Complementary Medicine, Peninsula Medical School, Universities of Exeter & Plymouth, 25 Victoria Park Road, Exeter, UK.
Headache. 2011 Jul-Aug;51(7):1132-9. doi: 10.1111/j.1526-4610.2011.01932.x. Epub 2011 Jun 7.
The objective of this systematic review was to assess the effectiveness of spinal manipulations as a treatment option for cervicogenic headaches. Seven databases were searched from their inception to February 2011. All randomized trials which investigated spinal manipulations performed by any type of healthcare professional for treating cervicogenic headaches in human subjects were considered. The selection of studies, data extraction, and validation were performed independently by 2 reviewers. Nine randomized clinical trials (RCTs) met the inclusion criteria. Their methodological quality was mostly poor. Six RCTs suggested that spinal manipulation is more effective than physical therapy, gentle massage, drug therapy, or no intervention. Three RCTs showed no differences in pain, duration, and frequency of headaches compared to placebo, manipulation, physical therapy, massage, or wait list controls. Adequate control for placebo effect was achieved in 1 RCT only, and this trial showed no benefit of spinal manipulations beyond a placebo effect. The majority of RCTs failed to provide details of adverse effects. There are few rigorous RCTs testing the effectiveness of spinal manipulations for treating cervicogenic headaches. The results are mixed and the only trial accounting for placebo effects fails to be positive. Therefore, the therapeutic value of this approach remains uncertain.
本系统评价的目的是评估脊柱推拿作为治疗颈源性头痛的一种治疗选择的有效性。从建库开始至 2011 年 2 月,我们检索了 7 个数据库。我们纳入了所有调查由任何类型的医疗保健专业人员对颈源性头痛患者实施脊柱推拿的随机临床试验。研究选择、数据提取和验证均由 2 位评审员独立进行。9 项随机临床试验(RCT)符合纳入标准。其方法学质量大多较差。6 项 RCT 表明,脊柱推拿比物理疗法、温和按摩、药物治疗或不干预更有效。3 项 RCT 显示,与安慰剂、推拿、物理疗法、按摩或等待名单对照组相比,疼痛、头痛持续时间和频率没有差异。只有 1 项 RCT 充分控制了安慰剂效应,该试验显示脊柱推拿除了安慰剂效应之外没有益处。大多数 RCT 未能提供不良反应的详细信息。很少有严格的 RCT 测试脊柱推拿治疗颈源性头痛的有效性。结果不一,唯一考虑了安慰剂效应的试验也没有得出阳性结果。因此,这种方法的治疗价值仍不确定。