Search clinical trials by condition, location and status
Neck pain is a common issue that can lead to long-term disability and lost work time for many individuals. Despite numerous studies, finding effective treatment strategies has been challenging. One possible reason for this is that treatments may not have been tested on the specific groups of people who would benefit most. A method was developed to identify people with neck pain who are likely to see significant improvements from a manipulation technique used by physical therapists, called cervical spine thrust joint manipulation. The investigators believe that patients identified as likely responders to cervical spine manipulation will show greater improvements in disability. The investigators aim to test whether this method works with different patients and therapists across the country through a multicenter randomized clinical trial. In this study, 140 patients with primary complaints of neck pain will be enrolled from 20 clinical sites. Designed with stringent criteria for inclusion, this study is a testament to our commitment to participant safety and the effectiveness of the treatment. Participants will be randomly assigned to one of two groups: (1) one group will receive 2 sessions of cervical spine manipulation followed by 3 sessions of exercise, and (2) the other group will receive 2 sessions of gentle hands-on treatment followed by 3 sessions of exercise. The primary goal is to measure changes in disability 4 weeks after starting treatment, with follow-ups after one week, 4 weeks, 3 months, and 6 months to assess both immediate and long-term effects. By providing crucial data on the reliability of our method in identifying patients who will benefit most from cervical spine manipulation, this study has the potential to significantly enhance decision-making leading to rapid improvement. Results from this study will provide clearer guidelines on the optimal use of cervical spine manipulation, potentially revolutionizing the way patients recover from neck pain.
Assess the feasibility of recruiting, enrolling and randomizing patients with concussion symptoms and neck pain to receive manual therapy and cervical rehabilitative exercises in addition to standard concussion treatment. In the usual care workflow provided at the participating concussion clinic, cervical spine rehab is not typically introduced until after week 4. The rationale is that neck pain is often a self-limiting condition that may resolve spontaneously, without the need for specific cervical spine rehab. This study is chiefly focused on feasibility aims that revolve around developing changes to barriers in workflow issues at the participating concussion clinic, that would allow for earlier introduction of cervical spine rehab.
This study is interested in whether baseline measures of pain sensitivity i.e. the amount of pressure required to feel pain predicts pain relief following a pain inducing massage AND whether pain relief following a pain inducing massage is different than a pain free massage or placing your hand in a cold water bath. Participants with neck pain will be randomly assigned to receive a pain inducing massage, pain free massage, or to place their hand in a cold water bath.
This feasibility project aims to evaluate the effectiveness of chiropractic care combined with Tai Chi (TC) training to reduce pain and disability in adults with chronic non-specific neck pain (CNNP).
The primary aim is to test the combined effectiveness of OMT and targeted head exercise (THE) to achieve a significant decrease in headache measures of frequency, intensity, and duration in a Treatment group when compared to a Control group whose members receive only standard medical care. A parallel, 2-arm, longitudinal, randomized controlled trial (RCT) will focus upon female patients (18 to 75 years of age) who have been diagnosed with chronic cervicogenic headache (CeH) based upon a differential diagnosis that includes classification according to the International Headache Society Classification IHSD 3rd Edition, reproduction of referred headache resulting from manual pressure over the upper cervical regions, and objective MRI findings. It is estimated that a sample size of 30 will provide sufficient statistical power (79%) to detect an intervention effect that corresponds to a clinically meaningful recovery (60%). CeH is classified as a secondary headache disorder because the headache pain is a consequence of injury to, or disease of, the bony and/or soft tissues of the upper cervical spine. It has been reported that some patients diagnosed with CeH demonstrate atrophy and/or fatty infiltration (FI) of the RCPm muscles on MRI. FI and/or a reduction in the cross-sectional area (CSA) of active muscle would not be expected to be the direct cause of chronic headache, but either or both could prevent muscles from generating normal physiologic levels of force. It has been shown that there is a functional connection between the pain sensitive dura mater and RCPm muscles and it is known that mechanical stretching of the dura mater results in referred headache. While FI and/or a reduction in the CSA of active muscle would not be expected to be the direct cause of chronic headache, it is known that muscle pathology will result in functional deficits. It is proposed that pathology in RCPm muscles will compromise the normal functional relationship between the RCPm and the dura mater and result in referred head and neck pain. It is predicted that at the end of the study, the Treatment group will show a significant decrease in headache measures that will be accompanied by a significant increase in CSA and a significant decrease in FI on MRI, and restoration of a normal head posture that will not be seen in the Control group. The proposed study is unique in that we are proposing both a mechanism and a source for some instances of CeH. By testing the effectiveness of specific interventions to address a specific pathology within a specific headache population, and by restricting the study cohort to female subjects presenting with CeH, this study will increase the ability to detect a significant change in the outcomes by increasing the power of the statistical analysis.
Neck pain is a common complaint among active duty military personnel, and can have tremendous impacts on quality of life and participation in duty-related activities. Treatments for spinal pain in military personnel are typically multimodal, relying upon physical therapy, pharmacological agents, spinal manipulation, and psychotherapy. However, there does not exist a wide body of evidence to support many of these treatments in active-duty military. The Cervigard neck collar was designed to treat posture-related neck pain with minimal effort and time required for treatment by the patient. However, this has yet to be tested experimentally. The objective of this study is to evaluate the treatment effect and safety of a novel device for the treatment of neck pain using self-reported pain and function measures, as well as objective radiological measures of cervical lordosis and head posture. Participants will be randomized to be fitted with and receive the Cervigard neck collar either immediately, or 6-weeks after being screened. Participants will complete neck pain and function questionnaires, and have cervical X-Rays collected at screening, treatment, 6 weeks, and 12 weeks (for the immediate group). Participants will be instructed to wear the collar every day for the duration of the trial. Self-reported neck pain and function measures will be collected, as well as cervical X-Rays, protocol adherence measures, and adverse events. The intervention is expected to reduce neck pain/discomfort, improve function, and improve cervical lordosis.
Determine the most effective and efficient treatment protocols for treating neck pain with LLLT.
The broad long-term objective is to develop an objective biomarker for spinal health based on aberrant or abnormal movement patterns during functional activities to better target spinal manipulation therapy (SMT) and other conservative treatments. The central hypotheses are a) that aberrant spinal motions and their location (area and level) are indicative of underlying spinal dysfunction, and b) that quantified 3D cervical spine intersegmental and global motion patterns during functional tasks can be used as a biomarker for subsequent clinical studies aimed at normalizing cervical kinematics. Specific Aim: Determine the extent to which SMT can modulate, or normalize, intersegmental motion in patients with neck pain. Rationale: SMT is a force-based biomechanical event whose hypothesized mechanism of action relies on moving the segment into the para-physiological zone, resulting in normalization of spinal kinematic function. Hypothesis: Severity of abnormal or aberrant motion, identified in those with NP, will improve following SMT. Approach: Participants with chronic mechanical neck pain will be recruited and randomized into one of three groups: 1) No Treatment, 2) Light Massage (pseudo- sham), and 3) Spinal Manipulative Therapy. Using a repeated measures study design, metrics of quality of spinal motion will be compared before and after the prescribed intervention.
This study aims to assess the efficacy of Personalized Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (PrTMS) therapy to reduce chronic neck for military health system beneficiaries.
Cervical medial branch radiofrequency ablation (CMBRFA) is an effective treatment for cervical facet pain. The efficacy of CMBRFA was proven by studies published in the late 1990's and early 2000's. Patients were selected by a strict, labor-intensive placebo-controlled, diagnostic block protocol and were treated using a conventional monopolar cannula that was positioned parallel to the medial branch, two to three lesions per medial branch nerve and both sagittal and oblique passes. Since the original CMBRFA publications, patient selection for CMBRFA is less strict, and new RFA cannulae have been developed to improve efficiency and safety while maintaining a large ablative lesion. Current clinical patient selection criteria for CMBRFA tend to be more relaxed than described in early research studies. However, subsequent research has shown that when selection criteria are too relaxed, outcomes are poorer. A recent cross-sectional study reported that when CMBRFA is done in patients selected by \>80% pain improvement after dual medial branch blocks, outcomes are similar to patients selected with a stricter selection protocol (100% pain relief) similar to the original CMBRFA studies. Although, the cross-sectional study suggests an appropriate selection criteria, it has not been used in any prospective studies. The Trident multi-tined cannula is a recent technology that produces a large ablative lesion distal to the triple-tined tip. This design allows a perpendicular/lateral approach to CMBRFA and only requires a single lesion at each medial branch. This differs from the conventional cannula, which produces it's most extensive ablative lesion along the cannula with minimal distal projection. As a result, it requires a parallel approach with multiple burn cycles at the same medial branch. The perpendicular approach with Trident and single lesion cycle at each medial branch are appealing for safety purposes and efficiency however, it's efficacy has not been directly compared to the standard conventional cannula. Problem: There are no randomized controlled trials comparing novel technologies like Trident cannula to the previously studied conventional cannula in patients selected with a more practical selection criteria. Purpose: To compared procedural characteristics, pain, and disability outcomes of CMBRFA using either a Trident or conventional cannula in patients with confirmed facet mediated pain (defined by ≥80% symptom reduction after dual medial branch block). Central Hypothesis: Trident cannula during CMBRFA will result in noninferior improvements in pain and function compared to conventional cannula but will significantly reduce procedural discomfort, time and radiation exposure. Specific Aims: 1. Determine the proportion of patients with a successful pain response (defined as ≥50% improvement in index pain) to Trident (T-CMBRFA) versus conventional (C-CMBRFA) at 3, 6, and 12 months. 2. Determine the proportion of patients with a successful functional response (defined as ≥10% reduction on neck disability index \[NDI\]) to T-CMBRFA versus C-CMBRFA at 3, 6, and 12 months. 3. Determine the proportion of patients with a successful perception of improvement (defined as a score ≥6 on the Patient Global Impression of Change \[PGIC\]) to T-CMBRFA versus C-CMBRFA at 3, 6, and 12 months.