Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

16 questions · 20 findings · 3 reviews · Back and Neck

Sort:Best matchNewest Highest certainty Download CSV

No studies found 0 · 0%GRADE not reported 2 · 10%Very low 3 · 15%Low 7 · 35%Moderate 4 · 20%High 4 · 20%

Spinal manipulative therapy plus another intervention vs the intervention alone

Patient‐reported pain intensity or pain relief (VAS, NRS or categorical scale) · patients with chronic LBP

3 findings from 1 review

Spinal manipulative therapy for chronic low‐back pain 2011 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
3 studies · 228 participants
Low
Spinal manipulative therapy for chronic low‐back pain 2011 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
2 studies · 1016 participants
High
Spinal manipulative therapy for chronic low‐back pain 2011 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
2 studies · 1000 participants
High

Spinal manipulative therapy plus another intervention vs the intervention alone

Functional ability · patients with chronic LBP

2 findings from 1 review

Spinal manipulative therapy for chronic low‐back pain 2011 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
2 studies · 156 participants
Low
Spinal manipulative therapy for chronic low‐back pain 2011 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
1 study · 994 participants
High

Spinal manipulative therapy plus another intervention vs the intervention alone

Disability (Roland‐Morris Disability Questionnaire) Scale from: 0 to 23; 0 is no disability. · patients with chronic LBP

1 finding from 1 review

Spinal manipulative therapy for chronic low‐back pain 2011 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
2 studies · 1078 participants
High

Spinal manipulative therapy plus another intervention vs the intervention alone

Recovery at one month · patients with chronic LBP

It is very uncertain whether spinal manipulative therapy plus any intervention changes recovery at one month compared with the intervention alone (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Spinal manipulative therapy for chronic low‐back pain 2011 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
RR 3.4 [1.12, 10.28]
1 study · 32 participants
Very low

Spinal manipulative therapy plus another intervention vs the intervention alone

Functional status at 3 to 6 months Oswestry Disability Index. Scale from: 0 (no dysfunction) to 100 (worse function) · Patients with acute low‐back pain

1 finding from 1 review

Spinal manipulative therapy for acute low‐back pain 2012 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
2 studies · 225 participants
Low

Spinal manipulative therapy plus another intervention vs the intervention alone

Recovery at one week · Patients with acute low‐back pain

It is very uncertain whether spinal manipulative therapy plus another intervention changes recovery at one week compared with the intervention alone (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Spinal manipulative therapy for acute low‐back pain 2012 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
RR 0.89 [0.32, 2.47]
2 studies · 196 participants
Very low

Spinal manipulative therapy plus another intervention vs the intervention alone

Recovery at 3 to 6 months · Patients with acute low‐back pain

It is very uncertain whether spinal manipulative therapy plus another intervention changes recovery at 3 to 6 months compared with the intervention alone (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Spinal manipulative therapy for acute low‐back pain 2012 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
RR 0.75 [0.51, 1.1]
2 studies · 195 participants
Very low

Spinal manipulative therapy plus another intervention vs the intervention alone

Serious adverse events · Patients with acute low‐back pain

1 finding from 1 review

Spinal manipulative therapy for acute low‐back pain 2012 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
2 studies · 2 participants
GRADE not reported

Spinal manipulative therapy plus another intervention vs the intervention alone

Pain at 3 to 6 months Scale from: 0 (no pain) to 10 (worse pain) · Patients with acute low‐back pain

2 findings from 1 review

Spinal manipulative therapy for acute low‐back pain 2012 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
1 study · 102 participants
Low
Spinal manipulative therapy for acute low‐back pain 2012 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
1 study · 104 participants
Low

Spinal manipulative therapy plus another intervention vs the intervention alone

Functional status at one week Oswestry Disability Index. Scale from: 0 (no dysfunction) to 100 (worse function). · Patients with acute low‐back pain

1 finding from 1 review

Spinal manipulative therapy for acute low‐back pain 2012 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
2 studies · 225 participants
Low

Chronic MND: Cervical/UE Stretch/ROM Exercises + Cervical/Scapulothoracic+/‐UE Strengthening + Dynamic/Static Cervical Stabilization + ANOTHER INTERVENTION vs THAT SAME INTERVENTION

Patient‐reported pain intensity or pain relief (VAS, NRS or categorical scale) · patients with mechanical neck disorders

1 finding from 1 review

Exercises for mechanical neck disorders 2015 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
3 studies · 241 participants
Moderate

Chronic MND: Cervical/UE Stretch/ROM Exercises + Cervical/Scapulothoracic+/‐UE Strengthening + Dynamic/Static Cervical Stabilization + ANOTHER INTERVENTION vs THAT SAME INTERVENTION

Function: NDI 0 no disability to 50 maximum disability ( · patients with mechanical neck disorders

1 finding from 1 review

Exercises for mechanical neck disorders 2015 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
3 studies · 241 participants
Moderate

Chronic MND: Cervical/UE Stretch/ROM Exercises + Cervical/Scapulothoracic+/‐UE Strengthening + Dynamic/Static Cervical Stabilization + ANOTHER INTERVENTION vs THAT SAME INTERVENTION

Quality of Life: SF‐36 (physical component) · patients with mechanical neck disorders

1 finding from 1 review

Exercises for mechanical neck disorders 2015 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
2 studies · 165 participants
Low

Chronic MND: Cervical/UE Stretch/ROM Exercises + Cervical/Scapulothoracic+/‐UE Strengthening + Dynamic/Static Cervical Stabilization + ANOTHER INTERVENTION vs THAT SAME INTERVENTION

Patient satisfaction Number of satisfied patients · patients with mechanical neck disorders

1 finding from 1 review

Exercises for mechanical neck disorders 2015 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
1 study · 101 participants
Moderate

Chronic MND: Cervical/UE Stretch/ROM Exercises + Cervical/Scapulothoracic+/‐UE Strengthening + Dynamic/Static Cervical Stabilization + ANOTHER INTERVENTION vs THAT SAME INTERVENTION

Global Perceived Effect · patients with mechanical neck disorders

1 finding from 1 review

Exercises for mechanical neck disorders 2015 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
1 study · 101 participants
Moderate

Chronic MND: Cervical/UE Stretch/ROM Exercises + Cervical/Scapulothoracic+/‐UE Strengthening + Dynamic/Static Cervical Stabilization + ANOTHER INTERVENTION vs THAT SAME INTERVENTION

Adverse effects · patients with mechanical neck disorders

1 finding from 1 review

Exercises for mechanical neck disorders 2015 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
3 studies · 8 participants
GRADE not reported