Manual Cervical Distraction: Measuring Chiropractic Delivery for Neck Pain Clinical Trial

Neck Pain Clinical Trial

— MCD  

Official title:

Cervical Distraction Minimal Intervention Development: Translating From Basic to Clinical Studies

Clinical Trial Details — Status: Completed

Administrative data

• NCT number: NCT01765751
• Other study ID #: U19AT004663
• Status: Completed
• Phase: N/A
• First received: May 30, 2012
• Last updated: January 3, 2018
• Start date: January 2013
• Est. completion date: October 2013

Study information

• Verified date: January 2018
• Source: Palmer College of Chiropractic
• Contact: n/a
• Is FDA regulated: No
• Study type: Interventional

Clinical Trial Summary

The purpose of the Manual Cervical Distraction: Measuring Chiropractic Delivery for Neck Pain Clinical Trial is to examine the patient‐centered clinical and biomechanical outcomes, doctor treatment delivery, and believability characteristics of a commonly used chiropractic procedure for the treatment of neck- or neck-related arm pain or disability.

Description:

The purpose of the Manual Cervical Distraction (MCD): Measuring Chiropractic Delivery for Neck Pain Clinical Trial is to examine the patient‐centered clinical and biomechanical outcomes, and believability characteristics of a manually‐localized cervical distraction procedure for the treatment of neck- or neck-related arm pain or disability. One challenging issue in the study of manual therapies, including spinal manipulation (SM), is the development of sham and/or minimal intervention procedures suitable for use with control groups in clinical trials. With SM, active treatment requires substantial physical contact between a study clinician and the study participant, either directly or through a mechanical intermediary. Consequently, it is difficult to introduce differences in manual therapy procedures that distinguish sham and/or minimal interventions from the active treatment, but are not immediately obvious to the study participant. Another challenging issue is training clinicians to deliver a standardized SM treatment within specified force ranges. The muscles surrounding the neck could alter the forces transmitted to the cervical spine, and could alter the treatment effectiveness. The purpose of this pilot randomized controlled trial is to examine the patient‐centered clinical, biomechanical, and believability outcome characteristics of a manually‐localized cervical distraction procedure for the treatment of neck or neck-related arm pain or disability. We also will evaluate the ability of the doctor of chiropractic to deliver the MCD treatment within specified force ranges. An exploratory aim of this study is to evaluate EMG measurement during MCD delivery.

Recruitment information / eligibility

• Status: Completed
• Enrollment: 48
• Est. completion date: October 2013
• Est. primary completion date: October 2013
• Accepts healthy volunteers: No
• Gender: All
• Age group: 18 Years to 70 Years

Eligibility

Inclusion Criteria

• Age 18 to 70 years (inclusive).

• Mechanical neck pain or neck-related upper extremity pain lasting at least 4 weeks duration.

• Mechanical neck pain or neck-related upper extremity pain classified as Quebec Task Force (QTF) 2-4.

• Naïve to flexion-distraction manual therapy procedures to cervical area.

• Average neck pain in the past 24 hours rated between 3 and 7 on a 0-10 Pain Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) at Phone Screen and Baseline 1 Interview.

• Signed Informed Consent Document.

Exclusion Criteria

• Doctor of chiropractic or current or former chiropractic student.

• Average neck pain in past 24 hours rated 0-2 or 8-10 on a 0-10 Pain NRS at Phone Screen and Baseline 1 Interview.

• Neck pain from other than somatic tissues as determined by history and clinical examination.

• Surgery to cervical-thoracic area within the past 6 months.

• Recent fracture in the cervico-thoracic spine or ribs within the past 8 weeks.

• Injections for pain in neck, shoulders, arms or hands in the past 4 weeks.

• Neck pain classified as QTF 1, 5-11.

• Unwillingness to postpone use of all types of manual treatment for neck pain, except those provided in the study for the duration of the study.

• Inability or unwillingness to comply with study protocols.

• Bone or joint pathologies representing a contraindication to study procedures.

• Any single or multisegmental fusion (surgical or congenital) of the 1st through the 7th cervical vertebrae.

• Other safety concerns as determined by the clinical evaluation/opinion at case review.

• Unable to tolerate study procedures.

• Uncontrolled hypertension: systolic blood pressure =160 mmHg or diastolic blood pressure =100 mmHg.

• Simultaneous clinical management for a health condition that compromises ability to deliver study treatment or assess health status.

• Inability to read or verbally comprehend English.

• Drug or alcohol abuse or dependence, suspected or confirmed through self-report questionnaires and clinical interview.

• Depression rated as = 29 on the Beck Depression Inventory.

• Cognitive or memory impairment identified during eligibility exam.

• Pregnancy, under either of the following 2 circumstances: 1) Participant safety, if participant is unable to tolerate or undergo study procedures; or 2) Fetus safety, if x-rays are required for diagnosis.

• Weight greater than 300 lbs (table weight limit).

• Referral for evaluation, diagnosis, or management of other health conditions, or additional diagnostics required for neck pain diagnosis.

• Retention of legal advice or seeking a health-related insurance claim.

• Household member previously enrolled in MCD Clinical Trial.

• Compliance concerns identified during baseline eligibility process.

Related Conditions & MeSH terms

• Neck Pain
• Pain in Arm, Unspecified

Intervention

Procedure:
• Manual Cervical Distraction
Manual Cervical Distraction (MCD) is a form of Low Velocity Variable Amplitude Spinal Manipulation (LVVA-SM). MCD procedure is performed with participant lying prone on a load instrumented table with moveable headpiece allowing guided head movement while recumbent. Clinician gently grasps posterior aspect of participant's neck with a broad contact (contact hand) between thumb and index finger at specific vertebral level. With opposite hand, clinician grasps control handle. Using contact hand, clinician exhibits superior traction to maintain a contact at a single vertebral level and ensuring a gentle movement via contact with control handle. Goal is to create a slow rhythmic (1-3 sec) localized distractive movement. In this trial, only axial distraction (Cox protocol 1) will be used.

Locations

Country	Name	City	State
United States	Palmer Center for Chiropractic Research	Davenport	Iowa

Sponsors (2)

Lead Sponsor	Collaborator
Palmer College of Chiropractic	Loyola University

Country where clinical trial is conducted

United States, 

References & Publications (6)

Gudavalli MR, Potluri T, Carandang G, Havey RM, Voronov LI, Cox JM, Rowell RM, Kruse RA, Joachim GC, Patwardhan AG, Henderson CN, Goertz C. Intradiscal Pressure Changes during Manual Cervical Distraction: A Cadaveric Study. Evid Based Complement Alternat Med. 2013;2013:954134. doi: 10.1155/2013/954134. Epub 2013 Aug 20. — View Citation

Gudavalli MR, Salsbury SA, Vining RD, Long CR, Corber L, Patwardhan AG, Goertz CM. Development of an attention-touch control for manual cervical distraction: a pilot randomized clinical trial for patients with neck pain. Trials. 2015 Jun 5;16:259. doi: 10 — View Citation

Gudavalli MR, Vining RD, Salsbury SA, Corber LG, Long CR, Patwardhan AG, Goertz CM. Clinician proficiency in delivering manual treatment for neck pain within specified force ranges. Spine J. 2015 Apr 1;15(4):570-6. doi: 10.1016/j.spinee.2014.10.016. Epub — View Citation

Gudavalli MR, Vining RD, Salsbury SA, Goertz CM. Training and certification of doctors of chiropractic in delivering manual cervical traction forces: Results of a longitudinal observational study. J Chiropr Educ. 2014 Oct;28(2):130-8. doi: 10.7899/JCE-14-18. Epub 2014 Sep 19. — View Citation

Gudavalli MR, Vining RD, Salsbury SA, Long CR, Patwardhan AG, and Goertz CM. Forces and durations measured during delivery of a manual cervical distraction procedure. Abstract presented at the World Federation of Chiropractic Conference, 2015.

Vining RD, Salsbury SA, Pohlman KA. Eligibility determination for clinical trials: development of a case review process at a chiropractic research center. Trials. 2014 Oct 24;15:406. doi: 10.1186/1745-6215-15-406. — View Citation

Outcome

Type	Measure	Description	Time frame	Safety issue
Other	Cervical Muscle Electromyographic (EMG) Activity	We will describe electromyographic (EMG) activity of superficial neck muscles during delivery of the three manual interventions during visits 3 and 4. EMG measurements are an exploratory outcome variable in this study.; RMS EMG TREATMENT DESCRIPTIONS: (A) Ratio of Root Mean square (RMS) EMG during Treatment at C5/RMS EMG during maximum voluntary contraction (MVC); (B) RMS EMG during Treatment at C5/RMS EMG during Prone Resting; (C) RMS EMG during Treatment at Occiput (OCC)/RMS EMG during MVC; (D) RMS EMG during Treatment at OCC/ RMS EMG during Prone Resting; MUSCLES: LES-Left erector Spinae Muscle; RES-Right Erector Spinae Muscle; LTRPS- Left Trapezius muscle; RTRPS- Right Trapezius Muscle; LSCM- Left Sternocleido Mastoid muscle; RSCM- Right Sternocleido Mastoid Muscle; ACRONYM KEY: RMS-Root Mean Square Value; MVC-Maximum Voluntary Contraction; C5-Cervical vertebrae contact; OCC-Occipital contact; EMG-Electromyographic activity	Day 8 (Study Visit 3), Day 11 (Study Visit 4)
Other	Patient Satisfaction Questionnaire	Participants' satisfaction with study procedures and staff were assessed at Study Visit 5 using standard questions. Participants rated their satisfaction with various elements of the study (e.g., treatments received, clinicians) using a 5 category response from 1 (strongly satisfied) to 5 (strongly dissatisfied) with categories collapsed into satisfied (categories 1 and 2) or not satisfied (categories 3, 4 or 5) for interpretation.	Day 14 (Study Visit 5)
Primary	Range of Traction Forces	We will evaluate the clinician's ability to deliver three randomly assigned manual interventions to the cervical spine within specified traction force ranges (<20 Newtons [N], 20-50N, >50N). The primary outcome of this study is to determine the accuracy and consistency of traction force delivery ranges both between clinicians and within individual clinicians. Traction force ranges (C5 contact level and Occiput contact level) will be measured at each study visit (visits 1, 2, 3, 4, 5) for 2 weeks and averaged to calculate final outcome.	Day 1, 4, 8, 11, 14 (Each Study Visit)
Secondary	Neck Disability Index (NDI)	The NDI is a 10-item questionnaire modified from the Oswestry Low Back Pain Disability Index. The NDI has been shown to be a reliable and valid measure of disability due to neck pain, and responsive for measuring change. Study Visit 1 and Study Visit 5 Measures occur 2 weeks apart. The NDI scale is measured on a scale of 0-50, with 0 indicating no disability and 50 indicating complete disability. This measure is an adjusted mean NDI change.	Change from Baseline to Day 1 (Study Visit 1) and Day 14 (Study Visit 5)
Secondary	Neck Pain Visual Analogue Scale (VAS)	The VAS has excellent metric properties, is easy to administer and score (0-100mm), and is commonly used in pain research. Our anchors will be no pain (score of 0) to worst pain imaginable (score of 100). We will ask participants to rate their current neck pain at baseline and pre-/post-treatment for all 5 study visits. This measure is adjusted mean neck pain VAS change. A single value was calculated by averaging.	Change from Baseline, Day 1, 4, 8, 11, 14 (Pre- and Post-Study Visits 1, 2, 3, 4, 5)
Secondary	Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS-43)	The PROMIS-43 questionnaire will be used to measure general functional health status. PROMIS-43 questions measure physical function, anxiety, depression, fatigue, sleep disturbance, social role satisfaction, and pain interference and intensity.; The table below displays the mean score at baseline. On the T-score metric & interpretation: A score of 40 is one SD lower than the mean of the reference population (REF POP).; A score of 60 is one SD higher than the mean of the REF POP.; For PROMIS measures, higher scores equals more of the concept being measured (e.g., more Fatigue, more Physical Function). Thus a score of 60 is one SD above the average REF POP. This could be a desirable or undesirable outcome, depending upon the concept being measured. For Physical Function and Satisfaction with Social Role, higher scores reflect a better outcome, while for the remaining concepts, higher scores reflect a worse outcome.; PROMIS - Pain Interference adjusted for baseline neck pain VAS.	Change from Baseline to Day 14 (Study Visit 5)
Secondary	Cervical Range of Motion (cROM).	Cervical ranges of motion are a measure of functional status and can be used to assess dysfunction in the cervical spine. Baseline/visit 1 ("BL") cROM is displayed for Flexion-Extension, Lateral Bending, and Rotation. The mean change in cROM from visit 1 to visit 5 ("V5 change") is also displayed.	Change from Day 1 (Study Visit 1) to Day 14 (Study Visit 5)
Secondary	Procedure Believability Questionnaire	We will ask all participants whether they feel the study procedure would relieve their neck pain using the Procedure Believability Questionnaire. The response choices will be: "Strongly believe the procedure will relieve my neck pain; Somewhat believe the procedure will relieve my neck pain; Somewhat believe the procedure will NOT relieve my neck pain; Strongly believe the procedure will NOT relieve my neck pain; and Don't know if the procedure will relieve my neck pain". A baseline (BL) evaluation will be completed based upon treatment description, and compared to assessments following study visit 1 (T1) and study visit 5 (T5) over a 2-week time period.	Baseline (BL), Day 1 (Study Visit 1/T1), Day 14 (Study Visit 5/T5)
Secondary	Credibility and Expectancy Questionnaire (CEQ)	The CEQ is a quick and easy-to-administer questionnaire for measuring treatment expectancy and rationale credibility of interventions for use in clinical outcome studies. Participants' perceptions of the study treatments were compared across groups using the CEQ. The CEQ credibility factor relates to how logical or believable a treatment is for the patient, whereas the expectancy factor refers to the patient's beliefs about improvements that might be achieved from the treatment [61]. CEQ scores for both the credibility and expectancy factors range from 3 to 27, with higher scores indicating greater belief in treatment credibility or expectancy for clinical improvement.	Baseline, Day 1 (Study Visit 1), Day 14 (Study Visit 5)

External Links

•   Clinician proficiency in delivering manual treatment for neck pain within specified force ranges.
•   Development of an attention-touch control for manual cervical distraction: a pilot randomized clinical trial for patients with neck pain.
•   Eligibility determination for clinical trials: development of a case review process at a chiropractic research center.
•   Intradiscal Pressure Changes during Manual Cervical Distraction: A Cadaveric Study.
•   Training and certification of doctors of chiropractic in delivering manual cervical traction forces: results of a longitudinal observational study.