Manipulation (cervical) showed no clear difference in acute and subacute neck pain Intermediate‐term compared with oral medicine (moderate certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Manipulation and mobilisation for neck pain contrasted against an inactive control or another active treatment 2015 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
1 study · 182 participants
Moderate

Manipulation (cervical) vs oral medicine

Acute and subacute neck pain Long‐term · patients with acute and subacute neck pain

Manipulation (cervical) showed no clear difference in acute and subacute neck pain Long‐term compared with oral medicine (moderate certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Manipulation and mobilisation for neck pain contrasted against an inactive control or another active treatment 2015 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
1 study · 181 participants
Moderate

Manipulation (cervical) vs oral medicine

Function · patients with acute and subacute neck pain

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Manipulation and mobilisation for neck pain contrasted against an inactive control or another active treatment 2015 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
Studies not reported
No studies found

Manipulation (cervical) vs oral medicine

Participant satisfaction · patients with acute and subacute neck pain

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Manipulation and mobilisation for neck pain contrasted against an inactive control or another active treatment 2015 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
Studies not reported
No studies found

Manipulation (cervical) vs oral medicine

Quality of life · patients with acute and subacute neck pain

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Manipulation and mobilisation for neck pain contrasted against an inactive control or another active treatment 2015 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
Studies not reported
No studies found

Manipulation (thoracic) vs inactive control

Pain · patients with acute, subacute and chronic neck pain

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Manipulation and mobilisation for neck pain contrasted against an inactive control or another active treatment 2015 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
Studies not reported
No studies found

Manipulation (thoracic) vs inactive control

Acute and subacute neck pain Short‐term · patients with acute, subacute and chronic neck pain

Manipulation (thoracic) showed no clear difference in acute and subacute neck pain Short‐term compared with inactive control (moderate certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Manipulation and mobilisation for neck pain contrasted against an inactive control or another active treatment 2015 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
4 studies · 242 participants
Moderate

Manipulation (thoracic) vs inactive control

Chronic neck pain Intermediate‐term · patients with acute, subacute and chronic neck pain

Manipulation (thoracic) showed no clear difference in chronic neck pain Intermediate‐term compared with inactive control (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Manipulation and mobilisation for neck pain contrasted against an inactive control or another active treatment 2015 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
1 study · 111 participants
Low

Spinal manipulative therapy vs other interventions

Overall Pain ‐ 1 to 2 weeks (adequate allocation concealment, and blinding) visual analogue scale; 1 to 9 points (higher indicates worse pain) · 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
3 studies · 383 participants
Low

Spinal manipulative therapy vs inert interventions

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
3 studies · 311 participants
Low
Spinal manipulative therapy for acute low‐back pain 2012 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
1 study · 178 participants
Low

Spinal manipulative therapy vs inert interventions

Disability (Roland‐Morris Disability Questionnaire) Scale from: 0 to 23; 0 is no disability. · 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
2 studies · 205 participants
Moderate
Spinal manipulative therapy for acute low‐back pain 2012 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
1 study · 178 participants
Low

Spinal manipulative therapy vs inert interventions

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

Spinal manipulative therapy showed no clear difference in recovery at one week compared with inert interventions (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Spinal manipulative therapy for acute low‐back pain 2012 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
RR 0.96 [0.5, 1.85]
2 studies · 263 participants
Low

Spinal manipulative therapy vs inert interventions

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 vs other interventions

Reduction in pain intensity · 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
3 studies · 606 participants
Moderate