Abstract
Objective
To assess the effectiveness of manual therapy versus a progressive, tailored neck-specific exercise program with high adherence for treating non-specific chronic neck pain (NSNP) and to examine the relationship between exercise adherence and treatment outcome.
Design
Single-blind, parallel, randomized clinical trial with two treatment arms, adhering to CONSORT guidelines.
Methods
65 NSNP participants were randomly allocated to manual therapy or exercise. They received four treatment sessions of either manual therapy or neck-specific exercise, once a week for four weeks. Outcomes measured at baseline, two weeks, four weeks, and 12 weeks post-treatment included pain intensity, disability, patient-perceived improvement, quality of life, kinesiophobia and the craniocervical flexion test (CCFT) performance. In addition to evaluating each individual outcome, patients were categorized into either responders or non-responders according to pain intensity, disability and patient-perceived improvement. Exercise adherence was recorded.
Results
There were no differences between groups in individual outcomes. Treatment outcome in the exercise group was associated with exercise adherence. Patients receiving manual therapy were more likely to be classified as responders than those receiving exercise at all measured time points (odds ratio, 2 weeks: 0.14; 95 % CI: 0.02–0.79; treatment completion: 0.31; 95 % CI: 0.12–0.82; 12 weeks after treatment completion: 0.19; 95 % CI: 0.05–0.65), however these differences were no longer present when only patients whose exercise adherence was ≥95 % were analysed. Exercise was more effective than manual therapy in improving CCFT performance but only if patients with ≥95 % adherence were considered.
Conclusion
A four-week intervention of manual therapy was more effective than exercise, however when exercise adherence was ≥95 %, the interventions were equally effective. Manual therapy may only be superior to specific-exercise when high exercise adherence cannot be assured.