Headaches have been listed as 1 of the 10 most disabling conditions worldwide. (Stovner et al., 2007) and cervicogenic headaches (CeHs) comprise 15% of the individuals with these complaints. (Nillsson, 1995); (Fernandez de-las-penas et al., 2005) The current best approach to the conservative care of this condition has yet to be determined. The primary aim of this study is to determine whether individuals with CeHs will respond to a program of thoracic spine thrust manipulation in isolation. This may further the current body of evidence by offering an alternative, potentially safer approach to the conservative care of individuals with this condition. Additionally, results of this study may serve to drive a larger scale Randomized Clinical Trial (RCT) by offering information regarding feasibility of recruitment of individuals with chronic CeHs as well as timing and dosing of the intervention.
Headaches have been listed as 1 of the 10 most disabling conditions worldwide. (Stovner et al., 2007) and cervicogenic headaches (CeHs) comprise 15% of the individuals with these complaints. (Nillsson, 1995); (Fernandez de-las-penas et al., 2005) The current best approach to the conservative care of this condition has yet to be determined. Evidence suggests that manipulative therapy aimed at the cervical spine in combination with exercise is helpful in alleviating these symptoms. (Jull et al., 2002) The risk of injury from cervical spine manipulative techniques has been documented to be remote (Haldeman et al., 2002; DiFabio 1999), however the potential consequences can be severe. Therefore with inherently lower risks, thoracic spine manipulations may be a suitable alternative as the evidence is accumulating for its influence on the cervical spine. (Mintken et al., 2010; Boyles et al., 2009; Cleland et al., 2005 \& 2007 A \& B, 2010; Flynn et al., 2001; Fernandez-de-las-penas et al., 2004; Piva et al., 2000; Browder et al., 2004) The primary aim of this study is to determine whether individuals with CeHs will respond to a program of thoracic spine thrust manipulation in isolation. This may further the current body of evidence by offering an alternative, potentially safer approach to the conservative care of individuals with this condition. Additionally, results of this study may serve to drive a larger scale RCT by offering information regarding feasibility of recruitment of individuals with chronic CeHs as well as timing and dosing of the intervention.
Study Type
INTERVENTIONAL
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
NONE
Enrollment
48
Manipulation techniques will include: CT junction manipulation seated and supine, upper thoracic manipulation, middle thoracic spine manipulation in seated and supine, middle thoracic spine manipulation in prone, thoracic active range of motion exercise and instruction to maintain usual activity level within the limits of pain.
Manipulation techniques will include: CT junction manipulation seated and supine, upper thoracic manipulation, middle thoracic spine manipulation in seated and supine, middle thoracic spine manipulation in prone, thoracic active range of motion exercise and instruction to maintain usual activity level within the limits of pain.
University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus
Aurora, Colorado, United States
Headache Disability Index
Headache Disability Index (HDI): The HDI is a 25-item questionnaire used to assess the patient's perceived impact of the headaches on their daily life.
Time frame: Baseline
Headache Disability Index
Headache Disability Index (HDI): The HDI is a 25-item questionnaire used to assess the patient's perceived impact of the headaches on their daily life.
Time frame: 4 weeks
Headache Disability Index
Headache Disability Index (HDI): The HDI is a 25-item questionnaire used to assess the patient's perceived impact of the headaches on their daily life.
Time frame: 8 weeks
Headache Disability Index
Headache Disability Index (HDI): The HDI is a 25-item questionnaire used to assess the patient's perceived impact of the headaches on their daily life.
Time frame: 3 months
Numeric Pain Rating Scale
An 11-point NPRS will be used to measure pain intensity. Patients rate their current level of pain and their worse and least amount of pain in the last 24 hours.
Time frame: Baseline
Numeric Pain Rating Scale
An 11-point NPRS will be used to measure pain intensity. Patients rate their current level of pain and their worse and least amount of pain in the last 24 hours.
Time frame: 4 weeks
Numeric Pain Rating Scale
An 11-point NPRS will be used to measure pain intensity. Patients rate their current level of pain and their worse and least amount of pain in the last 24 hours.
Time frame: 8 weeks
Numeric Pain Rating Scale
An 11-point NPRS will be used to measure pain intensity. Patients rate their current level of pain and their worse and least amount of pain in the last 24 hours.
Time frame: 3 months
Pain Self Efficacy Questionnaire (PSEQ)
The 10 item questionnaire is used to assess the patient's confidence in performing specific activities despite pain. Items are listed on a 0 to 6 scale, with a maximum score of 60 points.
Time frame: Baseline
Pain Self Efficacy Questionnaire (PSEQ)
The 10 item questionnaire is used to assess the patient's confidence in performing specific activities despite pain. Items are listed on a 0 to 6 scale, with a maximum score of 60 points.
Time frame: 4 weeks
Pain Self Efficacy Questionnaire (PSEQ)
The 10 item questionnaire is used to assess the patient's confidence in performing specific activities despite pain. Items are listed on a 0 to 6 scale, with a maximum score of 60 points.
Time frame: 8 weeks
Pain Self Efficacy Questionnaire (PSEQ)
The 10 item questionnaire is used to assess the patient's confidence in performing specific activities despite pain. Items are listed on a 0 to 6 scale, with a maximum score of 60 points.
Time frame: 3 months
This platform is for informational purposes only and does not constitute medical advice. Always consult a qualified healthcare professional.