Cargando…

Preliminary results, methodological considerations and recruitment difficulties of a randomised clinical trial comparing two treatment regimens for patients with headache and neck pain

BACKGROUND: Headache is a highly prevalent disorder. Irrespective of the headache diagnosis it is often accompanied with neck pain and -stiffness. Due to this common combination of headache and neck pain, physical treatments of the cervical spine are often considered. The additional value of these t...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: De Hertogh, Willem, Vaes, Peter, Devroey, Dirk, Louis, Paul, Carpay, Hans, Truijen, Steven, Duquet, William, Oostendorp, Rob
Formato: Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2009
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2758835/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19775434
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2474-10-115
_version_ 1782172613031755776
author De Hertogh, Willem
Vaes, Peter
Devroey, Dirk
Louis, Paul
Carpay, Hans
Truijen, Steven
Duquet, William
Oostendorp, Rob
author_facet De Hertogh, Willem
Vaes, Peter
Devroey, Dirk
Louis, Paul
Carpay, Hans
Truijen, Steven
Duquet, William
Oostendorp, Rob
author_sort De Hertogh, Willem
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Headache is a highly prevalent disorder. Irrespective of the headache diagnosis it is often accompanied with neck pain and -stiffness. Due to this common combination of headache and neck pain, physical treatments of the cervical spine are often considered. The additional value of these treatments to standard medical care or usual care (UC) is insufficiently documented. We therefore wanted to compare the treatment effects of UC alone and in combination with manual therapy (MT) in patients with a combination of headache and neck pain. UC consisted of a stepped treatment approach according to the Dutch General Practitioners Guideline for headache, the additional MT consisted of articular mobilisations and low load exercises. Due to insufficient enrolment the study was terminated prematurely. We aim to report not only our preliminary clinical findings but also to discuss the encountered difficulties and to formulate recommendations for future research. METHODS: A randomised clinical trial was conducted. Thirty-seven patients were included and randomly allocated to one of both treatment groups. The treatment period was 6 weeks, with follow-up measurements at weeks 7, 12 and 26. Primary outcome measures were global perceived effect (GPE) and the impact of the headache using the Headache Impact Test (HIT-6). Reduction in headache frequency, pain intensity, medication intake, absenteeism and the use of additional professional help were secondary outcome measures RESULTS: Significant improvements on primary and secondary outcome measures were recorded in both treatment groups. No significant differences between both treatment groups were found. The number of recruited patients remained low despite various strategies. CONCLUSION: It appears that both treatment strategies can have equivalent positive influences on headache complaints. Additional studies with larger study populations are needed to draw firm conclusions. Recommendations to increase patient inflow in primary care trials, such as the use of an extended network of participating physicians and of clinical alert software applications, are discussed. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT00298142
format Text
id pubmed-2758835
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2009
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-27588352009-10-08 Preliminary results, methodological considerations and recruitment difficulties of a randomised clinical trial comparing two treatment regimens for patients with headache and neck pain De Hertogh, Willem Vaes, Peter Devroey, Dirk Louis, Paul Carpay, Hans Truijen, Steven Duquet, William Oostendorp, Rob BMC Musculoskelet Disord Research Article BACKGROUND: Headache is a highly prevalent disorder. Irrespective of the headache diagnosis it is often accompanied with neck pain and -stiffness. Due to this common combination of headache and neck pain, physical treatments of the cervical spine are often considered. The additional value of these treatments to standard medical care or usual care (UC) is insufficiently documented. We therefore wanted to compare the treatment effects of UC alone and in combination with manual therapy (MT) in patients with a combination of headache and neck pain. UC consisted of a stepped treatment approach according to the Dutch General Practitioners Guideline for headache, the additional MT consisted of articular mobilisations and low load exercises. Due to insufficient enrolment the study was terminated prematurely. We aim to report not only our preliminary clinical findings but also to discuss the encountered difficulties and to formulate recommendations for future research. METHODS: A randomised clinical trial was conducted. Thirty-seven patients were included and randomly allocated to one of both treatment groups. The treatment period was 6 weeks, with follow-up measurements at weeks 7, 12 and 26. Primary outcome measures were global perceived effect (GPE) and the impact of the headache using the Headache Impact Test (HIT-6). Reduction in headache frequency, pain intensity, medication intake, absenteeism and the use of additional professional help were secondary outcome measures RESULTS: Significant improvements on primary and secondary outcome measures were recorded in both treatment groups. No significant differences between both treatment groups were found. The number of recruited patients remained low despite various strategies. CONCLUSION: It appears that both treatment strategies can have equivalent positive influences on headache complaints. Additional studies with larger study populations are needed to draw firm conclusions. Recommendations to increase patient inflow in primary care trials, such as the use of an extended network of participating physicians and of clinical alert software applications, are discussed. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT00298142 BioMed Central 2009-09-23 /pmc/articles/PMC2758835/ /pubmed/19775434 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2474-10-115 Text en Copyright © 2009 De Hertogh et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0) ), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research Article
De Hertogh, Willem
Vaes, Peter
Devroey, Dirk
Louis, Paul
Carpay, Hans
Truijen, Steven
Duquet, William
Oostendorp, Rob
Preliminary results, methodological considerations and recruitment difficulties of a randomised clinical trial comparing two treatment regimens for patients with headache and neck pain
title Preliminary results, methodological considerations and recruitment difficulties of a randomised clinical trial comparing two treatment regimens for patients with headache and neck pain
title_full Preliminary results, methodological considerations and recruitment difficulties of a randomised clinical trial comparing two treatment regimens for patients with headache and neck pain
title_fullStr Preliminary results, methodological considerations and recruitment difficulties of a randomised clinical trial comparing two treatment regimens for patients with headache and neck pain
title_full_unstemmed Preliminary results, methodological considerations and recruitment difficulties of a randomised clinical trial comparing two treatment regimens for patients with headache and neck pain
title_short Preliminary results, methodological considerations and recruitment difficulties of a randomised clinical trial comparing two treatment regimens for patients with headache and neck pain
title_sort preliminary results, methodological considerations and recruitment difficulties of a randomised clinical trial comparing two treatment regimens for patients with headache and neck pain
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2758835/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19775434
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2474-10-115
work_keys_str_mv AT dehertoghwillem preliminaryresultsmethodologicalconsiderationsandrecruitmentdifficultiesofarandomisedclinicaltrialcomparingtwotreatmentregimensforpatientswithheadacheandneckpain
AT vaespeter preliminaryresultsmethodologicalconsiderationsandrecruitmentdifficultiesofarandomisedclinicaltrialcomparingtwotreatmentregimensforpatientswithheadacheandneckpain
AT devroeydirk preliminaryresultsmethodologicalconsiderationsandrecruitmentdifficultiesofarandomisedclinicaltrialcomparingtwotreatmentregimensforpatientswithheadacheandneckpain
AT louispaul preliminaryresultsmethodologicalconsiderationsandrecruitmentdifficultiesofarandomisedclinicaltrialcomparingtwotreatmentregimensforpatientswithheadacheandneckpain
AT carpayhans preliminaryresultsmethodologicalconsiderationsandrecruitmentdifficultiesofarandomisedclinicaltrialcomparingtwotreatmentregimensforpatientswithheadacheandneckpain
AT truijensteven preliminaryresultsmethodologicalconsiderationsandrecruitmentdifficultiesofarandomisedclinicaltrialcomparingtwotreatmentregimensforpatientswithheadacheandneckpain
AT duquetwilliam preliminaryresultsmethodologicalconsiderationsandrecruitmentdifficultiesofarandomisedclinicaltrialcomparingtwotreatmentregimensforpatientswithheadacheandneckpain
AT oostendorprob preliminaryresultsmethodologicalconsiderationsandrecruitmentdifficultiesofarandomisedclinicaltrialcomparingtwotreatmentregimensforpatientswithheadacheandneckpain