hig.sePublications
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard-cite-them-right
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • sv-SE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • de-DE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Is tailored treatment superior to non-tailored treatment for pain and disability in women with non-specific neck pain?: a randomized controlled trial
Institutionen för samhällsmedicin och rehabilitering, enheten för fysioterapi, Umeå universitet, Umeå.ORCID iD: 0000-0003-4485-3868
University of Gävle, Faculty of Health and Occupational Studies, Department of Occupational and Public Health Sciences, Occupational health science. University of Gävle, Centre for Musculoskeletal Research.
Institutionen för samhällsmedicin och rehabilitering, enheten för fysioterapi, Umeå universitet.
Centre of Clinical Research Excellence in Spinal Pain, Injury and Health, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia.
Show others and affiliations
2016 (English)In: BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders, ISSN 1471-2474, E-ISSN 1471-2474, Vol. 17, no 1, 408Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

BACKGROUND:

The evidence for the effect of treatments of neck pain is modest. In the absence of causal treatments, a possibility is to tailor the treatment to the individuals' functional limitations and symptoms. The aim was to evaluate treatment effects of a tailored treatment versus a non-tailored treatment. Our hypothesis was that tailored treatment (TT) would have better effect on pain intensity and disability than either non-tailored treatment (NTT) (same treatment components but applied quasi-randomly) or treatment-as-usual (TAU) (no treatment from the study, no restrictions). We further hypothesized that TT and NTT would both have better effect than TAU.

METHOD:

One hundred twenty working women with subacute and chronic non-specific neck pain were allocated to 11 weeks of either TT, NTT or TAU in a randomized controlled trial with follow-ups at 3, 9 and 15 months. The TT was designed from a decision model based on assessment of function and symptoms with defined cut-off levels for the following categories: reduced cervical mobility, impaired neck-shoulder strength and motor control, impaired eye-head-neck control, trapezius myalgia and cervicogenic headache. Primary outcomes were pain and disability. Secondary outcomes were symptoms, general improvement, work productivity, and pressure pain threshold of m. trapezius.

RESULTS:

Linear mixed models analysis showed no differences between TT and NTT besides work productivity favoring TT at 9- and 15-months follow-ups. TT and NTT improved significantly more than TAU on pain, disability and symptoms at 3-month follow-up. General improvement also favored TT and NTT over TAU at all follow-ups.

CONCLUSION:

Tailored treatment according to our proposed decision model was not more effective than non-tailored treatment in women with subacute and chronic neck pain. Both tailored and non-tailored treatments had better short-term effects than treatment-as-usual, supporting active and specific exercise therapy, although therapist-patient interaction was not controlled for. Better understanding of the importance of functional impairments for pain and disability, in combination with a more precise tailoring of specific treatment components, is needed to progress.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2016. Vol. 17, no 1, 408
Keyword [en]
Cut-off; Individualized treatment; Neck-shoulder pain; Physiotherapy; Rehabilitation; Trapezius
National Category
Physiotherapy
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:hig:diva-21406DOI: 10.1186/s12891-016-1263-9ISI: 000395028500001PubMedID: 27716128Scopus ID: 2-s2.0-84995489854OAI: oai:DiVA.org:hig-21406DiVA: diva2:920234
Funder
Forte, Swedish Research Council for Health, Working Life and Welfare, 2009-1403AFA Insurance, 090288
Note

Funding text: The project was funded by the Swedish Council for Working Life and Social Research (registration number 2009-1403), AFA Insurance (registration number 090288) and The Centre for Environmental Research (project number 1152383). 

Available from: 2016-04-18 Created: 2016-04-18 Last updated: 2017-03-27Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text

Other links

Publisher's full textPubMedScopus

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Svedmark, ÅsaDjupsjöbacka, MatsBjörklund, Martin
By organisation
Occupational health scienceCentre for Musculoskeletal Research
In the same journal
BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders
Physiotherapy

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

Altmetric score

Total: 318 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard-cite-them-right
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • sv-SE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • de-DE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf