinical outcomes included perceived recovery (yes/no), functional status (continuous and yes/no), and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). Costs were measured from a societal perspective using self-reported questionnaires. Missing data were imputed using multiple imputation. To estimate statistical uncertainty, bootstrapping techniques were used.

RESULTS

After 52 weeks, there were no significant between-group differences in clinical outcomes. During follow-up, intervention costs (β:€-32; 95 %CI: -54 to -10) and healthcare costs (β:€-126; 95 %CI: -235 to -32) were significantly lower in the MTU group than in the PT group, whereas unpaid productivity costs were significantly higher (β:€186; 95 %CI:19-557). Societal costs did not significantly differ between groups (β:€-96; 95 %CI:-1975-2022). For QALYs and functional status (yes/no), the maximum probability of MTU being cost-effective in comparison with PT was low (≤0.54). For perceived recovery (yes/no) and functional status (continuous), a large amount of money must be paid per additional unit of effect to reach a reasonable probability of cost-effectiveness.

CONCLUSIONS

From a societal perspective, MTU was not cost-effective in comparison with PT in patients with sub-acute and chronic non-specific neck pain for perceived recovery, functional status, and QALYs. As no clear total societal cost and effect differences were found between MTU and PT, the decision about what intervention to administer, reimburse, and/or implement can be based on the preferences of the patient and the decision-maker at hand.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00713843.

2015 Updated Method Guideline for Systematic Reviews in the Cochrane Back and Neck Group

STUDY DESIGN

Method guideline for systematic reviews of trials of interventions for neck and back pain, and related spinal disorders.

OBJECTIVE

To help authors design, conduct, and report systematic reviews of trials in this field.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

In 1997, the Cochrane Back Review Group editorial board published the Method Guideline for Systematic Reviews, which was updated in 2003 and in 2009. Since then, new methodological evidence has emerged and standards have changed, therefore it was clear that revisions were needed to the 2009 guideline. In May 2015 the group changed its name to Cochrane Back and Neck.

METHODS

The editorial board met in September 2014 to review the relevant new methodological evidence and determine how it should be incorporated. Members of the advisory board were consulted. Based on the feedback received, an updated method guideline was prepared and approved by the editorial board.

RESULTS

We have updated recommendations in 7 categories: objectives, literature search, selection criteria, risk of bias assessment, data extraction, data analysis, and reporting of results and conclusions. Each category is classified into minimum criteria (mandatory) and further guidance (optional). This update also includes some new guidance for preparation of summary of finding tables and for conducting nonintervention reviews.

CONCLUSION

Citations of previous versions of the method guideline in published scientific articles (1193 in total) suggest that others may find this guideline useful to plan, conduct, or evaluate systematic reviews in the field of back and neck pain, and spinal disorders.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

N/A.

A systematic review comparing the costs of chiropractic care to other interventions for spine pain in the United States

Background

Although chiropractors in the United States (US) have long suggested that their approach to managing spine pain is less costly than other health care providers (HCPs), it is unclear if available evidence supports this premise.

Methods

A systematic review was conducted using a comprehensive search strategy to uncover studies that compared health care costs for patients with any type of spine pain who received chiropractic care or care from other HCPs. Only studies conducted in the US and published in English between 1993 and 2015 were included. Health care costs were summarized for studies examining: 1. private health plans, 2. workers’ compensation (WC) plans, and 3. clinical outcomes. The quality of studies in the latter group was evaluated using a Consensus on Health Economic Criteria (CHEC) list.

Results

The search uncovered 1276 citations and 25 eligible studies, including 12 from private health plans, 6 from WC plans, and 7 that examined clinical outcomes. Chiropractic care was most commonly compared to care from a medical physician, with few details about the care received. Heterogeneity was noted among studies in patient selection, definition of spine pain, scope of costs compared, study duration, and methods to estimate costs. Overall, cost comparison studies from private health plans and WC plans reported that health care costs were lower with chiropractic care. In studies that also examined clinical outcomes, there were few differences in efficacy between groups, and health care costs were higher for those receiving chiropractic care. The effects of adjusting for differences in sociodemographic, clinical, or other factors between study groups were unclear.

Conclusions

Although cost comparison studies suggest that health care costs were generally lower among patients whose spine pain was managed with chiropractic care, the studies reviewed had many methodological limitations. Better research is needed to determine if these differences in health care costs were attributable to the type of HCP managing their care.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12913-015-1140-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Workplace interventions to prevent work disability in workers on sick leave

BACKGROUND

Work disability has serious consequences for individuals as well as society. It is possible to facilitate resumption of work by reducing barriers to return to work (RTW) and promoting collaboration with key stakeholders. This review was first published in 2009 and has now been updated to include studies published up to February 2015.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effectiveness of workplace interventions in preventing work disability among sick-listed workers, when compared to usual care or clinical interventions.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Work Trials Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, and PsycINFO databases on 2 February 2015.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of workplace interventions that aimed to improve RTW for disabled workers. We only included studies where RTW or conversely sickness absence was reported as a continuous outcome.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently extracted data and assessed risk of bias of the studies. We performed meta-analysis where possible, and we assessed the quality of evidence according to GRADE criteria. We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 14 RCTs with 1897 workers. Eight studies included workers with musculoskeletal disorders, five workers with mental health problems, and one workers with cancer. We judged six studies to have low risk of bias for the outcome sickness absence.Workplace interventions significantly improved time until first RTW compared to usual care, moderate-quality evidence (hazard ratio (HR) 1.55, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.20 to 2.01). Workplace interventions did not considerably reduce time to lasting RTW compared to usual care, very low-quality evidence (HR 1.07, 95% CI 0.72 to 1.57). The effect on cumulative duration of sickness absence showed a mean difference of -33.33 (95% CI -49.54 to -17.12), favouring the workplace intervention, high-quality evidence. One study assessed recurrences of sick leave, and favoured usual care, moderate-quality evidence (HR 0.42, 95% CI 0.21 to 0.82). Overall, the effectiveness of workplace interventions on work disability showed varying results.In subgroup analyses, we found that workplace interventions reduced time to first and lasting RTW among workers with musculoskeletal disorders more than usual care (HR 1.44, 95% CI 1.15 to 1.82 and HR 1.77, 95% CI 1.37 to 2.29, respectively; both moderate-quality evidence). In studies of workers with musculoskeletal disorders, pain also improved (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.26, 95% CI -0.47 to -0.06), as well as functional status (SMD -0.33, 95% CI -0.58 to -0.08). In studies of workers with mental health problems, there was a significant improvement in time until first RTW (HR 2.64, 95% CI 1.41 to 4.95), but no considerable reduction in lasting RTW (HR 0.79, 95% CI 0.54 to 1.17). One study of workers with cancer did not find a considerable reduction in lasting RTW (HR 0.88, 95% CI 0.53 to 1.47).In another subgroup analysis, we did not find evidence that offering a workplace intervention in combination with a cognitive behavioural intervention (HR 1.93, 95% CI 1.27 to 2.93) is considerably more effective than offering a workplace intervention alone (HR 1.35, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.82, test for subgroup differences P = 0.17).Workplace interventions did not considerably reduce time until first RTW compared with a clinical intervention in workers with mental health problems in one study (HR 2.65, 95% CI 1.42 to 4.95, very low-quality evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We found moderate-quality evidence that workplace interventions reduce time to first RTW, high-quality evidence that workplace interventions reduce cumulative duration of sickness absence, very low-quality evidence that workplace interventions reduce time to lasting RTW, and moderate-quality evidence that workplace interventions increase recurrences of sick leave. Overall, the effectiveness of workplace interventions on work disability showed varying results. Workplace interventions reduce time to RTW and improve pain and functional status in workers with musculoskeletal disorders. We found no evidence of a considerable effect of workplace interventions on time to RTW in workers with mental health problems or cancer.We found moderate-quality evidence to support workplace interventions for workers with musculoskeletal disorders. The quality of the evidence on the effectiveness of workplace interventions for workers with mental health problems and cancer is low, and results do not show an effect of workplace interventions for these workers. Future research should expand the range of health conditions evaluated with high-quality studies.

Immediate and Short-Term Effects of Upper Thoracic Manipulation on Myoelectric Activity of Sternocleidomastoid Muscles in Young Women With Chronic Neck Pain: A Randomized Blind Clinical Trial

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to assess the immediate and short-term effects of upper thoracic spine manipulation on pain intensity and myoelectric activity of the sternocleidomastoid muscles in young women with chronic neck pain.

METHODS

A randomized clinical trial was carried out involving 32 women with chronic neck pain (mean age, 24.8 ± 5.4 years) allocated to an experimental group and a placebo group. Three evaluations were carried out: baseline, immediate postintervention, and short-term postintervention (48-72 hours after intervention). Myoelectric activity of the right and left sternocleidomastoid muscles was assessed at rest and during isometric contractions for cervical flexion and elevation of the shoulder girdle. Neck pain intensity was assessed at rest using a visual analog scale. Comparisons of the data were performed using 2-way repeated-measures analysis of variance with the Bonferroni correction. The level of significance was set at P < .05.

RESULTS

A moderate treatment effect on myoelectric activity of the right and left sternocleidomastoid muscles during isometric elevation of the shoulder girdle was found in the experimental group only on the short-term postintervention evaluation (d > 0.40). No statistically significant differences were found for any of the variables analyzed in the intergroup comparisons at the different evaluation times (P > .05).

CONCLUSION

No statistically significant differences were found in the intragroup or intergroup analyses of the experimental and placebo groups regarding myoelectric activity of the cervical muscles or the intensity of neck pain at rest in the immediate or short-term postintervention evaluations.

Systematic overview of economic evaluations of health-related rehabilitation

BACKGROUND

Health related rehabilitation is instrumental in improving functioning and promoting participation by people with disabilities. To make clinical and policy decisions about health-related rehabilitation, resource allocation and cost issues need to be considered.

OBJECTIVES

To provide an overview of systematic reviews (SRs) on economic evaluations of health-related rehabilitation.

METHODS

We searched multiple databases to identify relevant SRs of economic evaluations of health-related rehabilitation. Review quality was assessed by AMSTAR checklist.

RESULTS

We included 64 SRs, most of which included economic evaluations alongside randomized controlled trials (RCTs). The review quality was low to moderate (AMSTAR score 5-8) in 35, and high (score 9-11) in 29 of the included SRs. The included SRs addressed various health conditions, including spinal or other pain conditions (n = 14), age-related problems (11), stroke (7), musculoskeletal disorders (6), heart diseases (4), pulmonary (3), mental health problems (3), and injury (3). Physiotherapy was the most commonly evaluated rehabilitation intervention in the included SRs (n = 24). Other commonly evaluated interventions included multidisciplinary programmes (14); behavioral, educational or psychological interventions (11); home-based interventions (11); complementary therapy (6); self-management (6); and occupational therapy (4).

CONCLUSIONS

Although the available evidence is often described as limited, inconsistent or inconclusive, some rehabilitation interventions were cost-effective or showed cost-saving in a variety of disability conditions. Available evidence comes predominantly from high income countries, therefore economic evaluations of health-related rehabilitation are urgently required in less resourced settings.

Is there preliminary value to a within- and/or between-session change for determining short-term outcomes of manual therapy on mechanical neck pain?

OBJECTIVES

The primary purpose of this study was to determine whether occurrences of within- and between-session changes were significantly associated with functional outcomes, pain, and self-report of recovery in patients at discharge who were treated with manual therapy for mechanical neck pain. A secondary purpose was to determine the extent of change needed for the within- and between-session change in association to function.

METHODS

This secondary data analysis examined 56 patients who demonstrated a positive response to manual therapy during the initial assessment within a randomized controlled trial (RCT) that examined manual therapy techniques and a home exercise program (HEP). Within- and between-session findings were defined as 'changes in pain report during the initial session (within)' and 'changes in pain from baseline to 48-hours post initial assessment (between)'. Outcomes were analyzed for associations with the global rating of change (GRoC), self-report activity scale (SRAS), and a 50% reduction of the neck disability index (NDI) by discharge at 96 hours.

RESULTS

Findings indicate that within-session pain changes of 36.7% are strongly associated with a 50% change in NDI at 96 hours. Between-session changes in pain were associated with 50% change in NDI and a ≧3-point change in GRoC at 96 hours.

CONCLUSION

Both within- and between-session measures may be useful to predict success levels at 96 hours for NDI; however, between-session changes are more useful to predict success in GRoC. Measures used during clinical examination may help guide clinicians in identification of candidates best suited for the treatment.

What is the Experience of Receiving Health Care for Neck Pain?

This study used a descriptive phenomenological approach to describe the experience of finding and receiving health services for neck pain. Nineteen participants (18 females, 1 male) with neck pain (>3 months) were interviewed using a semi-structured questionnaire guide. Interviews were recorded, transcribed and coded. Two overarching themes described the experience: complexity in finding effective health care; and the need for informative, personalized, respectful communication. Complexity in finding effective health care was attributed to the variable approach and effectiveness of different health professionals, the need to experiment with care to find what works, the need to differentiate temporary versus permanent treatment effects, concerns about treatment side effects and the sense that financial factors influence personal treatment choices and provider behaviours. The need for informative, personalized, respectful communications was broken down into the following subthemes: the importance of being listened to, seen and believed; the need for useful information; and a desire to have outcomes formally tracked as a means of individualizing treatment. Overall, patients struggled to navigate the variable health services and providers that were available and that provided variable outcomes. They often did so through a trial and error approach. As such, patients remain open to unproven, even controversial treatment options. Research evidence was not a key ingredient in patient decision-making about accessing health services. The environmental, personal, health behavior factors interacted to contribute to health service utilization and would increase the burden of these for both the individual and society at large. The effectiveness of neck pain interventions is dependent on complex interactions between the context, individual, and health care provider, therefore, physiological responses cannot be considered as being distinct from these determinants.