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 (P50.075) 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.

Comparison of 2 Manual Therapy and Exercise Protocols for Cervical Radiculopathy: A Randomized Clinical Trial Evaluating Short-Term Effects

“…Second, similar treatment effects have previously been shown to occur when a nonspecific level versus a specific level is treated with mobilizations in patients with mechanical neck pain. 1,39,40 However, this is the first study to investigate manual therapy mobilizations at a specific level and in a specific direction (direction targeting an increase of the IVF) in patients with CR. Third, the study was adequately powered for the primary outcome (NDI) but underpowered for several secondary outcomes.…”

The short and mid-term effects of Mulligan concept in patients with chronic mechanical neck pain

“…Our approach was symptomatic level treated and not randomly chosen. Speci ic techniques are more effective than general techniques in cervical spine [27].…”

Factors affecting confidence and knowledge in spinal palpation among International Manual Physical Therapists

“…12,13 While these techniques are commonly taught in manual therapy education, their lack of validity and reliability has not gone unnoticed. [14][15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22] Some journal commentaries and editorials have suggested MTs move away from segment specific motion palpation altogether, [23][24][25] and correspondingly, some studies have found positive results using techniques that were designed to treat a spinal region, not a specific motion segment. [26][27][28][29][30][31][32] However, research that supports the use of regional techniques also often encourages the use of segmental motion palpation as part of the clinical decision-making process.…”