search
Back to results

Specific and Shared Mechanisms Associated With Treatment for Chronic Neck Pain (SS-MECH)

Primary Purpose

Chronic Neck Pain

Status
Not yet recruiting
Phase
Not Applicable
Locations
Study Type
Interventional
Intervention
Manual Therapy
Sponsored by
Duke University
About
Eligibility
Locations
Arms
Outcomes
Full info

About this trial

This is an interventional treatment trial for Chronic Neck Pain

Eligibility Criteria

18 Years - undefined (Adult, Older Adult)All SexesDoes not accept healthy volunteers

Inclusion Criteria: Individuals with chronic neck pain (chronic pain is defined using the International Association of the Study of Pain (IASP) pragmatic criteria of pain lasting for 3 months or more that cannot be attributed to another diagnosis or condition.) 18 years of age and older experience ongoing neck pain of ≥3 on a 10-point scale for most days of the previous 3-months. Exclusion Criteria: Individuals with cervical pain and suspected radicular symptoms a history of neck surgery current or suspected red flags unable to speak or write in English.

Sites / Locations

    Arms of the Study

    Arm 1

    Arm 2

    Arm Type

    Experimental

    Active Comparator

    Arm Label

    Manual therapy treatment

    Resisted exercise treatment

    Arm Description

    Manual therapy treatments will consist of global soft tissue stretching of the upper trapezius, occipital muscles, levator scapula, and scalene muscles as the patient lies in supine. Non-thrust manipulation will consist of unilateral or central posterior-anterior accessory movements (PAIVMs) to the cervical and upper thoracic segments (in prone) at the most symptomatic levels. Passive physiological intervertebral movements of rotation will be performed in supine, as a mechanism to reduce pain and increase range of motion. Individuals with chronic neck pain randomized to the manual therapy arm, will be assigned a HEP twice daily that will consist of cervical rotations with belt or equivalent, side flexion with belt or equivalent, self-stretching exercises that are designed to target the upper thoracic musculature, and corner wall stretches.

    In-clinic exercises will consist of chin retractions in sitting, supine clock isometric resistance, supine anterior neck flexion exercises that target the deep neck flexors, prone neck extensor exercises (with concurrent chin retraction), and lateral neck raises (bilaterally). The study team will also target the mid and upper thoracic region by performing upright rows, supine chest raises that target the mid-scapular muscles and the paraspinal muscles, prone "I, T, and Y" exercises, and proprioceptive neuromuscular facilitation exercises using a bar or a cane. Individuals randomized to the resistance exercise arm will be assigned a HEP twice daily that will consist of chin retractions in sitting, supine anterior neck flexion exercises, and elastic band rows that replicate the upright rows performed in the clinic.

    Outcomes

    Primary Outcome Measures

    Changes in Cervical Range of motion device (CROM) in flexion using a CROM
    Changes in Cervical Range of motion device in extension using a CROM
    Changes in Cervical Range of motion device rotation using a CROM
    Changes in Cervical Range of motion device in side flexion using a CROM
    Changes in Pain Pressure Threshold with Algometry
    Changes in time held with the Deep Neck Flexor Endurance Test
    Changes in in time held with the Cervical Extensor Endurance Test
    Changes in in time held with the Lateral Neck Flexor Endurance Test for left side
    Changes in in time held with the Lateral Neck Flexor Endurance Test for right side

    Secondary Outcome Measures

    Change in the Working Alliance Inventory (WAI).
    The WAI evaluates the collaborative relationship between the helper and the client, but does not encompass all aspects of the therapy relationship (i.e. clinical outcomes, recidivism).The WAI is a 36 item scale with 3 domains (task, goal and bond). Each item is scored 1 to 7, with higher scores reflecting better alliance with the therapist. Total scores range from 36 (low alliance) to 252 (higher alliance). Higher scores are better.
    Change in the the OSPRO-YF-10
    The OSPRO-YF is a 10 item Optimal Screening for Prediction of Referral and Outcome cohort yellow flag assessment tool. As OSPRO-YF summarizes 11 psychological questionnaires, it is not scored like a conventional screening tool. Quartile scores are used instead of cutoff scores for consistency and assessment of a wide range of outpatient orthopedic patients. Scores that are in the top quartile (top 25%) for negative psychological questionnaires (Negative Mood and Fear Avoidance questionnaires). Scores that are in the bottom quartile (bottom 25%) for positive psychological questionnaires (Positive Affect/Coping questionnaires).
    Change in the University of Washington Pain-Related Self Efficacy Scale short form
    The UW Pain Related Self-Efficacy Scale is intended for measuring disability management self-efficacy in adults with chronic health conditions. The 6 items on the short form are summed using the values provided for each response available in the clinician/researcher version of the form. This will give a summary score that ranges from 6 to 30. Using the Summary Score to T-score Conversion Table, we will use the summary score to look up the IRT-based T-score in the column labeled "Tscore" in the conversion table (page 7 below). This T-score is the final score we will use for all analyses.
    Change in Patient Health Engagement Scale
    The Patient Health Engagement Scale (PHE-s) is a patient self-administrable short psycho-metric questionnaire developed with the aim of diagnosing the level of patient engagement in their healthcare process that is function of his/her degree of emotional elaboration of the health condition. The scale has six items and each item is scored 1 to 7. A low score is poorer engagement whereas a higher score reflects higher engagement. Scores range from six to 42.
    Change in the PROMIS 29.2.
    The PROMIS-29 v2.0 profile assesses pain intensity using a single 0-10 numeric rating item and seven health domains (physical function, fatigue, pain interference, depressive symptoms, anxiety, ability to participate in social roles and activities, and sleep disturbance) using four items per domain. Pain intensity is measured 0 to 10, with higher scores reflecting more pain. The other scales are measured as a t score, where 50% reflects the norm and value lower or higher reflect the current scoring by standard deviation to the general population.

    Full Information

    First Posted
    May 26, 2023
    Last Updated
    September 11, 2023
    Sponsor
    Duke University
    Collaborators
    University of Colorado, Denver, Saint-Joseph University
    search

    1. Study Identification

    Unique Protocol Identification Number
    NCT05940012
    Brief Title
    Specific and Shared Mechanisms Associated With Treatment for Chronic Neck Pain
    Acronym
    SS-MECH
    Official Title
    Specific and Shared Mechanisms Associated With Physical Therapy Interventions
    Study Type
    Interventional

    2. Study Status

    Record Verification Date
    September 2023
    Overall Recruitment Status
    Not yet recruiting
    Study Start Date
    September 2023 (Anticipated)
    Primary Completion Date
    June 30, 2024 (Anticipated)
    Study Completion Date
    December 31, 2024 (Anticipated)

    3. Sponsor/Collaborators

    Responsible Party, by Official Title
    Sponsor
    Name of the Sponsor
    Duke University
    Collaborators
    University of Colorado, Denver, Saint-Joseph University

    4. Oversight

    Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated Drug Product
    No
    Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated Device Product
    No
    Data Monitoring Committee
    No

    5. Study Description

    Brief Summary
    It is expected that different physical therapy treatments influence outcomes in many different ways. Each treatment is assumed to have a "specific" treatment mechanism, which explains how that specific treatment works. Different treatments also have "shared" mechanisms, which are similar across many different types of interventions (e.g., exercise, cognitive treatments or manual therapy). In this study, the study team will investigate the several types of specific treatment mechanisms of a manual therapy-based approach and an exercise-based approach and the study team will compare these to see if they are different. The patient population will include individuals with chronic neck pain, which is a condition that leads to notable disability and pain. The study team will also evaluate several shared treatment mechanisms to see if these are similar across the two treatments (e.g., manual therapy versus exercise). The study team expects to find that there are some specific treatment mechanisms with each approach (manual therapy versus exercise) but also several "shared" mechanisms that are similar across the two seemingly different approaches. These will likely influence the outcomes and may help explain why clinicians see similar outcomes across both treatment groups for chronic neck pain. This study is important because no one has investigated whether the outcomes that occur with chronic neck pain are mostly influenced by specific or shared treatment mechanisms. Interestingly, in the psychological literature, shared treatment mechanisms demonstrate the strongest influence (more than specific treatment mechanisms).
    Detailed Description
    Treatment mechanisms involve the steps or processes through which an intervention unfolds and produces the change in an outcome variable. In other words, a treatment mechanism is "how a treatment works". Treatment mechanisms can be specific to the intervention provided (i.e., fiber size increase and neuro adaptation occur with resistance exercise) or shared with other treatments (i.e., theoretically, increased therapeutic alliance and reduced fear of movement occur with almost all forms of interventions). In this proposal, the study team plans to investigate specific and shared treatment mechanisms of a manual therapy approach and a resistance exercise approach for treatment of chronic neck pain. The study team is targeting chronic neck pain because it is a common problem that is second only to low back pain for years lived with disability. Routinely, chronic neck pain management includes manual therapy and resistance exercise, as both approaches are included in clinical practice guidelines. The study plans to answer two research questions: 1) what are the specific mechanisms associated with manual therapy and resistance exercise interventions (and are these different), and 2) what are the shared mechanisms associated with these interventions, and do both mechanisms mediate clinical outcomes? The study team hypothesized that manual therapy and resistance exercise approaches will exhibit different specific treatment mechanisms. Further, the team hypothesizes that both approaches will lead to shared treatment mechanisms, which will notably influence outcomes at both 4 weeks and 6-month follow-up. This study is important because it will help identify how different treatment mechanisms influence clinical outcomes. There are several studies in the psychological literature that demonstrate the role of both specific and shared treatment mechanisms but this form of investigation is mostly absent for general musculoskeletal rehabilitation interventions. It will be the first study involving manual therapy in which specific and shared mechanisms are evaluated and explored against clinical outcomes.

    6. Conditions and Keywords

    Primary Disease or Condition Being Studied in the Trial, or the Focus of the Study
    Chronic Neck Pain

    7. Study Design

    Primary Purpose
    Treatment
    Study Phase
    Not Applicable
    Interventional Study Model
    Parallel Assignment
    Masking
    Participant
    Masking Description
    Subjects are told they will be randomized into two forms of treatment for chronic neck pain and that the study team is interested in learning the mechanisms associated with that treatment
    Allocation
    Randomized
    Enrollment
    126 (Anticipated)

    8. Arms, Groups, and Interventions

    Arm Title
    Manual therapy treatment
    Arm Type
    Experimental
    Arm Description
    Manual therapy treatments will consist of global soft tissue stretching of the upper trapezius, occipital muscles, levator scapula, and scalene muscles as the patient lies in supine. Non-thrust manipulation will consist of unilateral or central posterior-anterior accessory movements (PAIVMs) to the cervical and upper thoracic segments (in prone) at the most symptomatic levels. Passive physiological intervertebral movements of rotation will be performed in supine, as a mechanism to reduce pain and increase range of motion. Individuals with chronic neck pain randomized to the manual therapy arm, will be assigned a HEP twice daily that will consist of cervical rotations with belt or equivalent, side flexion with belt or equivalent, self-stretching exercises that are designed to target the upper thoracic musculature, and corner wall stretches.
    Arm Title
    Resisted exercise treatment
    Arm Type
    Active Comparator
    Arm Description
    In-clinic exercises will consist of chin retractions in sitting, supine clock isometric resistance, supine anterior neck flexion exercises that target the deep neck flexors, prone neck extensor exercises (with concurrent chin retraction), and lateral neck raises (bilaterally). The study team will also target the mid and upper thoracic region by performing upright rows, supine chest raises that target the mid-scapular muscles and the paraspinal muscles, prone "I, T, and Y" exercises, and proprioceptive neuromuscular facilitation exercises using a bar or a cane. Individuals randomized to the resistance exercise arm will be assigned a HEP twice daily that will consist of chin retractions in sitting, supine anterior neck flexion exercises, and elastic band rows that replicate the upright rows performed in the clinic.
    Intervention Type
    Other
    Intervention Name(s)
    Manual Therapy
    Other Intervention Name(s)
    Force based manipulations
    Intervention Description
    Hands on treatments including manipulation, mobilization and soft-tissue mobilization with therapeutic intent.
    Primary Outcome Measure Information:
    Title
    Changes in Cervical Range of motion device (CROM) in flexion using a CROM
    Time Frame
    Baseline, 2 weeks, and 3 weeks
    Title
    Changes in Cervical Range of motion device in extension using a CROM
    Time Frame
    Baseline, 2 weeks, and 3 weeks
    Title
    Changes in Cervical Range of motion device rotation using a CROM
    Time Frame
    Baseline, 2 weeks, and 3 weeks
    Title
    Changes in Cervical Range of motion device in side flexion using a CROM
    Time Frame
    Baseline, 2 weeks, and 3 weeks
    Title
    Changes in Pain Pressure Threshold with Algometry
    Time Frame
    Baseline, 2 weeks, and 3 weeks
    Title
    Changes in time held with the Deep Neck Flexor Endurance Test
    Time Frame
    Baseline, 2 weeks, and 3 weeks
    Title
    Changes in in time held with the Cervical Extensor Endurance Test
    Time Frame
    Baseline, 2 weeks, and 3 weeks
    Title
    Changes in in time held with the Lateral Neck Flexor Endurance Test for left side
    Time Frame
    Baseline, 2 weeks, and 3 weeks
    Title
    Changes in in time held with the Lateral Neck Flexor Endurance Test for right side
    Time Frame
    Baseline, 2 weeks, and 3 weeks
    Secondary Outcome Measure Information:
    Title
    Change in the Working Alliance Inventory (WAI).
    Description
    The WAI evaluates the collaborative relationship between the helper and the client, but does not encompass all aspects of the therapy relationship (i.e. clinical outcomes, recidivism).The WAI is a 36 item scale with 3 domains (task, goal and bond). Each item is scored 1 to 7, with higher scores reflecting better alliance with the therapist. Total scores range from 36 (low alliance) to 252 (higher alliance). Higher scores are better.
    Time Frame
    Baseline, 2 weeks and 3 weeks
    Title
    Change in the the OSPRO-YF-10
    Description
    The OSPRO-YF is a 10 item Optimal Screening for Prediction of Referral and Outcome cohort yellow flag assessment tool. As OSPRO-YF summarizes 11 psychological questionnaires, it is not scored like a conventional screening tool. Quartile scores are used instead of cutoff scores for consistency and assessment of a wide range of outpatient orthopedic patients. Scores that are in the top quartile (top 25%) for negative psychological questionnaires (Negative Mood and Fear Avoidance questionnaires). Scores that are in the bottom quartile (bottom 25%) for positive psychological questionnaires (Positive Affect/Coping questionnaires).
    Time Frame
    Baseline, 2 weeks and 3 weeks
    Title
    Change in the University of Washington Pain-Related Self Efficacy Scale short form
    Description
    The UW Pain Related Self-Efficacy Scale is intended for measuring disability management self-efficacy in adults with chronic health conditions. The 6 items on the short form are summed using the values provided for each response available in the clinician/researcher version of the form. This will give a summary score that ranges from 6 to 30. Using the Summary Score to T-score Conversion Table, we will use the summary score to look up the IRT-based T-score in the column labeled "Tscore" in the conversion table (page 7 below). This T-score is the final score we will use for all analyses.
    Time Frame
    Baseline, 2 weeks and 3 weeks
    Title
    Change in Patient Health Engagement Scale
    Description
    The Patient Health Engagement Scale (PHE-s) is a patient self-administrable short psycho-metric questionnaire developed with the aim of diagnosing the level of patient engagement in their healthcare process that is function of his/her degree of emotional elaboration of the health condition. The scale has six items and each item is scored 1 to 7. A low score is poorer engagement whereas a higher score reflects higher engagement. Scores range from six to 42.
    Time Frame
    Baseline, 2 weeks and 3 weeks
    Title
    Change in the PROMIS 29.2.
    Description
    The PROMIS-29 v2.0 profile assesses pain intensity using a single 0-10 numeric rating item and seven health domains (physical function, fatigue, pain interference, depressive symptoms, anxiety, ability to participate in social roles and activities, and sleep disturbance) using four items per domain. Pain intensity is measured 0 to 10, with higher scores reflecting more pain. The other scales are measured as a t score, where 50% reflects the norm and value lower or higher reflect the current scoring by standard deviation to the general population.
    Time Frame
    Baseline, 4 weeks, and 6 months

    10. Eligibility

    Sex
    All
    Minimum Age & Unit of Time
    18 Years
    Accepts Healthy Volunteers
    No
    Eligibility Criteria
    Inclusion Criteria: Individuals with chronic neck pain (chronic pain is defined using the International Association of the Study of Pain (IASP) pragmatic criteria of pain lasting for 3 months or more that cannot be attributed to another diagnosis or condition.) 18 years of age and older experience ongoing neck pain of ≥3 on a 10-point scale for most days of the previous 3-months. Exclusion Criteria: Individuals with cervical pain and suspected radicular symptoms a history of neck surgery current or suspected red flags unable to speak or write in English.
    Central Contact Person:
    First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name or Official Title & Degree
    Chad E Cook, PhD
    Phone
    1 919 684 8905
    Email
    chad.cook@dm.duke.edu
    Overall Study Officials:
    First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name & Degree
    Chad E Cook
    Organizational Affiliation
    Duke University
    Official's Role
    Principal Investigator

    12. IPD Sharing Statement

    Plan to Share IPD
    Yes
    IPD Sharing Plan Description
    The proposal will follow the data sharing guidelines set forth for the NIH HEAL Initiative®. As with the HEAL initiative, we plan to create an infrastructure that addresses the need for researchers, clinicians, and patients to collaborate on sharing their collective data. Our Data Sharing Plan that (1) will make the two projected Publications Open Access and, to the extent possible, and (2) will make the Underlying Primary Data immediately and broadly available to the public. Underlying Primary Data should be made as widely and freely available as possible while safeguarding the privacy of participants and protecting confidential and proprietary data.
    IPD Sharing Time Frame
    Protocol when published. SAP within the protocol when published. Informed consent once approval of IRB.

    Learn more about this trial

    Specific and Shared Mechanisms Associated With Treatment for Chronic Neck Pain

    We'll reach out to this number within 24 hrs