Efficacy of physiotherapy interventions for the management of adults with cervicogenic headache: A systematic review and <scp>meta‐analyses</scp>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To update and appraise the efficacy of physiotherapy for adults with cervicogenic headache. LITERATURE SURVEY: Bibliographic searches were conducted up to October 2021 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs), assessing the efficacy of physiotherapy interventions for adults with cervicogenic headache, in five databases: CINAHL, Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro), PubMed, Sage Journals, and Wiley Online Library. METHODOLOGY: Data extraction of included trials was conducted by two reviewers according to a standardized extraction form. The PEDro tool and the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) approach were used for grading evidence. Results from trials with similar interventions and with similar outcome measures were pooled into separate meta-analyses. A qualitative synthesis was performed for studies that were not pooled into meta-analyses. SYNTHESIS: Fourteen trials were included. Moderate-certainty evidence indicates that manual therapy significantly reduces headache frequency (mean difference [MD]: -0.93 episodes/week; 95% confidence interval [CI]: -1.40 to -0.46; 2 RCTs; n = 265) compared to sham manual therapy, and headache frequency (MD: -1.23 episodes/week; 95% CI: -1.55 to -0.91; 3 RCTs; n = 126) and intensity (MD: -1.63/10; 95% CI: -2.15 to -1.10; 4 RCTs; n = 208) compared to no treatment in the short term. At 12-month follow-up, moderate-certainty evidence indicates that manual therapy did not lead to greater reduction in headache intensity (MD Visual Analog Scale 0-10: -0.12; 95% CI: -0.49 to 0.26; 2 RCTs; n = 265) or frequency (MD: -0.32 episodes/week; 95% CI: -0.91 to 0.28; 2 RCTs; n = 265) when compared to a sham manual therapy. In the long-term, in one high quality trial, neck exercise significantly reduced headache intensity compared to no treatment (MD: -1.51/10; 95% CI: -2.52 to -0.50; n = 100) or to aerobic exercises in another trial of moderate quality (MD: -1.15/10; 95% CI: -2.1 to -0.20; n = 180). CONCLUSIONS: Manual therapy in the short term and neck exercise in the long term may be efficacious to treat adults with cervicogenic headache. More high-quality evidence is needed and future results may change the current conclusions. Trial Registration Prospero: #CRD42019135858.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".