title: The relative effectiveness of spinal manipulation and ultrasound in mechanical pain: Pilot study.
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  To assess the efficacy of spinal manipulation versus ultrasound in the treatment of patients with neck pain.
  
  
  METHODS
  Randomized clinical trial.
  
  
  METHODS
  Technikon Natal Chiropractic Clinic-Durban, South Africa
  
  
  METHODS
  Thirty randomly allocated subjects with neck pain, (aged between 16 and 60 years), responded to advertisements from the "college" (Technikon Natal, Department of Chiropractic), in the local newspapers and from the radio.
  
  
  METHODS
  Two groups of subjects were treated. Group 1 received spinal manipulation and Group 2 received ultrasound. Both groups were assessed with a CROM goniometer used for cervical range of motion assessments, algometer measurements (to assess pain thresholds), completion of the Numerical Pain Rating Scale 101 (for intensity of pain), level of disability using the CMCC Neck Disability Index, and the Short Form McGill Questionnaire to assess for the sensory dimension of pain.
  
  
  RESULTS
  Ultrasound increased only right rotation range of motion of the neck, whereas spinal manipulation increased left rotation, right lateral flexion (ranges of motion of the neck) and decreased disability.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  From the results it appears that both ultrasound and adjustments are useful in treating mechanical neck pain; however, it appears that adjustments were more effective in restoring overall mobility and in decreasing cervical disability than ultrasound alone.
authors.affiliation: Department of Chiropractic, Technikon Natal, South Africa.
authors.forename: Malany
authors.initials: M
authors.lastname: Moodley
authors.forename: James W
authors.initials: JW
authors.lastname: Brantingham
references.citation: Pain. 1986 Oct;27(1):117-126
references.pmid: 3785962
references.citation: J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 1992 Oct;15(8):495-500
references.pmid: 1402409
references.citation: J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 1991 Sep;14(7):409-15
references.pmid: 1834753
references.citation: BMJ. 1996 Nov 23;313(7068):1291-6
references.pmid: 8942688
references.citation: Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1986 Nov;67(11):836-8
references.pmid: 3778185
references.citation: J R Coll Gen Pract. 1983 Sep;33(254):574-9
references.pmid: 6355460
references.citation: Pain. 1995 Oct;63(1):85-91
references.pmid: 8577494
references.citation: Pain. 1975 Sep;1(3):277-299
references.pmid: 1235985
references.citation: J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 1992 Jan;15(1):16-23
references.pmid: 1531487
references.citation: J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 1990 Jan;13(1):7-12
references.pmid: 2324662
references.citation: J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 1990 Jan;13(1):17-25
references.pmid: 2182754