Status
Conditions
About
The aim of this prospective observational study is to investigate whether the presence or absence of directional preference impacts movement coordination impairments as measured in patients with Whiplash Associated Disorders (WAD).
The primary research question this study aims to answer is:
Patients in this study will asked to complete the following measures at baseline, during care, discharge, and 3 month follow up.
Patients demonstrating a directional preference will be managed utilizing a Mechanical Diagnosis and Treatment approach (MDT) while those without directional preference will be managed according to published clinical practice guidelines for patients with Neck Pain and Movement Coordination Deficits (WADs).
Full description
Objective The primary aim of this prospective observational study is to investigate whether the presence or absence of directional preference impacts movement coordination impairments as measured at the start of care, during care, discharge, and at 3 month follow up. It is hypothesized that the presence of directional preference in patients with WADs may be associated with more favorable improvements in the specific outcome measures as compared to the group without the presence of directional preference.
Design: Prospective Observation Cohort Design
Background: Neck pain ranks 19th in global disability-adjusted life years with an overall prevalence of 27 per 1000 population with variation based on geographic location amongst other factors. The clinical course of neck pain is variable and not always favorable. A research dearth remains in whiplash associated disorders (WAD) and movement coordination issues for the cervical spine.
Movement coordination impairments are commonly associated with whiplash associated disorders. Poorer prognosis is associated with older age, higher initial neck disability index, high initial pain intensity. Recovery slows down after the first 6-12 weeks, and some patients have with persistent pain and disability even 1 year after the whiplash associated disorder. However, the prognostic value of limited cervical mobility and altered motor control has also been questioned. The use of mechanical diagnosis and therapy (MDT) has been associated with better function, range of motion, and overall lower costs in whiplash associated disorders at both the 6 and 36 month mark but whether the results differ from natural history or other approaches is debatable.
Setting:
The settings for subject recruitment and all data collection are two outpatient physical therapy clinics located in the southeastern United States during the period of September 2023 to September 2024. Prior approval for data collection will be obtained in writing from the clinic directors of both sites.
Sample and Population:
Convenience sampling will be utilized for this study. A G-power a priori power analysis with a medium effect size determined that a sample size of 55 is required to achieve a statistical power of .80 with an alpha level of .05. A total of 65 subjects will be recruited between the two data collection sites to account for an expected 20% attrition rate on follow up.
Procedures: Subjects referred to one of two out-patient physical therapy clinics meeting inclusion criteria will be evaluated, classified using a Mechanical Diagnosis and Treatment (MDT) approach. Those patients demonstrating a directional preference will be managed using an MDT approach while those not demonstration a directional preference will be managed using published clinical practice guidelines for patients with Movement Coordination Deficits (WADs). Outcome measures will be taken at baseline, visit 5, visit 10 or discharge (whichever comes first) and 3 month follow up.
Data Analyses:
Descriptive statistics will be used to assess patient baseline and change scores on the dependent variables of interest. Inferential statistics (linear regression) will be utilized to assess for statistically significant changes over time and between groups for the variables of interest.
Enrollment
Sex
Ages
Volunteers
Inclusion criteria
Exclusion criteria
65 participants in 2 patient groups
Loading...
Central trial contact
Jane Borgehammar, DSc; Eric Miller, DSc
Data sourced from clinicaltrials.gov
Clinical trials
Research sites
Resources
Legal