Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2013 Feb;21(1):7-17.
doi: 10.1179/2042618612Y.0000000016.

The relative effectiveness of segment specific level and non-specific level spinal joint mobilization on pain and range of motion: results of a systematic review and meta-analysis

Emily Joan Slaven  1 , Adam P Goode  1 , Rogelio A Coronado  1 , Charles Poole  1 , Eric J Hegedus  1
Affiliations
Review

The relative effectiveness of segment specific level and non-specific level spinal joint mobilization on pain and range of motion: results of a systematic review and meta-analysis

Emily Joan Slaven et al. J Man Manip Ther. 2013 Feb.

Abstract

Study design: Systematic literature review and meta-analysis.

Objective: IN SYMPTOMATIC SUBJECTS TO: (1) examine the effects of a single session of joint mobilization on pain at rest and with most painful movement, and (2) compare the effects when joint mobilization is provided to a specific or non-specific spinal level.

Background: Joint mobilization is routinely used for treating spinal pain in conjunction with other interventions, but its unique effect is not well understood. Further, there is controversy about the role of 'specific level' techniques in producing benefit.

Methods: Searches were performed for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) using electronic databases (MEDLINE, CINAHL, and PEDro) from 1966 through November 2010. Methodological quality was assessed using previously detailed criteria. Meta-analysis and meta-regression were conducted on eligible studies.

Results: Eight RCTs with a mean methodological score of 10/12 were included. Significant heterogeneity (P = 0.075) was found in the overall meta-analysis estimate. When stratified by body location, no significant individual effect was found for pain at rest. However, there was a statistical mean difference [0.71 (95% confidence interval: 0.13-1.28)] between pain at rest for the cervical and lumbar individual means.

Conclusions: We found multiple studies which provided evidence that a single session of joint mobilization can lead to a reduction of pain at rest and with most painful movement. When using joint mobilization, the need for specific versus non-specific level mobilization may be influenced by anatomical region; the direction of effect in the cervical spine was toward specific mobilization and in the lumbar spine towards non-specific mobilization.

Keywords: Pain; Specific level; Spinal mobilization.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Selection process for studies included in the analysis.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Summary of methodological qualities of studies based on criteria by Furlan et al.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Comparison of the effect of specific versus non-specific mobilization measured with numeric pain rating scale for pain at rest. The Chiradejnant (2003) and (2002) papers reference the lumbar spine, and the Schomacher (2009) and Aquino (2009) papers reference the cervical spine.
Figure 4
Figure 4
Comparison of the effect of specific versus non-specific mobilization in the cervical spine measured with numeric pain rating scale for pain at rest.
Figure 5
Figure 5
Comparison of the effects of specific versus non-specific mobilization in the lumbar spine measured with numeric pain rating scale for pain at rest.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

See all "Cited by" articles

References

    1. Allison G, Edmonston S, Kiviniemi K, Lanigan H, Simonsen AV, Walcher S. Influence of standardized mobilization on the posteroanterior stiffness of the lumbar spine in asymptomatic subjects. Physiother Res Int. 2001;6:145–56 - PubMed
    1. Powers CM, Kulig K, Harrison J, Bergman G. Segmental mobility of the lumbar spine during a posterior to anterior mobilization: assessment using dynamic MRI. Clin Biomech. 2003;18:80–3 - PubMed
    1. Abbott JH, McCane B, Herbison P, Moginie G, Chapple C, Hogarty T. Lumbar segmental instability: a criterion-related validity study of manual therapy assessment. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2005;6:56. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Humphreys BK, Delahaye M, Peterson CK. An investigation into the validity of cervical spine motion palpation using subjects with congenital block vertebrae as a ‘gold standard’. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2004;5:19. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Kulig K, Powers CM, Landel RF, Chen H, Fredericson M, Guillet M, et al. Segmental lumbar mobility in individuals with low back pain: in vivo assessment during manual and self-imposed motion using dynamic MRI. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2007;8:8. - PMC - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources