BACKGROUND CONTEXT: In 2008, the lack of published evidence prevented the Bone and Joint Decade 2000-2010 Task Force on Neck Pain and Its Associated Disorders (Neck Pain Task Force [NPTF]) from commenting on the effectiveness of psychological interventions for the management of neck pain.
PURPOSE: This study aimed to update findings of the NPTF and evaluate the effectiveness of psychological interventions for the management of neck pain and associated disorders (NAD) or whiplash-associated disorders (WAD).
STUDY DESIGN/SETTING: This study used systematic review and best-evidence synthesis.
SAMPLE: Randomized controlled trials, cohort studies, and case-control studies comparing psychological interventions to other non-invasive interventions or no intervention were the samples used in this study.
OUTCOME MEASURES: The outcome measures are (1) self-rated recovery; (2) functional recovery; (3) clinical outcomes; (4) administrative outcomes; and (5) adverse effects.
METHODS: We searched six databases from 1990 to 2015. Randomized controlled trials, cohort studies, and case-control studies meeting our selection criteria were eligible for critical appraisal. Random pairs of independent reviewers used the Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network criteria to critically appraise eligible studies. Studies with a low risk of bias were synthesized following best evidence synthesis principles. This study was funded by the Ontario Ministry of Finance.
RESULTS: We screened 1,919 articles, 19 were eligible for critical appraisal and 10 were judged to have low risk of bias. We found no clear evidence supporting relaxation training or cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) for persistent grades I-III NAD for reducing pain intensity or disability. Similarly, we did not find evidence to support the effectiveness of biofeedback or relaxation training for persistent grade II WAD, and there is conflicting evidence for the use of CBT in this population. However, adding a progressive goal attainment program to functional restoration physiotherapy may benefit patients with persistent grades I-III WAD. Furthermore, Jyoti meditation may help reduce neck pain intensity and bothersomeness in patients with persistent NAD.
CONCLUSIONS: We did not find evidence for or against the use of psychological interventions in patients with recent onset NAD or WAD. We found evidence that a progressive goal attainment program may be helpful for the management of persistent WAD and that Jyoti meditation may benefit patients with persistent NAD. The limited evidence of effectiveness for psychological interventions may be due to several factors, such as interventions that are ineffective, poorly conceptualized, or poorly implemented. Further methodologically rigorous research is needed.
BACKGROUND: Although research on non-surgical treatments for neck pain (NP) is progressing, there remains uncertainty about the efficacy of cognitive-behavioural therapy (CBT) for this population. Addressing cognitive and behavioural factors might reduce the clinical burden and the costs of NP in society.
OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of CBT among individuals with subacute and chronic NP. Specifically, the following comparisons were investigated: (1) cognitive-behavioural therapy versus placebo, no treatment, or waiting list controls; (2) cognitive-behavioural therapy versus other types of interventions; (3) cognitive-behavioural therapy in addition to another intervention (e.g. physiotherapy) versus the other intervention alone.
SEARCH METHODS: We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, SCOPUS, Web of Science, and PubMed, as well as ClinicalTrials.gov and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform up to November 2014. Reference lists and citations of identified trials and relevant systematic reviews were screened.
SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials that assessed the use of CBT in adults with subacute and chronic NP.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently assessed the risk of bias in each study and extracted the data. If sufficient homogeneity existed among studies in the pre-defined comparisons, a meta-analysis was performed. We determined the quality of the evidence for each comparison with the GRADE approach.
MAIN RESULTS: We included 10 randomised trials (836 participants) in this review. Four trials (40%) had low risk of bias, the remaining 60% of trials had a high risk of bias.The quality of the evidence for the effects of CBT on patients with chronic NP was from very low to moderate. There was low quality evidence that CBT was better than no treatment for improving pain (standard mean difference (SMD) -0.58, 95% confidence interval (CI) -1.01 to -0.16), disability (SMD -0.61, 95% CI -1.21 to -0.01), and quality of life (SMD -0.93, 95% CI -1.54 to -0.31) at short-term follow-up, while there was from very low to low quality evidence of no effect on various psychological indicators at short-term follow-up. Both at short- and intermediate-term follow-up, CBT did not affect pain (SMD -0.06, 95% CI -0.33 to 0.21, low quality, at short-term follow-up; MD -0.89, 95% CI -2.73 to 0.94, low quality, at intermediate-term follow-up) or disability (SMD -0.10, 95% CI -0.40 to 0.20, moderate quality, at short-term follow-up; SMD -0.24, 95% CI-0.54 to 0.07, moderate quality, at intermediate-term follow-up) compared to other types of interventions. There was moderate quality evidence that CBT was better than other interventions for improving kinesiophobia at intermediate-term follow-up (SMD -0.39, 95% CI -0.69 to -0.08, I(2) = 0%). Finally, there was very low quality evidence that CBT in addition to another intervention did not differ from the other intervention alone in terms of effect on pain (SMD -0.36, 95% CI -0.73 to 0.02) and disability (SMD -0.10, 95% CI -0.56 to 0.36) at short-term follow-up.For patients with subacute NP, there was low quality evidence that CBT was better than other interventions at reducing pain at short-term follow-up (SMD -0.24, 95% CI -0.48 to 0.00), while no difference was found in terms of effect on disability (SMD -0.12, 95% CI -0.36 to 0.12) and kinesiophobia.None of the included studies reported on adverse effects.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: With regard to chronic neck pain, CBT was found to be statistically significantly more effective for short-term pain reduction only when compared to no treatment, but these effects could not be considered clinically meaningful. When comparing both CBT to other types of interventions and CBT in addition to another intervention to the other intervention alone, no differences were found. For patients with subacute NP, CBT was significantly better than other types of interventions at reducing pain at short-term follow-up, while no difference was found for disability and kinesiophobia. Further research is recommended to investigate the long-term benefits and risks of CBT including for the different subgroups of subjects with NP.
BACKGROUND: Proprioceptive training (PrT) is popularly applied as preventive or rehabilitative exercise method in various sports and rehabilitation settings. Its effect on pain and function is only poorly evaluated. The aim of this systematic review was to summarise and analyse the existing data on the effects of PrT on pain alleviation and functional restoration in patients with chronic (≥ 3 months) neck- or back pain.
METHODS: Relevant electronic databases were searched from their respective inception to February 2014. Randomised controlled trials comparing PrT with conventional therapies or inactive controls in patients with neck- or low back pain were included. Two review authors independently screened articles and assessed risk of bias (RoB). Data extraction was performed by the first author and crosschecked by a second author. Quality of findings was assessed and rated according to GRADE guidelines. Pain and functional status outcomes were extracted and synthesised qualitatively and quantitatively.
RESULTS: In total, 18 studies involving 1380 subjects described interventions related to PrT (years 1994-2013). 6 studies focussed on neck-, 12 on low back pain. Three main directions of PrT were identified: Discriminatory perceptive exercises with somatosensory stimuli to the back (pPrT, n=2), multimodal exercises on labile surfaces (mPrT, n=13), or joint repositioning exercise with head-eye coordination (rPrT, n=3). Comparators entailed usual care, home based training, educational therapy, strengthening, stretching and endurance training, or inactive controls. Quality of studies was low and RoB was deemed moderate to high with a high prevalence of unclear sequence generation and group allocation (>60%). Low quality evidence suggests PrT may be more effective than not intervening at all. Low quality evidence suggests that PrT is no more effective than conventional physiotherapy. Low quality evidence suggests PrT is inferior to educational and behavioural approaches.
CONCLUSIONS: There are few relevant good quality studies on proprioceptive exercises. A descriptive summary of the evidence suggests that there is no consistent benefit in adding PrT to neck- and low back pain rehabilitation and functional restoration.
Objectives: The purpose of this study was to systematically review trial-based economic evaluations of manual therapy relative to other alternative interventions used for the management of musculoskeletal conditions. Methods: A comprehensive literature search was undertaken in major medical, health-related, science and health economic electronic databases. Results: Twenty-five publications were included (11 trial-based economic evaluations). The studies compared cost-effectiveness and/or cost-utility of manual therapy interventions to other treatment alternatives in reducing pain (spinal, shoulder, ankle). Manual therapy techniques (eg, osteopathic spinal manipulation, physiotherapy manipulation and mobilization techniques, and chiropractic manipulation with or without other treatments) were more cost-effective than usual general practitioner (GP) care alone or with exercise, spinal stabilization, GP advice, advice to remain active, or brief pain management for improving low back and shoulder pain/disability. Chiropractic manipulation was found to be less costly and more effective than alternative treatment compared with either physiotherapy orGP care in improving neck pain. Conclusions: Preliminary evidence from this review shows some economic advantage of manual therapy relative to other interventions used for the management of musculoskeletal conditions, indicating that some manual therapy techniques may be more cost-effective than usual GP care, spinal stabilization, GP advice, advice to remain active, or brief pain management for improving low back and shoulder pain/disability. However, at present, there is a paucity of evidence on the cost-effectiveness and/or cost-utility evaluations for manual therapy interventions. Further improvements in the methodological conduct and reporting quality of economic evaluations of manual therapy are warranted in order to facilitate adequate evidence-based decisions among policy makers, health care practitioners, and patients.
BACKGROUND: Neck disorders are common, disabling, and costly. The effectiveness of patient education strategies is unclear.
OBJECTIVES: To assess the short- to long-term effects of therapeutic patient education (TPE) strategies on pain, function, disability, quality of life, global perceived effect, patient satisfaction, knowledge transfer, or behaviour change in adults with neck pain associated with whiplash or non-specific and specific mechanical neck pain with or without radiculopathy or cervicogenic headache.
SEARCH METHODS: We searched computerised bibliographic databases (inception to 11 July 2010).
SELECTION CRITERIA: Eligible studies were randomised controlled trials (RCT) investigating the effectiveness of TPE for acute to chronic neck pain.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Paired independent review authors conducted selection, data abstraction, and 'Risk of bias' assessment. We calculated risk ratio (RR) and standardised mean differences (SMD). Heterogeneity was assessed; no studies were pooled.
MAIN RESULTS: Of the 15 selected trials, three were rated low risk of bias. Three TPE themes emerged.
Advice focusing on activation: There is moderate quality evidence (one trial, 348 participants) that an educational video of advice focusing on activation was more beneficial for acute whiplash-related pain when compared with no treatment at intermediate-term [RR 0.79 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.59 to 1.06)] but not long-term follow-up [0.89 (95% CI, 0.65 to 1.21)]. There is low quality evidence (one trial, 102 participants) that a whiplash pamphlet on advice focusing on activation is less beneficial for pain reduction, or no different in improving function and global perceived improvement from generic information given out in emergency care (control) for acute whiplash at short- or intermediate-term follow-up. Low to very low quality evidence (nine trials using diverse educational approaches) showed either no evidence of benefit or difference for varied outcomes. 
Advice focusing on pain & stress coping skills and workplace ergonomics: Very low quality evidence (three trials, 243 participants) favoured other treatment or showed no difference spanning numerous follow-up periods and disorder subtypes.  Low quality evidence (one trial, 192 participants) favoured specific exercise training for chronic neck pain at short-term follow-up.
Self-care strategies: Very low quality evidence (one trial, 58 participants) indicated that self-care strategies did not relieve pain for acute to chronic neck pain at short-term follow-up.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: With the exception of one trial, this review has not shown effectiveness for educational interventions, including advice to activate, advice on stress-coping skills, workplace ergonomics and self-care strategies. Future research should be founded on sound adult learning theory and learning skill acquisition.
INTRODUCTION: Neck pain is one of the most common musculoskeletal disorders and it implicates several economical and social consequences. The efficacy of the education strategies of Cognitive Behavioural Therapy (CBT) has not been clearly determined yet. This systematic review aimed at finding the evidence of the efficacy of this therapeutic method in non-specific neck pain. METHODS: Bibliographic research was carried out from March 17th, 2008 to September 30th, 2009. The detected studies were examined and classified according to specific inclusion and exclusion criteria. Controlled trials concerning the effectiveness of CBT versus conventional trreatments were evaluated by means of JADAD Scale and PEDro Scale. RESULTS: Fifty-eight studies were found, eight of which (two reviews and six clinical trials) met the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Clinical trials quality was good in three studies, but scarce in the other three. The findings of included trials did not show significant differences between conventional and multidisciplinary therapy with respect to neck pain. The two evaluated systematic reviews confirmed this statement. CONCLUSION: This systematic review does not allow to assert that CBT leads to better results than conventional therapies. As reliable results lack, specific clinical trials are needed in order to study further CBT techniques specifically with regard to neck pain.
BACKGROUND: Chronic musculoskeletal pain (CMP) is a major health problem, accounting for approximately one-quarter of general practice (GP) consultations in the United Kingdom (UK). Exercise and physical activity is beneficial for the most common types of CMP, such as back and knee pain. However, poor adherence to exercise and physical activity may limit long-term effectiveness. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of interventions to improve adherence to exercise and physical activity for people with chronic musculoskeletal pain. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the trials registers of relevant Cochrane Review Groups. In addition, we searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, AMED, PsycINFO, Science Citation Index and Social Science Citation Index and reference lists of articles to October 2007. We consulted experts for unpublished trials. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised or quasi-randomised trials evaluating interventions that aimed to improve adherence to exercise and physical activity in adults with pain for three months and over in the axial skeleton or large peripheral joints. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two of the four authors independently assessed the quality of each included trial and extracted data. We contacted study authors for missing information. MAIN RESULTS: We included 42 trials with 8243 participants, mainly with osteoarthritis and spinal pain. Methods used for improving and measuring adherence in the included trials were inconsistent. Two of the 17 trials that compared different types of exercise showed positive effects, suggesting that the type of exercise is not an important factor in improving exercise adherence. Six trials studied different methods of delivering exercise, such as supervising exercise sessions, refresher sessions and audio or videotapes of the exercises to take home. Of these, five trials found interventions improved exercise adherence. Four trials evaluated specific interventions targeting exercise adherence; three of these showed a positive effect on exercise adherence. In eight trials studying self-management programmes, six improved adherence measures. One trial found graded activity was more effective than usual care for improving exercise adherence. Cognitive behavioural therapy was effective in a trial in people with whiplash-associated disorder, but not in trials of people with other CMP. In the trials that showed a positive effect on adherence, association between clinical outcomes and exercise adherence was conflicting. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Interventions such as supervised or individualised exercise therapy and self-management techniques may enhance exercise adherence. However, high-quality, randomised trials with long-term follow up that explicitly address adherence to exercises and physical activity are needed. A standard validated measure of exercise adherence should be used consistently in future studies.
BACKGROUND: Many treatments are available for whiplash patients but there is little scientific evidence for their accepted use. Patients with whiplash-associated disorders (WAD) can be classified by the severity of signs and symptoms from Grade 0 (no complaints or physical signs) to Grade 4 (fracture or dislocation).
OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness of conservative treatment for patients with whiplash injuries rated as Grades 1 or 2 (neck and musculoskeletal complaints).
SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (The Cochrane Library, 2006, Issue 3), MEDLINE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, and PEDro to November 2006 and screened references of identified randomised trials and relevant systematic reviews.
SELECTION CRITERIA: We selected randomised controlled trials published in English, French, German or Dutch, that included patients with a whiplash-injury, conservative interventions, outcomes of pain, global perceived effect or participation in daily activities.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently assessed the methodological quality using the Delphi criteria and extracted the data onto standardised data-extraction forms. We did not pool the results because of the heterogeneity of the population, intervention and outcomes and lack of data. A pre-planned stratified analysis was performed for three different comparisons.
MAIN RESULTS: Twenty-three studies (2344 participants) were included in this update, including nine new studies. A broad variety of conservative interventions were evaluated. Two studies included patients with chronic symptoms (longer than three months), two included subacute (four to six weeks) symptoms, two had undefined duration of symptoms, and 17 studied patients with acute (less than three weeks) symptoms. Only eight studies (33.3%) satisfied one of our criteria of high quality, indicating overall, a poor methodological quality. Interventions were divided into passive (such as rest, immobilisation, ultrasound, etc) and active interventions (such as exercises, act as usual approach, etc.) and were compared with no treatment, a placebo or each other.
Clinical and statistical heterogeneity and lack of data precluded pooling. Individual studies demonstrated effectiveness of one treatment over another, but the comparisons were varied and results inconsistent. Therefore, the evidence neither supports nor refutes the effectiveness of either passive or active treatments to relieve the symptoms of WAD, Grades 1 or 2.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The current literature is of poor methodological quality and is insufficiently homogeneous to allow the pooling of results. Therefore, clearly effective treatments are not supported at this time for the treatment of acute, subacute or chronic symptoms of whiplash-associated disorders.
BACKGROUND: Multidisciplinary biopsychosocial rehabilitation programs for neck and shoulder pain require substantial staff and financial resources. Despite questionable scientific evidence of their effectiveness, they are widely used.
Neck and shoulder complaints are common among working age adults and they are often associated with physical work load and stress. Pain in the neck and shoulder area cause biopsychosocial difficulties for the patient, especially if disability due to pain is prolonged. To help patients with biopsychosocial problems, or to prevent their development, multidisciplinary biopsychosocial programs are used for rehabilitation for patients with neck and shoulder pain. Nevertheless, multidisciplinary treatment programmes are often laborious and rather long processes and require good collaboration between the patient, the rehabilitation team and the work place.
OBJECTIVES: The objective of this systematic review was to determine the effectiveness of multidisciplinary biopsychosocial rehabilitation for neck and shoulder pain among working age adults.
SEARCH STRATEGY: The reviewed studies for this review were electronically identified from MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycLIT, CENTRAL, Medic, the Science Citation Index, reference checking and consulting experts in the rehabilitation field. The original search was planned and performed for more broad area of musculoskeletal disorders. Trials on neck and shoulder pain were separated afterwards. The literature search was updated in November 2002 by electronically searching MEDLINE and EMBASE.
SELECTION CRITERIA: From all references identified in our original search, we selected randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and non-randomized controlled clinical trials (CCTs). Trials had to assess the effectiveness of biopsychosocial rehabilitation for working age adults suffering from neck and shoulder pain. The rehabilitation program was required to be multidisciplinary, i.e., it had to consist of a physician's consultation plus either a psychological, social or vocational intervention, or a combination of these.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Four authors blinded to journal and author selected the trials that met the specified inclusion criteria. Two experts in the field of rehabilitation evaluated the clinical relevance and applicability of the findings of the selected studies for actual clinical use. Two other authors blinded to journal and author extracted the data and assessed the main results and the methodological quality of the studies, using standardized forms. Finally, a qualitative analysis was performed to evaluate the level of scientific evidence for the effectiveness of multidisciplinary biopsychosocial rehabilitation.
MAIN RESULTS: After screening 1808 abstracts, and the references of 65 reviews, we found only two relevant studies that satisfied our criteria. No more studies were found for this update. One of the studies was considered to be a methodologically low quality RCT and the other one was a methodologically low quality CCT. The clinical relevance of included studies was satisfactory. There was limited scientific evidence for the effectiveness of multidisciplinary biopsychosocial rehabilitation for neck and shoulder pain.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that there appears to be little scientific evidence for the effectiveness of multidisciplinary biopsychosocial rehabilitation compared with other rehabilitation facilities for neck and shoulder pain. Multidisciplinary rehabilitation is a commonly used intervention for chronic neck and shoulder complaints, therefore we see an urgent need for high quality trials in this field.
In spite of neck disorders being so common in the population, little evidence supporting effective interventions has been identified. The objective of this systematic review was to determine if various exercise methods are effective in treating the different mechanical neck disorders occurring in adults. Sixteen trials were included: nine randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and seven randomized comparative trials (CTs). The average PEDro score indicated moderate methodological quality. PEDro results showed the subject- and therapist-blinding criteria to be inappropriate. Findings revealed relatively strong evidence supporting the effectiveness of proprioceptive exercises and dynamic resisted strengthening exercises of the neck-shoulder musculature for chronic or frequent neck disorders. Moderate evidence was found to support early mobilizing exercises in acute whiplash patients. The evidence identified could not support the effectiveness of group exercise, neck schools or single sessions of extension-retraction exercises. Clinicians are encouraged to incorporate these findings into their practice when planning the management of mechanical neck disorders. There is great need for well-designed RCTs to further investigate the topic and perhaps evaluate exercise effectiveness in relation to more specific disorders, e.g., discogenic vs facet joint originated disorder.
In 2008, the lack of published evidence prevented the Bone and Joint Decade 2000-2010 Task Force on Neck Pain and Its Associated Disorders (Neck Pain Task Force [NPTF]) from commenting on the effectiveness of psychological interventions for the management of neck pain.
PURPOSE:
This study aimed to update findings of the NPTF and evaluate the effectiveness of psychological interventions for the management of neck pain and associated disorders (NAD) or whiplash-associated disorders (WAD).
STUDY DESIGN/SETTING:
This study used systematic review and best-evidence synthesis.
SAMPLE:
Randomized controlled trials, cohort studies, and case-control studies comparing psychological interventions to other non-invasive interventions or no intervention were the samples used in this study.
OUTCOME MEASURES:
The outcome measures are (1) self-rated recovery; (2) functional recovery; (3) clinical outcomes; (4) administrative outcomes; and (5) adverse effects.
METHODS:
We searched six databases from 1990 to 2015. Randomized controlled trials, cohort studies, and case-control studies meeting our selection criteria were eligible for critical appraisal. Random pairs of independent reviewers used the Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network criteria to critically appraise eligible studies. Studies with a low risk of bias were synthesized following best evidence synthesis principles. This study was funded by the Ontario Ministry of Finance.
RESULTS:
We screened 1,919 articles, 19 were eligible for critical appraisal and 10 were judged to have low risk of bias. We found no clear evidence supporting relaxation training or cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) for persistent grades I-III NAD for reducing pain intensity or disability. Similarly, we did not find evidence to support the effectiveness of biofeedback or relaxation training for persistent grade II WAD, and there is conflicting evidence for the use of CBT in this population. However, adding a progressive goal attainment program to functional restoration physiotherapy may benefit patients with persistent grades I-III WAD. Furthermore, Jyoti meditation may help reduce neck pain intensity and bothersomeness in patients with persistent NAD.
CONCLUSIONS:
We did not find evidence for or against the use of psychological interventions in patients with recent onset NAD or WAD. We found evidence that a progressive goal attainment program may be helpful for the management of persistent WAD and that Jyoti meditation may benefit patients with persistent NAD. The limited evidence of effectiveness for psychological interventions may be due to several factors, such as interventions that are ineffective, poorly conceptualized, or poorly implemented. Further methodologically rigorous research is needed.
