The effect of cervical spine manipulation versus mechanical cervical traction on suboccipital trigger points

M.Tech. (Chiropractic)Abstract: Purpose: The aim of this study was to determine whether mechanical cervical traction had an effect on suboccipital myofascial trigger points, by comparing it to the effect of cervical spine manipulation on suboccipital myofascial trigger points. Method: This was a randomised comparative study, consisting of two groups of 15 participants each. Anyone suffering from neck pain caused by suboccipital myofascial trigger points and aged between 18 and 55 years were considered eligible for this study. Potential participants were examined and accepted to partake in this study, according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria for this study. Participants were randomly divided into two groups of fifteen, thereby determining the treatment method that was administered. Group A participants received a chiropractic manipulation of the cervical spine on the side that the occiput presented restricted during motion palpation. Group B participants received mechanical cervical traction alone. Procedure: Participants completed the study over a period of three weeks. Subjective and objective readings were taken at the 1st, 4th and 7th visits. The subjective data was collected by means of the numerical pain rating scale and the Vernon-Mior neck pain and Disability Index questionnaire. The objective data was collected by means of cervical spine range of motion measurements and pressure algometer readings over the suboccipital muscles bilaterally. Participants received their allocated treatments, according to their group, during the first 6 visits. The 7th and final visit only included data capturing. The subjective and objective data collected during this trial period was analysed by a statistician. Results: The statistical data was analysed using the Friedman test, the Wilcoxon Signed-Rank test and the Mann-Whitney U test. The results showed a clinically and statistically significant improvement in both group A and group B, with regards to subjective and objective data. However, treatment received by group B proved to be statistically superior to treatment received by group A on many components of the subjective and objective measurements..