Skip to main content

Table 2 Comparison between the groups (unadjusted means)

From: Immediate effects of cervicothoracic junction mobilization versus thoracic manipulation on the range of motion and pain in mechanical neck pain with cervicothoracic junction dysfunction: a pilot randomized controlled trial

OutcomeCT junction mobilization group (mean ± SD)Thoracic manipulation group (mean ± SD)Adjusted mean difference (95% CI) 
BaselinePost treatmentp valueBaselinePost treatmentp value p value
Flexion49.95 ± 8.5954.52 ± 9.13< 0.0152.80 ± 11.8855.28 ± 10.460.012.36 (− 0.9–5.6)0.15
Extension60.85 ± 13.1564.42 ± 13.460.0253.66 ± 10.5158.09 ± 8.20< 0.010.28 (− 3.2–3.8)0.87
L SF38.52 ± 9.2041.33 ± 9.990.0537.85 ± 9.1841.19 ± 8.78< 0.01- 2.21 (− 4.9–0.5)0.11
R SF40.14 ± 10.3841.66 ± 10.790.0142.09 ± 11.4242.09 ± 11.42< 0.01- 1.06 (− 4.2–2.1)0.50
L ROT61.80 ± 10.9164.42 ± 12.36< 0.0157.90 ± 12.1861.95 ± 14.100.021.42 (− 2.5–5.3)0.47
R ROT56.57 ± 10.0659.90 ± 10.130.0151.33 ± 15.8557.71 ± 14.63< 0.010.28 (− 3.4–3.9)0.87
NRS5.52 ± 1.474.33 ± 1.95< 0.016.52 ± 1.805.23 ± 1.54< 0.01− 0.12 (− 0.9–0.6)0.75
  1. (L-left, R-right, SF-side flexion, ROT-rotation, SD- standard deviation; NRS- Numerical Rating Scale; Mean differences- CT junction mobilization group – Thoracic manipulation group)