Effectiveness of Global Postural Re-education in Patients With Chronic Nonspecific Neck Pain: Randomized Controlled Trial

Author:

Pillastrini Paolo1,de Lima e Sá Resende Fernanda2,Banchelli Federico3,Burioli Anna4,Di Ciaccio Emanuele5,Guccione Andrew A.6,Villafañe Jorge Hugo7,Vanti Carla8

Affiliation:

1. P. Pillastrini, PT, MSc, Occupational Medicine Unit, Department of Biomedical and Neurological Sciences, University of Bologna, via P. Palagi 9-40138 Bologna, Italy.

2. F. de Lima e Sá Resende, PT, PhD, Occupational Medicine Unit, Department of Biomedical and Neurological Sciences, University of Bologna.

3. F. Banchelli, PhD, Department of Statistical Sciences Paolo Fortunati, University of Bologna.

4. A. Burioli, PT, Occupational Medicine Unit, Department of Biomedical and Neurological Sciences, University of Bologna.

5. E. Di Ciaccio, PT, Occupational Medicine Unit, Department of Biomedical and Neurological Sciences, University of Bologna.

6. A.A. Guccione, PT, DPT, PhD, FAPTA, Department of Rehabilitation Science, College of Health and Human Services, George Mason University, Fairfax, Virginia.

7. J.H. Villafañe, PT, PhD, IRCCS Don Gnocchi Foundation, Milan, Italy.

8. C. Vanti, PT, MSc, Occupational Medicine Unit, Department of Biomedical and Neurological Sciences, University of Bologna.

Abstract

Abstract Background Global postural re-education (GPR) has shown positive results for patients with musculoskeletal disorders, but no previous randomized controlled trial (RCT) has investigated its effectiveness as the sole procedure for adult patients with chronic nonspecific neck pain (NP). Objective The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of applying GPR compared with a manual therapy (MT) intervention to patients with chronic nonspecific NP. Design An RCT was conducted. Patients Ninety-four patients with chronic nonspecific NP (72 women and 22 men; average age=47.5 years, SD=11.3) were randomly assigned to receive either a GPR intervention or an MT intervention. Outcome Measures Pain intensity (visual analog scale), disability (Neck Disability Index), cervical range of motion, and kinesiophobia (Tampa Scale of Kinesiophobia) were assessed. Methods The experimental group received GPR, and the reference group received MT. Both groups received nine 60-minute-long sessions with one-to-one supervision from physical therapists as the care providers. All participants were asked to follow ergonomic advice and to perform home exercises. Measures were assessed before treatment, following treatment, and at a 6-month follow-up. Results No important baseline differences were found between groups. The experimental group exhibited a statistically significant reduction in pain following treatment and in disability 6 months after the intervention compared with the reference group. Limitations Randomization did not lead to completely homogeneous groups. It also was noted that the time spent integrating the movements practiced during the session into daily routines at the end of each session was requested only of participants in the GPR group and may have had an impact on patient adherence that contributed to a better outcome. Conclusions The results suggest that GPR was more effective than MT for reducing pain after treatment and for reducing disability at 6-month follow-up in patients with chronic nonspecific NP.

Publisher

Oxford University Press (OUP)

Subject

Physical Therapy, Sports Therapy and Rehabilitation

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3