Intended for healthcare professionals

Papers

Effectiveness of dynamic muscle training, relaxation training, or ordinary activity for chronic neck pain: randomised controlled trial

BMJ 2003; 327 doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.327.7413.475 (Published 28 August 2003) Cite this as: BMJ 2003;327:475
  1. Matti Viljanen, specialist in rehabilitation medicine (matti.viljanen{at}ttl.fi)1,
  2. Antti Malmivaara, senior medical officer2,
  3. Jukka Uitti, chief physician1,
  4. Marjo Rinne, researcher3,
  5. Pirjo Palmroos, statistician1,
  6. Pekka Laippala, professor4
  1. 1Tampere Regional Institute of Occupational Health, PO Box 486, FIN-33101 Tampere, Finland
  2. 2Finnish Office for Health Care Technology Assessment, National Research and Development Centre for Welfare and Health, Helsinki, Finland
  3. 3Urho Kaleva Kekkonen Institute for Health Promotion Research, Tampere, Finland
  4. 4School of Public Health, University of Tampere and Research Unit, Tampere University Hospital, Tampere, Finland
  1. Correspondence to: M Viljanen
  • Accepted 3 June 2003

Abstract

Objective To determine the effectiveness of dynamic muscle training and relaxation training for chronic neck pain.

Design Randomised controlled trial.

Setting Five occupational healthcare centres, Tampere, Finland.

Participants 393 female office workers (mean age 45 years) with chronic non-specific neck pain randomly assigned to 12 weeks of dynamic muscle training (n = 135) or relaxation training (n = 128), plus one week of reinforcement training six months after baseline; or ordinary activity (control group; n = 130).

Main outcome measure Change in intensity of neck pain at three, six, and 12 months.

Results No significant difference was found in neck pain between the groups at follow up. However, the range of motion for cervical rotation and lateral flexion increased more in the training groups than in the control group.

Conclusions Dynamic muscle training and relaxation training do not lead to better improvements in neck pain compared with ordinary activity.

Footnotes

  • Contributors MV, AM, and JU were responsible for the conception and design of the study, the analysis and interpretation of the data, the drafting and critical revision of the manuscript, and obtaining funding. MR, PP, and PL were responsible for the design of the study and drafting and critically revising the manuscript. PP provided statistical analysis and interpretation of the data. PL supervised the analysis and interpretation of the data. MV, AM, JU, and PP will act as guarantors for the paper. Funding: This work was supported by a grant from the Finnish work environment fund (project No 96243). The guarantors accept full responsibility for the conduct of the study, had access to the data, and controlled the decision to publish.

  • Competing interests None declared.

  • Ethical approval This study was approved by the ethics committee of the Finnish Institute of Occupational Health.

View Full Text