You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output.
Click here to find out more.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
| Title |
Manual therapy compared with physical therapy in patients with non-specific neck pain: a randomized controlled trial
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Chiropractic & Manual Therapies, April 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12998-017-0141-3 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Ruud Groeneweg, Luite van Assen, Hans Kropman, Huco Leopold, Jan Mulder, Bouwien C. M. Smits-Engelsman, Raymond W J. G. Ostelo, Rob A. B. Oostendorp, Maurits W. van Tulder |
| Abstract |
Manual therapy according to the School of Manual Therapy Utrecht (MTU) is a specific type of passive manual joint mobilization. MTU has not yet been systematically compared to other manual therapies and physical therapy. In this study the effectiveness of MTU is compared to physical therapy, particularly active exercise therapy (PT) in patients with non-specific neck pain. Patients neck pain, aged between 18-70 years, were included in a pragmatic randomized controlled trial with a one-year follow-up. Primary outcome measures were global perceived effect and functioning (Neck Disability Index), the secondary outcome was pain intensity (Numeric Rating Scale for Pain). Outcomes were measured at 3, 7, 13, 26 and 52 weeks. Multilevel analyses (intention-to-treat) were the primary analyses for overall between-group differences. Additional to the primary and secondary outcomes the number of treatment sessions of the MTU group and PT group was analyzed. Data were collected from September 2008 to February 2011. A total of 181 patients were included. Multilevel analyses showed no statistically significant overall differences at one year between the MTU and PT groups on any of the primary and secondary outcomes. The MTU group showed significantly lower treatment sessions compared to the PT group (respectively 3.1 vs. 5.9 after 7 weeks; 6.1 vs. 10.0 after 52 weeks). Patients with neck pain improved in both groups without statistical significantly or clinically relevant differences between the MTU and PT groups during one-year follow-up. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00713843. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 100 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 19 | 19% |
| United States | 9 | 9% |
| Canada | 7 | 7% |
| Australia | 6 | 6% |
| Netherlands | 4 | 4% |
| France | 2 | 2% |
| Brazil | 2 | 2% |
| Ireland | 2 | 2% |
| Switzerland | 2 | 2% |
| Other | 17 | 17% |
| Unknown | 30 | 30% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 75 | 75% |
| Scientists | 15 | 15% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 9 | 9% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 1% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 220 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Netherlands | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 219 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 35 | 16% |
| Student > Master | 33 | 15% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 19 | 9% |
| Researcher | 12 | 5% |
| Lecturer | 11 | 5% |
| Other | 43 | 20% |
| Unknown | 67 | 30% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Nursing and Health Professions | 68 | 31% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 43 | 20% |
| Sports and Recreations | 14 | 6% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 5 | 2% |
| Social Sciences | 3 | 1% |
| Other | 10 | 5% |
| Unknown | 77 | 35% |