The relative effectiveness of segment specific level and non-specific level spinal joint mobilization on pain and range of motion

Results of a systematic review and meta-analysis

Emily Joan Slaven, Adam P. Goode, Rogelio A. Coronado, Charles Poole, Eric J. Hegedus

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

21 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Study design: Systematic literature review and meta-analysis. Objective: In symptomatic subjects to: (1) examine the effects of a single session of joint mobilization on pain at rest and with most painful movement, and (2) compare the effects when joint mobilization is provided to a specific or non-specific spinal level. Background: Joint mobilization is routinely used for treating spinal pain in conjunction with other interventions, but its unique effect is not well understood. Further, there is controversy about the role of 'specific level' techniques in producing benefit. Methods: Searches were performed for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) using electronic databases (MEDLINE, CINAHL, and PEDro) from 1966 through November 2010. Methodological quality was assessed using previously detailed criteria. Meta-analysis and meta-regression were conducted on eligible studies. Results: Eight RCTs with a mean methodological score of 10/12 were included. Significant heterogeneity (P=0.075) was found in the overall meta-analysis estimate. When stratified by body location, no significant individual effect was found for pain at rest. However, there was a statistical mean difference [0.71 (95% confidence interval: 0.13-1.28)] between pain at rest for the cervical and lumbar individual means. Conclusions: We found multiple studies which provided evidence that a single session of joint mobilization can lead to a reduction of pain at rest and with most painful movement. When using joint mobilization, the need for specific versus non-specific level mobilization may be influenced by anatomical region; the direction of effect in the cervical spine was toward specific mobilization and in the lumbar spine towards non-specific mobilization.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)7-17
Number of pages11
JournalJournal of Manual and Manipulative Therapy
Volume21
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - 2013
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Articular Range of Motion
Meta-Analysis
Joints
Pain
Spine
Randomized Controlled Trials
MEDLINE
Databases
Confidence Intervals

Keywords

  • Pain
  • Specific level
  • Spinal mobilization

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Physical Therapy, Sports Therapy and Rehabilitation

Cite this

The relative effectiveness of segment specific level and non-specific level spinal joint mobilization on pain and range of motion : Results of a systematic review and meta-analysis. / Slaven, Emily Joan; Goode, Adam P.; Coronado, Rogelio A.; Poole, Charles; Hegedus, Eric J.

In: Journal of Manual and Manipulative Therapy, Vol. 21, No. 1, 2013, p. 7-17.

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

@article{bdb7b69e801046e4a77ac53aec64f498,
title = "The relative effectiveness of segment specific level and non-specific level spinal joint mobilization on pain and range of motion: Results of a systematic review and meta-analysis",
abstract = "Study design: Systematic literature review and meta-analysis. Objective: In symptomatic subjects to: (1) examine the effects of a single session of joint mobilization on pain at rest and with most painful movement, and (2) compare the effects when joint mobilization is provided to a specific or non-specific spinal level. Background: Joint mobilization is routinely used for treating spinal pain in conjunction with other interventions, but its unique effect is not well understood. Further, there is controversy about the role of 'specific level' techniques in producing benefit. Methods: Searches were performed for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) using electronic databases (MEDLINE, CINAHL, and PEDro) from 1966 through November 2010. Methodological quality was assessed using previously detailed criteria. Meta-analysis and meta-regression were conducted on eligible studies. Results: Eight RCTs with a mean methodological score of 10/12 were included. Significant heterogeneity (P=0.075) was found in the overall meta-analysis estimate. When stratified by body location, no significant individual effect was found for pain at rest. However, there was a statistical mean difference [0.71 (95{\%} confidence interval: 0.13-1.28)] between pain at rest for the cervical and lumbar individual means. Conclusions: We found multiple studies which provided evidence that a single session of joint mobilization can lead to a reduction of pain at rest and with most painful movement. When using joint mobilization, the need for specific versus non-specific level mobilization may be influenced by anatomical region; the direction of effect in the cervical spine was toward specific mobilization and in the lumbar spine towards non-specific mobilization.",
keywords = "Pain, Specific level, Spinal mobilization",
author = "Slaven, {Emily Joan} and Goode, {Adam P.} and Coronado, {Rogelio A.} and Charles Poole and Hegedus, {Eric J.}",
year = "2013",
doi = "10.1179/2042618612Y.0000000016",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "21",
pages = "7--17",
journal = "Journal of Manual and Manipulative Therapy",
issn = "1066-9817",
publisher = "Maney Publishing",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - The relative effectiveness of segment specific level and non-specific level spinal joint mobilization on pain and range of motion

T2 - Results of a systematic review and meta-analysis

AU - Slaven, Emily Joan

AU - Goode, Adam P.

AU - Coronado, Rogelio A.

AU - Poole, Charles

AU - Hegedus, Eric J.

PY - 2013

Y1 - 2013

N2 - Study design: Systematic literature review and meta-analysis. Objective: In symptomatic subjects to: (1) examine the effects of a single session of joint mobilization on pain at rest and with most painful movement, and (2) compare the effects when joint mobilization is provided to a specific or non-specific spinal level. Background: Joint mobilization is routinely used for treating spinal pain in conjunction with other interventions, but its unique effect is not well understood. Further, there is controversy about the role of 'specific level' techniques in producing benefit. Methods: Searches were performed for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) using electronic databases (MEDLINE, CINAHL, and PEDro) from 1966 through November 2010. Methodological quality was assessed using previously detailed criteria. Meta-analysis and meta-regression were conducted on eligible studies. Results: Eight RCTs with a mean methodological score of 10/12 were included. Significant heterogeneity (P=0.075) was found in the overall meta-analysis estimate. When stratified by body location, no significant individual effect was found for pain at rest. However, there was a statistical mean difference [0.71 (95% confidence interval: 0.13-1.28)] between pain at rest for the cervical and lumbar individual means. Conclusions: We found multiple studies which provided evidence that a single session of joint mobilization can lead to a reduction of pain at rest and with most painful movement. When using joint mobilization, the need for specific versus non-specific level mobilization may be influenced by anatomical region; the direction of effect in the cervical spine was toward specific mobilization and in the lumbar spine towards non-specific mobilization.

AB - Study design: Systematic literature review and meta-analysis. Objective: In symptomatic subjects to: (1) examine the effects of a single session of joint mobilization on pain at rest and with most painful movement, and (2) compare the effects when joint mobilization is provided to a specific or non-specific spinal level. Background: Joint mobilization is routinely used for treating spinal pain in conjunction with other interventions, but its unique effect is not well understood. Further, there is controversy about the role of 'specific level' techniques in producing benefit. Methods: Searches were performed for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) using electronic databases (MEDLINE, CINAHL, and PEDro) from 1966 through November 2010. Methodological quality was assessed using previously detailed criteria. Meta-analysis and meta-regression were conducted on eligible studies. Results: Eight RCTs with a mean methodological score of 10/12 were included. Significant heterogeneity (P=0.075) was found in the overall meta-analysis estimate. When stratified by body location, no significant individual effect was found for pain at rest. However, there was a statistical mean difference [0.71 (95% confidence interval: 0.13-1.28)] between pain at rest for the cervical and lumbar individual means. Conclusions: We found multiple studies which provided evidence that a single session of joint mobilization can lead to a reduction of pain at rest and with most painful movement. When using joint mobilization, the need for specific versus non-specific level mobilization may be influenced by anatomical region; the direction of effect in the cervical spine was toward specific mobilization and in the lumbar spine towards non-specific mobilization.

KW - Pain

KW - Specific level

KW - Spinal mobilization

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84874544937&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84874544937&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1179/2042618612Y.0000000016

DO - 10.1179/2042618612Y.0000000016

M3 - Review article

VL - 21

SP - 7

EP - 17

JO - Journal of Manual and Manipulative Therapy

JF - Journal of Manual and Manipulative Therapy

SN - 1066-9817

IS - 1

ER -