Is Chiropractic Spinal Manipulative Therapy an Efficient Treatment Option in Cervicogenic Headache
|The safety and scientific validity of this study is the responsibility of the study sponsor and investigators. Listing a study does not mean it has been evaluated by the U.S. Federal Government. Read our disclaimer for details.|
|ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01687881|
Recruitment Status : Completed
First Posted : September 19, 2012
Last Update Posted : December 31, 2015
This study will highlight and validate chiropractic spinal manipulative therapy (CSMT) for cervicogenic headache (CEH). If the method proves to be effective, it will provide a new non-pharmacological treatment option for CEH. This is especially important since pharmacological management has minor effect in CEH, and alternative treatment options are warranted. The applied methodology of the study will aim towards the highest possible research standards. This international study is a collaboration between Akershus University Hospital, Innlandet Hospital and University of Oslo (UiO), Norway and Macquarie University, Australia. The multidisciplinary professional backgrounds are physiotherapy, chiropractic and medicine. By increasing the methodological quality of the investigators research to a very high level, the investigators see the method to work as a guide to increase the quality of chiropractic research in the future, as previous randomized clinical trials (RCTs) of CEH used methodology showing room for improvement.
CSMT using the Gonstead method reduces days with CEH by at least 25% as compared to placebo (sham manipulation, i.e. broad non-specific contact, non-directional, low velocity and low amplitude) and no intervention (control group).
|Condition or disease||Intervention/treatment||Phase|
|Cervicogenic Headache||Other: Chiropractic Other: Sham Chiropractic||Phase 3|
Hide Detailed Description
Cervicogenic headache (CEH) is a symptomatic headache characterized by chronic unilateral headache and symptoms and signs of neck involvement. CEH is often worsened by neck movement, sustained awkward head position, external pressure over the upper cervical or occipital region on the symptomatic side. Abolition of the headache following diagnostic anesthetic blocks of cervical structures or local factors in neck give evidence that the pain is attributed to a neck disorder or lesion. The prevalence of CEH is 0.2% in the general population of Akershus County, i.e. 9,000 Norwegians have CEH. However, the prevalence varies between 0.4-4.1% in studies applying less rigorous diagnostic criteria. The efficacy of pharmacological management in CEH is poor. Patients suffering from CEH are commonly treated with CSMT, but the methodology has one or more shortcomings in all studies. In addition, the RCTs mostly included participant with infrequent CEH and did not follow the recommended clinical guidelines by the International Headache Society (IHS) of intervention of at least three months. An analysis of the literature as well as a recent pilot study suggests that CSMT has an effect on headache intensity and duration, and medication intake. However, a randomized controlled clinical trial with high methodological quality on CEH still remains to be conducted.
The RCT is single blinded, placebo-controlled trial of CSMT using the Gonstead method vs. sham manipulation and control group. If the treatment shows to be effective, the participants whom receive sham manipulation or control will be offered true intervention after the follow-up period and free of charge. This study will follow the recommendations set by the clinical trial guidelines from the IHS, while the methodological quality control will in general follow previous suggested criteria and the CONSORT statements.
Patients will be recruited through Akershus University Hospital and Innlandet Hospital, Norway as well as through media advertising in Akershus and Oslo County. The diagnose is set by a chiropractor and a neurologist with experience in headache.
The clinical trials consist of three stages: Run-in, intervention (treatment) and follow-up.
One month of base line data collection where participants will fill-in a diagnostic headache diary. Baseline demographics and clinical characteristics will be presented in tables with mean and standard deviation (SD) for each group.
The participants will be randomized by drawing prepared sealed lots. Each lot includes three different interventions, i.e active treatment, sham manipulation and control group. The first three participants will draw from the same lot until all three interventions are used. The next lot with three interventions is then followed by the next three participants.
The RCTs will be conducted by an experienced chiropractor. Active treatment consists of CSMT using the Gonstead method. A specific contact, high velocity, low amplitude, short lever, with no recoil post adjustment directed to spinal biomechanical dysfunction diagnosed by standard chiropractic tests.
Follow-up at 3, 6 and 12 months post-treatment. During this period participants continue to fill in a diagnostic headache diary. The control group will also be included in this phase of the study.
The data will be analyzed with SPSS using standard statistical techniques.
The investigators based our calculation of sample size on migraine days from recent group comparison studies of topiramate (38). The investigators calculated that a sample size of 16 patients was required to detect a difference in mean reduction in monthly headache days of 2.5 with 80% power, with p=0.05 as level of significance, and assuming a common SD of 2.5 for active treatment and broad-based treatment groups.
Insurance is through "The Norwegian System of Compensation to Patients" (NPE) which is an independent national body, set up to process compensation claims from patients who have suffered an injury as a result of treatment under the Norwegian health service.
The Regional Committee for Medical Research Ethics (REK) in Norway and Norwegian Social Science Data Services approved the full PhD research protocol. The declaration of Helsinski is followed.
|Study Type :||Interventional (Clinical Trial)|
|Actual Enrollment :||19 participants|
|Intervention Model:||Single Group Assignment|
|Masking:||Double (Participant, Outcomes Assessor)|
|Official Title:||Is Chiropractic Spinal Manipulative Therapy an Efficient Treatment Option in Cervicogenic Headache? A Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial.|
|Study Start Date :||September 2012|
|Actual Primary Completion Date :||May 2014|
|Actual Study Completion Date :||May 2014|
Sham Comparator: Sham Chiropractic
Sham Chiropractic manipulative therapy.
Other: Sham Chiropractic
No Intervention: Control group
No intervention: Control group.
Active Comparator: Chiropractic Spinal Manipulative Therapy
Active intervention: Chiropractic Spinal Manipulative Therapy
Chiropractic Spinal Manipulative Therapy
- Number of headache days [ Time Frame: Change from baseline to post-treatment, 3, 6, 12 months follow-up ]
- 25% reduction in number of headache days between active treatment and sham.
- 25% reduction in number of headache days between active treatment and control group.
- Headache duration [ Time Frame: Change from baseline to post-treatment, 3, 6, 12 months follow-up ]
- 25% reduction in headache duration in hours between active treatment and sham.
- 25% reduction in headache duration in hours between active treatment and control group.
- Self reported VAS [ Time Frame: Change from baseline to post-treatment, 3, 6, 12 months follow-up ]
- 25% self-reported improvement on VAS between active treatment and sham.
- 25% self-reported improvement on VAS between active treatment and control group.
- Headache index [ Time Frame: Change from baseline to post-treatment, 3, 6, 12 months follow-up ]
- 25% reduction in headache index (frequency x duration x intensity) between active treatment and sham.
- 25% reduction in headache index between active treatment and control group.
- Headache medication [ Time Frame: Change from baseline to post-treatment, 3, 6, 12 months follow-up ]
- 50% reduction in headache medication between active treatment and sham.
- 50% reduction in headache medication between active treatment and control group.
- Sub-analysis on x-ray findings [ Time Frame: Change formbaseline to post-treatment, 3, 6, 12 months follow-up ]Sub-analysis will be done on participants with structural deformities vs. normal x-ray findings.
To learn more about this study, you or your doctor may contact the study research staff using the contact information provided by the sponsor.
Please refer to this study by its ClinicalTrials.gov identifier (NCT number): NCT01687881
|Research Centre, Akershus University Hospital|
|Lørenskog, Norway, 1478|
|Study Director:||Michael B Russell, Professor||Head and Neck research Group, Research Centre, Akershus University Hospital|