CClinicalTrials.gg
RecruitingNCT06051799Updated Sep 25, 2023

Effects of Pressure Release of Myofascial Trigger Points on Mechanical Neck Pain.

An interventional study of Myofascial trigger points pressure release and Therapeutic exercise and postural hygiene in Myofascial Pain Syndrome of Neck, Trigger Point Pain, Myofascial and Myofacial Pain, sponsored by Universidad Complutense de Madrid. Recruiting at 1 site in Spain. Open to participants aged 18 Years to 55 Years, including healthy volunteers. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2023-09-25.

Sponsored by Universidad Complutense de Madrid · Not applicable, Interventional, and Treatment

From the registry’s dates

  • Primary completion was expected by Jul 2024, 2 years 2 months ago, but the record still lists the study as recruiting.
Phase
Not applicable
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
104
Allocation
Randomized
Ages
18 Years to 55 Years
Sex
All
01

Study summary

The study aims to compare the effectiveness of myofascial trigger point treatment using pressure release versus a control group in patients with mechanical neck pain, randomly assigned. In both groups a protocol of therapeutic exercise and postural correction will be carried out

Read the detailed description

With the present investigation it is wondered whether the choice of manual therapy techniques, specifically the pressure release of myofascial trigger points in the upper trapezius and sternocleidomastoid muscles, provide significant benefits in combination with therapeutic exercise and postural hygiene (treatment group), as opposed to the unique application of therapeutic exercise and postural hygiene (control group), thus constituting a treatment of choice in patients with mechanical neck pain.

A treatment protocol of one session per week will be carried out, and a follow-up two weeks after the end of the treatment protocol.

If, as postulated, pressure release is more effective than the treatment received by the control group, the choice of this type of technique for myofascial pain syndrome would benefit a high percentage of people who often come asking for treatment in pain treatment centers. Pressure release provides a painless manual stimulus, thus effectively resolving the symptomatology of myofascial trigger points without the need for invasive treatments or medication, which may have more contraindications.

02

Conditions studied

  • Myofascial Pain Syndrome of Neck
  • Trigger Point Pain, Myofascial
  • Myofacial Pain

Keywords

  • upper trapezius
  • sternocleidomastoid
  • manual therapy
  • trigger points
  • Myofascial pain syndrome
  • therapeutic exercise
03

In context

Myofascial Pain Syndromes

1,136 studies on the registry are indexed under Myofascial Pain Syndromes; 137 are open to participants now.

This study's planned enrollment of 104 is above the median of 60 across 931 interventional studies indexed under Myofascial Pain Syndromes.

Browse Myofascial Pain Syndromes studies →

Lead sponsor

Universidad Complutense de Madrid is the lead sponsor of 200 studies on the registry; 60 are open to participants now.

Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
18 Years to 55 Years
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
Yes

Inclusion criteria

  • Subjects between 18 and 55 years of age in order to avoid degenerative phenomena.
  • Have suffered from neck pain at least once in the last month.
  • Active or latent myofascial trigger points in the Upper Trapezius and Sternocleidomastoid muscles.

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Patients with recent trauma (last 6 months) to the upper quadrant or spine.
  • Patients with pathologies involving malignant neoplasms.
  • Surgery on the trunk or upper limb in the last six months.
  • Patients undergoing pharmacological or physiotherapy treatment at the time of the test.
  • Pregnancy.
  • No myofascial trigger points in the upper trapezius or sternocleidomastoid muscles.
  • Refusal to sign the consent form for the study or not being able to do so.
05

Study design

Phase
Not applicable
Primary purpose
Treatment
Allocation
Randomized
Intervention model
Parallel assignment
Masking
Double (Participant, Outcomes assessor)
Enrollment
104 participants (estimated)

Study arms

  • Experimental
    TREATMENT GROUP

    The Pressure Release Technique will be applied. One session per week will be carried out for four weeks. It will be performed on as many trigger points as we find in each muscle associated with the study, leaving a record of them. Also adding postural hygiene and home exercise guidelines. A progression of exercises involving contraction of the deep neck flexor muscles Subjects will be taught to perform slow and controlled craniocervical flexion. It should be performed a minimum of once daily during the treatment regimen. A follow-up of the patients will be carried out with respect to home therapeutic exercise and postural hygiene guidelines.

    Other: Myofascial trigger points pressure release · Other: Therapeutic exercise and postural hygiene

  • Active comparator
    CONTROL

    Postural hygiene guidelines will be given, as well as home therapeutic exercise (identical to the treatment group). About therapeutic exercise, a progression of exercises involving contraction of the deep neck flexor muscles shall be included in the first session. Subjects will be taught to perform slow and controlled craniocervical flexion. Subjects will then be trained to be able to progressively maintain craniocervical flexion through feedback from an air device (Stabilizer™, Chattanooga Group Inc., Chattanooga, TN) placed behind the neck. This sensor monitors the slight flattening of the cervical curve that occurs with contraction of the craniocervical deep flexor musculature. It should be performed a minimum of once daily during the treatment regimen. To this end, patients will be monitored and their understanding and correct follow-up of the treatment will be assessed in each face-to-face session per week, for four weeks, the same as in experimental group.

    Other: Therapeutic exercise and postural hygiene

Interventions

  • OtherMyofascial trigger points pressure release

    Patient lying down in the supine position, Therapist do a first and second finger pincer grasp is performed on the myofascial trigger points located on the upper trapezius muscle and sternocleidomastoid muscle, this pressure will be increased as the therapist perceives a reduction in soft tissue resistance under the finger over a period of 90 seconds. Previous studies indicate no difference between 60 and 90 seconds of pressure. It will be performed on as many trigger points as we find in each muscle associated with the study.

    Also known as: Ischemic compression, pressure release, manual compression

  • OtherTherapeutic exercise and postural hygiene

    Therapeutic exercise and postural hygiene: A progression of exercises with contraction of the deep neck flexor muscles will be included in the first session. Subjects will be taught to perform a slow and controlled craniocervical flexion. Subjects will then be trained to be able to progressively maintain craniocervical flexion through feedback from an air device (Stabilizer™, Chattanooga Group Inc., Chattanooga, TN) placed behind the neck. This sensor monitors the slight flattening of the cervical curve that occurs with contraction of the craniocervical deep flexor musculature. It should be performed at least once a day during the treatment regimen. Also Postural correction exercises carried out regularly throughout the day, especially when seated. Indications are given to avoid pelvic retroversion and maintain a natural lumbar lordosis while performing retraction and adduction of the scapulae and gently lengthening the spine.

    Also known as: postural correction, motor control exercise

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Visual analogue scale. Base

    Measure of pain intensity. A mark is placed on a 10-centimetre line with the left end being no pain at all and the right end being the worst pain imaginable.

    Time frame: Baseline. Prior to the first treatment session

  2. Visual analogue scale. Post treatment

    Measure of pain intensity. A mark is placed on a 10-centimetre line with the left end being no pain at all and the right end being the worst pain imaginable.

    Time frame: Up to 4 weeks. After the end protocol of four treatment sessions

  3. Visual analogue scale. Follow up

    Measure of pain intensity. A mark is placed on a 10-centimetre line with the left end being no pain at all and the right end being the worst pain imaginable.

    Time frame: Follow-up two weeks after the end of the four-session treatment protocol

  4. Pressure pain threshold. Base

    Measurement of pain threshold to pressure with Fischer algometer. The algometer is placed perpendicular to the myofascial trigger point previously marked by the therapist. Once in place, the pressure is increased at a rate of 1 kilogram per second (kg per sec) until the patient begins to feel discomfort. At this point, the application is stopped. Three measurements are taken and the average is calculated.

    Time frame: Baseline. Prior to the first treatment session

  5. Pressure pain threshold. Post treatment

    Measurement of pain threshold to pressure with Fischer algometer. The algometer is placed perpendicular to the myofascial trigger point previously marked by the therapist. Once in place, the pressure is increased at a rate of 1 kilogram per second (kg per sec) until the patient begins to feel discomfort. At this point, the application is stopped. Three measurements are taken and the average is calculated.

    Time frame: Up to 4 weeks. After the end protocol of four treatment sessions

  6. Pressure pain threshold. Follow up

    Measurement of pain threshold to pressure with Fischer algometer. The algometer is placed perpendicular to the myofascial trigger point previously marked by the therapist. Once in place, the pressure is increased at a rate of 1 kilogram per second (kg per sec) until the patient begins to feel discomfort. At this point, the application is stopped. Three measurements are taken and the average is calculated.

    Time frame: Follow-up two weeks after the end of the four-session treatment protocol

  7. Cervical Disability Index. Base

    Results on the Northwick Park Cervical Spine Disability Questionnaire, translated and validated in Spanish. The pre-questionnaire consists of 9 questions related to pain intensity, sleep, weight bearing, leisure and social activities, work and driving. Each question has 5 possible answers ranging from 0 to 4, where 0 represents the absence of disability and 4 the maximum degree of disability. Similarly, the subsequent questionnaire consists of 10 questions and the same answers. Taking this into account, the maximum score that can be obtained would be 36 in the pre-questionnaire or 40 in the post-questionnaire (categorised as high disability).

    Time frame: Baseline. Prior to the first treatment session

  8. Cervical Disability Index. Post treatment

    Results on the Northwick Park Cervical Spine Disability Questionnaire, translated and validated in Spanish. The pre-questionnaire consists of 9 questions related to pain intensity, sleep, weight bearing, leisure and social activities, work and driving. Each question has 5 possible answers ranging from 0 to 4, where 0 represents the absence of disability and 4 the maximum degree of disability. Similarly, the subsequent questionnaire consists of 10 questions and the same answers. Taking this into account, the maximum score that can be obtained would be 36 in the pre-questionnaire or 40 in the post-questionnaire (categorised as high disability).

    Time frame: Up to 4 weeks. After the end protocol of four treatment sessions

  9. Cervical Disability Index. Follow up

    Results on the Northwick Park Cervical Spine Disability Questionnaire, translated and validated in Spanish. The pre-questionnaire consists of 9 questions related to pain intensity, sleep, weight bearing, leisure and social activities, work and driving. Each question has 5 possible answers ranging from 0 to 4, where 0 represents the absence of disability and 4 the maximum degree of disability. Similarly, the subsequent questionnaire consists of 10 questions and the same answers. Taking this into account, the maximum score that can be obtained would be 36 in the pre-questionnaire or 40 in the post-questionnaire (categorised as high disability).

    Time frame: Follow-up two weeks after the end of the four-session treatment protocol

  10. Pain catastrophising scale. Base

    It is the set of cognitive and emotional processes consisting of having negative thoughts about the future that predispose to the chronification of pain. Self-administered scale made up of 13 items, each item scored from 0 to 4. The total score range is from 0 to 52, where higher scores indicate a higher level of catastrophism. It is one of the most widely used to assess the pain catastrophising construct.

    Time frame: Baseline. Prior to the first treatment session.

  11. Pain catastrophising scale. Post treatment

    It is the set of cognitive and emotional processes consisting of having negative thoughts about the future that predispose to the chronification of pain. Self-administered scale made up of 13 items, each item scored from 0 to 4. The total score range is from 0 to 52, where higher scores indicate a higher level of catastrophism. It is one of the most widely used to assess the pain catastrophising construct.

    Time frame: Up to 4 weeks. After the end protocol of four treatment sessions

  12. Pain catastrophising scale. Follow up

    It is the set of cognitive and emotional processes consisting of having negative thoughts about the future that predispose to the chronification of pain. Self-administered scale made up of 13 items, each item scored from 0 to 4. The total score range is from 0 to 52, where higher scores indicate a higher level of catastrophism. It is one of the most widely used to assess the pain catastrophising construct.

    Time frame: Follow-up two weeks after the end of the four-session treatment protocol

  13. Tampa Kinesiophobia Scale (ETK-11). Base

    Translated into Spanish. It is one of the most frequently used measures to assess pain-related fear of movement in patients with chronic pain. The ETK-11 is an 11-item self-questionnaire in its Spanish version that measures fear of movement and pain. The total score of the ETK-11 is between 11 - 44 points and each item has a likert scale that scores from 1 to 4 (1 = strongly disagree, 4 = strongly agree). Higher scores indicate greater fear of movement and pain. The ETK-11 has two subscales: activity avoidance and harm avoidance.

    Time frame: Baseline. Prior to the first treatment session.

  14. Tampa Kinesiophobia Scale (ETK-11). Post treatment

    Translated into Spanish. It is one of the most frequently used measures to assess pain-related fear of movement in patients with chronic pain. The ETK-11 is an 11-item self-questionnaire in its Spanish version that measures fear of movement and pain. The total score of the ETK-11 is between 11 - 44 points and each item has a likert scale that scores from 1 to 4 (1 = strongly disagree, 4 = strongly agree). Higher scores indicate greater fear of movement and pain. The ETK-11 has two subscales: activity avoidance and harm avoidance.

    Time frame: Up to 4 weeks. After the end protocol of four treatment sessions

  15. Tampa Kinesiophobia Scale (ETK-11). Follow up

    Translated into Spanish. It is one of the most frequently used measures to assess pain-related fear of movement in patients with chronic pain. The ETK-11 is an 11-item self-questionnaire in its Spanish version that measures fear of movement and pain. The total score of the ETK-11 is between 11 - 44 points and each item has a likert scale that scores from 1 to 4 (1 = strongly disagree, 4 = strongly agree). Higher scores indicate greater fear of movement and pain. The ETK-11 has two subscales: activity avoidance and harm avoidance.

    Time frame: Follow-up two weeks after the end of the four-session treatment protocol

Secondary outcomes

  1. Swallow-wall distance. Base

    Patient in a sitting position, back against the wall, the distance in centimetres is measured using a tape measure or ruler between the swallow and the surface of the wall during the maximum effort to bring the head close to the wall. The chin should not be lifted higher than horizontal. The average of both sides gives the final result. A value greater than 15 centimetres is considered pathological.

    Time frame: Baseline. Prior to the first treatment session.

  2. Swallow-wall distance. Post treatment

    Patient in a sitting position, back against the wall, the distance in centimetres is measured using a tape measure or ruler between the swallow and the surface of the wall during the maximum effort to bring the head close to the wall. The chin should not be lifted higher than horizontal. The average of both sides gives the final result. A value greater than 15 centimetres is considered pathological.

    Time frame: Up to 4 weeks. After the end protocol of four treatment sessions

  3. Swallow-wall distance. Follow up

    Patient in a sitting position, back against the wall, the distance in centimetres is measured using a tape measure or ruler between the swallow and the surface of the wall during the maximum effort to bring the head close to the wall. The chin should not be lifted higher than horizontal. The average of both sides gives the final result. A value greater than 15 centimetres is considered pathological.

    Time frame: Follow-up two weeks after the end of the four-session treatment protocol

  4. Cervical flexion-extension. Base

    Using the "Goniometer pro" mobile app. The patient performs flexion and extension movements and the inclinometer of the mobile device records the degrees of movement. Three measurements are taken and the average is recorded.

    Time frame: Baseline. Prior to the first treatment session.

  5. Cervical flexion-extension. Post treatment

    Using the "Goniometer pro" mobile app. The patient performs flexion and extension movements and the inclinometer of the mobile device records the degrees of movement. Three measurements are taken and the average is recorded.

    Time frame: Up to 4 weeks. After the end protocol of four treatment sessions.

  6. Cervical flexion-extension. Follow up

    Using the "Goniometer pro" mobile app. The patient performs flexion and extension movements and the inclinometer of the mobile device records the degrees of movement. Three measurements are taken and the average is recorded.

    Time frame: Follow-up two weeks after the end of the four-session treatment protocol.

  7. Cervical rotation. Base

    Via mobile application "Goniometer pro". The patient performs a cervical rotation movement to the left and right side and the degrees of movement are recorded by recording the angular translation of the mobile device on the apex of the skull. Three measurements are taken and the mean is recorded.

    Time frame: BaselinePrior to the first treatment session.

  8. Cervical rotation. Post treatment

    Via mobile application "Goniometer pro". The patient performs a cervical rotation movement to the left and right side and the degrees of movement are recorded by recording the angular translation of the mobile device on the apex of the skull. Three measurements are taken and the mean is recorded.

    Time frame: Up to 4 weeks. After the end protocol of four treatment sessions.

  9. Cervical rotation. Follow up

    Via mobile application "Goniometer pro". The patient performs a cervical rotation movement to the left and right side and the degrees of movement are recorded by recording the angular translation of the mobile device on the apex of the skull. Three measurements are taken and the mean is recorded.

    Time frame: Follow-up two weeks after the end of the four-session treatment protocol.

  10. Side bending. Base

    Using the "Goniometer pro" mobile app. The patient performs a lateral tilt movement to the right and left side and the degrees of movement are recorded using the inclinometer on the mobile device. The device is placed vertically on the prominence of the spinous process of the 7th cervical vertebra following the tilt movement. Three measurements shall be taken and the mean shall be recorded.

    Time frame: Baseline. Prior to the first treatment session.

  11. Side bending. Post treatment

    Using the "Goniometer pro" mobile app. The patient performs a lateral tilt movement to the right and left side and the degrees of movement are recorded using the inclinometer on the mobile device. The device is placed vertically on the prominence of the spinous process of the 7th cervical vertebra following the tilt movement. Three measurements shall be taken and the mean shall be recorded.

    Time frame: Up to 4 weeks. After the end protocol of four treatment sessions.

  12. Side bending. Follow up

    Using the "Goniometer pro" mobile app. The patient performs a lateral tilt movement to the right and left side and the degrees of movement are recorded using the inclinometer on the mobile device. The device is placed vertically on the prominence of the spinous process of the 7th cervical vertebra following the tilt movement. Three measurements shall be taken and the mean shall be recorded.

    Time frame: Follow-up two weeks after the end of the four-session treatment protocol.

07

Study locations

1 of 1 sites recruiting
  • Fisioterapia Los Molinos
    Getafe, Madrid 28906, Spain
    • Iván Batuecas, Director · Contact · fisiopilateslosmolinos@gmail.com · +34644722649
    • Iván Batuecas, PhD · Principal investigator
    • Ángela Álvarez, Doctor · Sub investigator
    • Isidro Fernández, Doctor · Sub investigator
    Recruiting
08

References and documents

Publications

  • Munoz-Munoz S, Munoz-Garcia MT, Alburquerque-Sendin F, Arroyo-Morales M, Fernandez-de-las-Penas C. Myofascial trigger points, pain, disability, and sleep quality in individuals with mechanical neck pain. J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 2012 Oct;35(8):608-13. doi: 10.1016/j.jmpt.2012.09.003. PubMed 23158466 ↗
  • Cerezo-Tellez E, Torres-Lacomba M, Mayoral-Del Moral O, Sanchez-Sanchez B, Dommerholt J, Gutierrez-Ortega C. Prevalence of Myofascial Pain Syndrome in Chronic Non-Specific Neck Pain: A Population-Based Cross-Sectional Descriptive Study. Pain Med. 2016 Dec;17(12):2369-2377. doi: 10.1093/pm/pnw114. Epub 2016 Jun 20. PubMed 28025371 ↗
  • Chao YW, Lin JJ, Yang JL, Wang WT. Kinesio taping and manual pressure release: Short-term effects in subjects with myofasical trigger point. J Hand Ther. 2016 Jan-Mar;29(1):23-9. doi: 10.1016/j.jht.2015.10.003. Epub 2015 Nov 6. PubMed 26705672 ↗
  • Grieve R, Barnett S, Coghill N, Cramp F. The prevalence of latent myofascial trigger points and diagnostic criteria of the triceps surae and upper trapezius: a cross sectional study. Physiotherapy. 2013 Dec;99(4):278-84. doi: 10.1016/j.physio.2013.04.002. Epub 2013 Jul 2. PubMed 23830716 ↗
  • Oliveira-Campelo NM, de Melo CA, Alburquerque-Sendin F, Machado JP. Short- and medium-term effects of manual therapy on cervical active range of motion and pressure pain sensitivity in latent myofascial pain of the upper trapezius muscle: a randomized controlled trial. J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 2013 Jun;36(5):300-9. doi: 10.1016/j.jmpt.2013.04.008. Epub 2013 Jun 12. PubMed 23769263 ↗
  • Cagnie B, Castelein B, Pollie F, Steelant L, Verhoeyen H, Cools A. Evidence for the Use of Ischemic Compression and Dry Needling in the Management of Trigger Points of the Upper Trapezius in Patients with Neck Pain: A Systematic Review. Am J Phys Med Rehabil. 2015 Jul;94(7):573-83. doi: 10.1097/PHM.0000000000000266. PubMed 25768071 ↗
  • De Meulemeester KE, Castelein B, Coppieters I, Barbe T, Cools A, Cagnie B. Comparing Trigger Point Dry Needling and Manual Pressure Technique for the Management of Myofascial Neck/Shoulder Pain: A Randomized Clinical Trial. J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 2017 Jan;40(1):11-20. doi: 10.1016/j.jmpt.2016.10.008. PubMed 28017188 ↗
  • Pecos-Martin D, Ponce-Castro MJ, Jimenez-Rejano JJ, Nunez-Nagy S, Calvo-Lobo C, Gallego-Izquierdo T. Immediate effects of variable durations of pressure release technique on latent myofascial trigger points of the levator scapulae: a double-blinded randomised clinical trial. Acupunct Med. 2019 Jun;37(3):141-150. doi: 10.1136/acupmed-2018-011738. Epub 2019 May 7. PubMed 31060367 ↗
  • Fernandez-de-Las-Penas C, Dommerholt J. International Consensus on Diagnostic Criteria and Clinical Considerations of Myofascial Trigger Points: A Delphi Study. Pain Med. 2018 Jan 1;19(1):142-150. doi: 10.1093/pm/pnx207. PubMed 29025044 ↗
  • Tsiringakis G, Dimitriadis Z, Triantafylloy E, McLean S. Motor control training of deep neck flexors with pressure biofeedback improves pain and disability in patients with neck pain: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Musculoskelet Sci Pract. 2020 Dec;50:102220. doi: 10.1016/j.msksp.2020.102220. Epub 2020 Jul 24. PubMed 32827852 ↗
  • de Zoete RM, Armfield NR, McAuley JH, Chen K, Sterling M. Comparative effectiveness of physical exercise interventions for chronic non-specific neck pain: a systematic review with network meta-analysis of 40 randomised controlled trials. Br J Sports Med. 2020 Nov 2:bjsports-2020-102664. doi: 10.1136/bjsports-2020-102664. Online ahead of print. PubMed 33139256 ↗
  • Moher D, Hopewell S, Schulz KF, Montori V, Gotzsche PC, Devereaux PJ, Elbourne D, Egger M, Altman DG; CONSORT. CONSORT 2010 explanation and elaboration: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials. Int J Surg. 2012;10(1):28-55. doi: 10.1016/j.ijsu.2011.10.001. Epub 2011 Oct 12. PubMed 22036893 ↗
  • Hou CR, Tsai LC, Cheng KF, Chung KC, Hong CZ. Immediate effects of various physical therapeutic modalities on cervical myofascial pain and trigger-point sensitivity. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2002 Oct;83(10):1406-14. doi: 10.1053/apmr.2002.34834. PubMed 12370877 ↗
  • Jull GA, O'Leary SP, Falla DL. Clinical assessment of the deep cervical flexor muscles: the craniocervical flexion test. J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 2008 Sep;31(7):525-33. doi: 10.1016/j.jmpt.2008.08.003. PubMed 18804003 ↗
  • Rodriguez-Sanz J, Malo-Urries M, Corral-de-Toro J, Lopez-de-Celis C, Lucha-Lopez MO, Tricas-Moreno JM, Lorente AI, Hidalgo-Garcia C. Does the Addition of Manual Therapy Approach to a Cervical Exercise Program Improve Clinical Outcomes for Patients with Chronic Neck Pain in Short- and Mid-Term? A Randomized Controlled Trial. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020 Sep 10;17(18):6601. doi: 10.3390/ijerph17186601. PubMed 32927858 ↗
  • Tsang SMH, So BCL, Lau RWL, Dai J, Szeto GPY. Effects of combining ergonomic interventions and motor control exercises on muscle activity and kinematics in people with work-related neck-shoulder pain. Eur J Appl Physiol. 2018 Apr;118(4):751-765. doi: 10.1007/s00421-018-3802-6. Epub 2018 Jan 15. PubMed 29335773 ↗
  • Beer A, Treleaven J, Jull G. Can a functional postural exercise improve performance in the cranio-cervical flexion test?--a preliminary study. Man Ther. 2012 Jun;17(3):219-24. doi: 10.1016/j.math.2011.12.005. Epub 2012 Feb 4. PubMed 22310655 ↗
  • Boonstra AM, Schiphorst Preuper HR, Balk GA, Stewart RE. Cut-off points for mild, moderate, and severe pain on the visual analogue scale for pain in patients with chronic musculoskeletal pain. Pain. 2014 Dec;155(12):2545-2550. doi: 10.1016/j.pain.2014.09.014. Epub 2014 Sep 17. PubMed 25239073 ↗
  • Park G, Kim CW, Park SB, Kim MJ, Jang SH. Reliability and usefulness of the pressure pain threshold measurement in patients with myofascial pain. Ann Rehabil Med. 2011 Jun;35(3):412-7. doi: 10.5535/arm.2011.35.3.412. Epub 2011 Jun 30. PubMed 22506152 ↗
  • Gonzalez T, Balsa A, Sainz de Murieta J, Zamorano E, Gonzalez I, Martin-Mola E. Spanish version of the Northwick Park Neck Pain Questionnaire: reliability and validity. Clin Exp Rheumatol. 2001 Jan-Feb;19(1):41-6. PubMed 11247324 ↗
  • Garcia Campayo J, Rodero B, Alda M, Sobradiel N, Montero J, Moreno S. [Validation of the Spanish version of the Pain Catastrophizing Scale in fibromyalgia]. Med Clin (Barc). 2008 Oct 18;131(13):487-92. doi: 10.1157/13127277. Spanish. PubMed 19007576 ↗
  • Gomez-Perez L, Lopez-Martinez AE, Ruiz-Parraga GT. Psychometric Properties of the Spanish Version of the Tampa Scale for Kinesiophobia (TSK). J Pain. 2011 Apr;12(4):425-35. doi: 10.1016/j.jpain.2010.08.004. PubMed 20926355 ↗
  • Vohralik SL, Bowen AR, Burns J, Hiller CE, Nightingale EJ. Reliability and validity of a smartphone app to measure joint range. Am J Phys Med Rehabil. 2015 Apr;94(4):325-30. doi: 10.1097/PHM.0000000000000221. PubMed 25299533 ↗
  • Melian-Ortiz A, Varillas-Delgado D, Laguarta-Val S, Rodriguez-Aparicio I, Senent-Sansegundo N, Fernandez-Garcia M, Roger-de Ona I. [Reliability and concurrent validity of the app Goniometer Pro vs Universal Goniometer in the determination of passive knee flexion]. Acta Ortop Mex. 2019 Jan-Feb;33(1):18-23. Spanish. PubMed 31480121 ↗
  • Ghorbani F, Kamyab M, Azadinia F. Smartphone Applications as a Suitable Alternative to CROM Device and Inclinometers in Assessing the Cervical Range of Motion in Patients With Nonspecific Neck Pain. J Chiropr Med. 2020 Mar;19(1):38-48. doi: 10.1016/j.jcm.2019.10.004. Epub 2020 Sep 3. PubMed 33192190 ↗
  • Pourahmadi MR, Bagheri R, Taghipour M, Takamjani IE, Sarrafzadeh J, Mohseni-Bandpei MA. A new iPhone application for measuring active craniocervical range of motion in patients with non-specific neck pain: a reliability and validity study. Spine J. 2018 Mar;18(3):447-457. doi: 10.1016/j.spinee.2017.08.229. Epub 2017 Sep 7. PubMed 28890223 ↗

Individual participant data

Plan to share: Yes — The present study is carried out as a doctoral thesis of the principal investigator. Therefore, a scientific dissemination is foreseen in the Complutense University of Madrid as well as in the appropriate journals.

Supporting information: Study protocol, Sap, Icf, Csr, Analytic code

09

Updates

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on Sep 25, 2023, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
10

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT06051799
Lead sponsor
Universidad Complutense de Madrid
Responsible party
Iván Batuecas Sánchez (PhD student, Principal investigator, Universidad Complutense de Madrid) — Principal investigator
First posted
Sep 25, 2023
Start date
Sep 25, 2023 (estimated)
Primary completion
Jul 31, 2024 (estimated)
Completion
Sep 20, 2024 (estimated)
Last update
Sep 25, 2023

Study contacts

Iván Batuecas Sánchez, PhD
Contact
ivanbatu@ucm.es
+34699654655
Angela C Álvarez Melcón, Doctor
study director · Universidad Complutense de Madrid
Isidro Fernández López, Doctor
study director · Universidad Complutense de Madrid
María A Atín Arratibel, Doctor
study director · Universidad Complutense de Madrid
Iván Batuecas Sánchez, PhD
principal investigator · Universidad Complutense / Fisioterapia Los Molinos

Oversight

Data monitoring committee
No
FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
No
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Interested in this study?

Eligibility is decided by the study team. Share this record with your doctor or contact the team directly.

Contact study team

Follow this study

Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.

Sign in to follow

Discussion

Questions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.

Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.

Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.

Start the discussion