Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Current Issue
  • Content
    • Current Issue
    • Early Access
    • Multimedia
    • Podcast
    • Collections
    • Past Issues
    • Articles by Subject
    • Articles by Type
    • Supplements
    • Plain Language Summaries
    • Calls for Papers
  • Info for
    • Authors
    • Reviewers
    • Job Seekers
    • Media
  • About
    • Annals of Family Medicine
    • Editorial Staff & Boards
    • Sponsoring Organizations
    • Copyrights & Permissions
    • Announcements
  • Engage
    • Engage
    • e-Letters (Comments)
    • Subscribe
    • Podcast
    • E-mail Alerts
    • Journal Club
    • RSS
    • Annals Forum (Archive)
  • Contact
    • Contact Us
  • Careers

User menu

  • My alerts

Search

  • Advanced search
Annals of Family Medicine
  • My alerts
Annals of Family Medicine

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Current Issue
  • Content
    • Current Issue
    • Early Access
    • Multimedia
    • Podcast
    • Collections
    • Past Issues
    • Articles by Subject
    • Articles by Type
    • Supplements
    • Plain Language Summaries
    • Calls for Papers
  • Info for
    • Authors
    • Reviewers
    • Job Seekers
    • Media
  • About
    • Annals of Family Medicine
    • Editorial Staff & Boards
    • Sponsoring Organizations
    • Copyrights & Permissions
    • Announcements
  • Engage
    • Engage
    • e-Letters (Comments)
    • Subscribe
    • Podcast
    • E-mail Alerts
    • Journal Club
    • RSS
    • Annals Forum (Archive)
  • Contact
    • Contact Us
  • Careers
  • Follow annalsfm on Twitter
  • Visit annalsfm on Facebook
Research ArticleOriginal Research

Five-Week Outcomes From a Dosing Trial of Therapeutic Massage for Chronic Neck Pain

Karen J. Sherman, Andrea J. Cook, Robert D. Wellman, Rene J. Hawkes, Janet R. Kahn, Richard A. Deyo and Daniel C. Cherkin
The Annals of Family Medicine March 2014, 12 (2) 112-120; DOI: https://doi.org/10.1370/afm.1602
Karen J. Sherman
1Group Health Research Institute, Seattle, Washington
2Department of Epidemiology, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington
PhD, MPH
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: sherman.k@ghc.org
Andrea J. Cook
1Group Health Research Institute, Seattle, Washington
3Department of Biostatistics, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington
PhD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Robert D. Wellman
1Group Health Research Institute, Seattle, Washington
MS
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Rene J. Hawkes
1Group Health Research Institute, Seattle, Washington
BS
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Janet R. Kahn
4Department of Psychiatry, University of Vermont College of Medicine, Burlington, Vermont
PhD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Richard A. Deyo
5Department of Family Medicine, Oregon Health and Science University, Portland, Oregon
MD, MPH
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Daniel C. Cherkin
1Group Health Research Institute, Seattle, Washington
6Departments of Family Medicine and Health Services, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington
PhD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • eLetters
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Article Figures & Data

Figures

  • Tables
  • Additional Files
  • Figure 1
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 1

    Trial flow.

    a Most common reasons for ineligibility: 237 (32.6%) insufficient neck pain; 176 (24.6%) neck pain too complex; 74 (10.2%) prior massage; 140 (19.2%) could not attend treatment clinics.

Tables

  • Figures
  • Additional Files
    • View popup
    Table 1

    Baseline Demographics and Measures Related to Neck Pain

    VariableControl
    (n = 37)
    1 × 60
    Min/wk
    (n = 38)
    2 × 30
    Min/wk
    (n = 38)
    2 × 60
    Min/wk
    (n = 39)
    3 × 30
    Min/wk
    (n = 37)
    3 × 60
    Min/wk
    (n = 39)
    Demographics
    Age, mean (SD), y44.4 (12.2)50.2 (10.9)42.3 (11.3)48.7 (11.5)45.7 (11.5)49.0 (9.9)
    Women, No. (%)26 (70.3)30 (78.9)28 (73.7)28 (71.8)25 (67.6)27 (69.2)
    College graduate, No. (%)27 (73.0)22 (57.9)26 (68.4)25 (64.1)27 (73)28 (78.1)
    White non-Hispanic, No. (%)30 (81.1)30 (78.9)27 (71.1)32 (84.2)20 (54.1)29 (76.3)
    Married, No. (%)22 (59.5)22 (57.9)27 (71.1)23 (59.0)26 (70.3)24 (61.5)
    Family income >$45,000/y, No. (%)27 (73.0)25 (65.8)21 (55.3)29 (74.4)27 (73.0)23 (59.0)
    Unemployed, No. (%)6 (16.2)9 (23.7)6 (15.8)8 (20.5)8 (21.6)7 (17.9)
    Work that requires lifting and carrying, No. (%)8 (21.6)7 (18.4)13 (34.2)8 (20.5)7 (18.9)10 (25.6)
    Measures of neck pain impact
    Neck Disability Index, mean (SD)13.4 (4.8)14 (4.6)13.4 (3.8)13.7 (5.1)13.1 (5.6)14.3 (5.5)
    Neck pain intensity, mean (SD)5.6 (1.3)5.9 (1.5)5.8 (1.4)5.6 (1.1)6.1 (1.5)5.7 (1.2)
    Duration of neck pain >5 y, No. (%)11 (29.7)15 (39.5)19 (50.0)16 (41.0)12 (32.4)17 (43.6)
    >7 Days usual activity restricted due to neck pain in the past 3 mo, No. (%)9 (24.3)6 (15.8)4 (10.5)8 (20.5)6 (16.2)11 (28.2)
    >3 Days of neck exercise in past week, No. (%)13 (35.0)14 (36.8)8 (21.1)14 (35.9)11 (29.7)15 (38.5)
    Any medications for neck pain in past week, No. (%)21 (56.8)22 (57.9)23 (60.5)25 (64.1)18 (48.7)28 (71.8)
    NSAID use for neck pain, No. (%)19 (51.4)15 (39.5)17 (44.7)20 (51.3)11 (29.7)15 (38.5)
    Opioid use for neck pain, No. (%)1 (2.7)0 (0.0)0 (0.0)0 (0.0)0 (0.0)0 (0.0)
    Measures of quality of life
    SF-36 General health very good or excellent, No. (%)25 (67.6)25 (65.8)22.0 (57.9)26 (66.7)23 (62.2)29 (74.4)
    SF-36 Mental health,a mean (SD)75.8 (15.2)76.3 (16.0)78.4 (14.3)77.1 (16.8)78.3 (11.7)78.9 (13.1)
    SF-36 Physical health, mean (SD)80.2 (13.7)76.6 (19.6)81.1 (15.4)73.8 (17.8)79.6 (20.2)78.5 (16.4)
    Miscellaneous measures
    Worry, mean (SD)4.6 (1.9)4.3 (2.6)3.6 (2.6)4.1 (2.2)4.2 (2.4)4 (2.4)
    Perceived Stress Scale, mean (SD)16.9 (6.9)15.9 (7.2)16.1 (5.6)17 (6.5)17.1 (4.9)15.8 (6.9)
    Very satisfied with overall care for neck pain No. (%)1 (4.0)2 (7.4)1 (3.2)5 (17.9)1 (3.0)2 (6.1)
    Expectation of massage helpfulness, mean (SD)7.7 (1.4)7.4 (2.3)7.4 (1.9)7.4 (1.8)7.2 (2.0)7.7 (2.3)
    Expect neck pain to be much better or completely gone in 1 year, No. (%)13 (35.1)11 (28.9)10 (26.3)13 (33.3)12 (33.3)11 (28.2)
    Top treatment choice was massage, No. (%)26 (76.5)25 (69.4)17 (48.6)22 (62.9)24 (68.6)25 (67.6)
    Had prior massage for back or neck pain, No. (%)25 (67.6)28 (73.7)21 (55.3)22 (56.4)20 (54.1)25 (64.1)
    Neck-related disability days
    >7 Days in past 4 weeks that normal activities were cut by half a day or more because of neck pain, No. (%)5 (13.5)4 (10.5)1 (2.6)2 (5.1)4 (10.8)6 (15.4)
    ≥1 Day in the past 4 weeks that neck pain kept you in bed or lying down for all or most of the day, No. (%)3 (8.1)4 (10.5)2 (5.3)0 (0.0)5 (13.5)2 (5.1)
    ≥1 Day in past 4 weeks that neck pain kept you out of work or school, No. (%)2 (5.7)3 (8.6)1 (2.7)2 (5.4)1 (2.9)3 (8.1)
    • NSAID = nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug; SF-36 = 36-Item Short Form Health Survey.

    • Notes: NDI is a 0 to 50 scale; higher scores indicate worse function. Neck pain intensity is a 0 to 10 scale; higher scores indicate more pain. SF-36 scales are all scaled to a 0 to 100 scale; higher scores indicate better function. Perceived Stress Scale is a 0 to 40 scale; higher scores indicate more stress. Worry and expectations are both 0 to 10 scales; higher scores indicate more worry or higher expectations, respectively.

    • ↵a On the 5-item Mental Health Inventory.

    • View popup
    Table 2

    Primary Outcomes: Clinically Relevant Improvements in Neck Pain Measures

    Outcome by Massage DoseUnadjustedAdjusteda
    % (95% CI)RR (95% CI)P ValueOverall P ValueRR (95% CI)P ValueOverall P Value
    Clinically relevant improvement in NDIb
     Control8.6 (2.9–25.3)1.00–.0011.00–.003
     1 × 60 min/wk18.4 (9.4–36.0)2.15 (0.60–7.67).241.96 (0.53–7.33).32
     2 × 30 min/wk15.8 (7.6–32.9)1.84 (0.50–6.81).361.90 (0.53–6.86).33
     2 × 60 min/wk31.6 (19.8–50.4)3.68 (1.13–11.98).033.41 (1.05–11.08).04
     3 × 30 min/wk11.8 (4.7–29.5)1.37 (0.33–5.68).661.61 (0.40–6.46).50
     3 × 60 min/wk47.4 (33.9–66.2)5.53 (1.78–17.15).0034.98 (1.64–15.17).005
    Clinically relevant improvement in neck pain intensityc
     Control25.7 (14.6–45.2)1.00–<.0011.00–<.001
     1 × 60 min/wk34.2 (22.0–53.2)1.33 (0.65–2.72).431.17 (0.58–2.37).66
     2 × 30 min/wk42.1 (29.0–61.1)1.64 (0.83–3.22).151.61 (0.83–3.13).16
     2 × 60 min/wk63.2 (49.5–80.5)2.46 (1.33–4.54).0042.30 (1.26–4.18).007
     3 × 30 min/wk44.1 (30.2–64.4)1.72 (0.87–3.38).121.61 (0.81–3.18).17
     3 × 60 min/wk76.3 (63.9–91.1)2.97 (1.64–5.36).0002.73 (1.52–4.91).001
    • RR = relative risk.

    • ↵a Adjusted for baseline Neck Disability Index and neck pain intensity, age, sex, duration of neck pain more than 5 years, use of medications for neck pain, and race/ethnicity (white non-Hispanic vs other).

    • ↵b Improvement of at least 5 points from baseline at 5 weeks postrandomization.

    • ↵c Improvement of at least 30% from baseline at 5 weeks postrandomization.

    • View popup
    Table 3

    Secondary Outcomes: Mean Improvements in Neck Pain Measures

    Outcome by Massage DoseUnadjustedAdjusteda
    Mean Change
    (95% CI)
    Mean Difference
    (95% CI)
    P ValueOverall P ValueMean Difference
    (95% CI)
    P ValueOverall P Value
    Neck Disability Index
     Control1.45 (−0.20 to 3.10)Ref–<.001Ref–<.001
     1 × 60 min/wk−0.86 (−2.09 to 0.36)−2.31 (−4.37 to −0.26).03−2.31 (−4.29 to −0.32).02
     2 × 30 min/wk−0.89 (−2.33 to 0.54)−2.34 (−4.53 to −0.16).04−2.35 (−4.51 to −0.18).03
     2 × 60 min/wk−2.06 (−3.51 to −0.62)−3.52 (−5.71 to −1.32).002−3.44 (−5.53 to −1.35).001
     3 × 30 min/wk0.05 (−1.26 to 1.35)−1.41 (−3.51 to 0.70).19−1.73 (−3.78 to 0.33).10
     3 × 60 min/wk−4.36 (−6.25 to −2.47)−5.81 (−8.32 to −3.30)<.001−5.63 (−7.94 to −3.32)<.001
    Neck pain intensity
     Control−0.51 (−1.35 to 0.32)Ref–<.001Ref–<.001
     1 × 60 min/wk−1.21 (−1.84 to −0.58)−0.70 (−1.74 to 0.35).19−0.43 (−1.36 to 0.50).37
     2 × 30 min/wk−1.66 (−2.29 to −1.03)−1.14 (−2.19 to −0.10).03−1.02 (−1.93 to −0.12).03
     2 × 60 min/wk−2.21 (−2.81 to −1.61)−1.70 (−2.72 to −0.67).001−1.56 (−2.46 to −0.66).001
     3 × 30 min/wk−1.62 (−2.19 to −1.05)−1.10 (−2.12 to 0.09).03−0.83 (−1.73 to 0.07).07
     3 × 60 min/wk−2.74 (−3.22 to −2.25)−2.22 (−3.19 to −1.26)<.001−2.07 (−2.94 to −1.20)<.001
    • Ref = reference group.

    • ↵a Adjusted for baseline Neck Disability Index and neck pain intensity, age, sex, duration of neck pain of more than 5 years, use of medications for neck pain, and race/ethnicity (white non-Hispanic vs other).

    • View popup
    Table 4

    Adjusted Secondary Outcomes at 5 Weeks Postrandomization

    OutcomeControl
    (n = 37)
    1 × 60
    Min/wk
    (n = 38)
    2 × 30
    Min/wk
    (n = 38)
    2 × 60
    Min/wk
    (n = 39)
    3 × 30
    Min/wk
    (n = 37)
    3 × 60
    Min/wk
    (n = 39)
    Overall P
    >7 Days in past 4 weeks that normal activities were cut by half a day or more because of neck pain, % (95% CI)8.9
    (4.0 to 19.8)
    5.1
    (2.3 to 11.8)
    1.9
    (0.3 to 12.2)
    2.8
    (0.8 to 9.2)
    4.7
    (1.6 to 13.7)
    7.9
    (3.3 to 18.9)
    .35
    ≥1 Day in the past 4 weeks that neck pain kept you in bed or lying down for all or most of the day, % (95% CI)6.5
    (2.0 to 21.2)
    6.9
    (2.9 to 16.7)
    4.3
    (0.9 to 20.3)
    0.0a
    (n/a)
    8.5
    (3.8 to 18.7)
    3.5
    (1.0 to 12.8)
    .67
    ≥1 Day in the past 4 weeks that neck pain kept you out of work or school, % (95% CI)4.6
    (1.1 to 19.8)
    6.8
    (2.4 to 19.1)
    2.2
    (0.4 to 14.1)
    3.6
    (0.9 to 14.7)
    1.8
    (0.4 to 7.8)
    4.9
    (1.2 to 19.8)
    .73
    Perceived Stress Scale, mean (95% CI)−0.42
    (−2.4 to 1.6)
    −1.1
    (−2.3 to 0.1)
    −1.6
    (−3.3 to 0.2)
    −1.5
    (−3.1 to 0.0)
    −3.7
    (−5.5 to −1.9)
    −1.5
    (−3.2 to 0.3)
    .21
    Compared with when you began the study, neck pain is much better or completely gone, % (95% CI)2.5
    (0.4 to 14.8)
    7.1
    (2.2 to 18.2)
    9.3
    (3.6 to 23.9)
    18.9
    (10.0 to 35.8)
    20.4
    (10.2 to 40.6)
    40.6
    (27.8 to 59.5)
    <.001
    Very satisfied with care for neck pain, % (95% CI)22.2
    (11.2 to 44.0)
    40.0
    (27.6 to 57.8)
    40.6
    (27.8 to 59.2)
    54.6
    (41.1 to 72.5)
    25.9
    (16.3 to 44.3)
    47. 0
    (33.2 to 66.5)
    .06
    • n/a = not applicable.

    • Note: All variables are adjusted for baseline Neck Disability Index and neck pain intensity. The outcomes Perceived Stress Scale, neck pain is much better/completely gone, and satisfaction with care for neck pain additionally adjusted for age, sex, duration of neck pain more than 5 years, use of medications for neck pain, and race (white non-Hispanic vs other). The Perceived Stress Scale was further adjusted for baseline score for this scale.

    • ↵a No participant in this group was kept in bed for most of the day because of neck pain.

Additional Files

  • Figures
  • Tables
  • The Article in Brief

    Five-Week Outcomes From a Dosing Trial of Therapeutic Massage for Chronic Neck Pain

    Karen J. Sherman , and colleagues

    Background Neck pain is a common and debilitating condition, and massage therapy is commonly used to treat it. This study evaluates the optimal dose of massage for persons with chronic neck pain.

    What This Study Found Two hundred twenty-eight patients with chronic neck pain were randomized to 5 groups receiving various doses of massage for a 5-week period. The study found that the benefits of massage treatments for chronic neck pain increase with dose. Specifically, patients who received 30-minute treatments 2 or 3 times weekly were not significantly better than a wait-listed control group in terms of achieving a clinically meaningful improvement in neck dysfunction or pain. In contrast, patients who received 60-minute treatments 2 or 3 times weekly showed significant improvement in neck dysfunction and pain intensity compared to the control group. Compared with their control counterparts, massage participants were 3 times more likely to have clinically meaningful improvement in neck function if they received 60 minutes of massage twice a week and 5 times more likely if they received 60 minutes of massage 3 times a week.

    Implications

    • Patients who receive massage treatment for chronic neck pain may not be realizing benefits from treatment because they are not receiving an effective treatment dose.
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

The Annals of Family Medicine: 12 (2)
The Annals of Family Medicine: 12 (2)
Vol. 12, Issue 2
March/April 2014
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author
  • Back Matter (PDF)
  • Front Matter (PDF)
  • In Brief
Print
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on Annals of Family Medicine.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Five-Week Outcomes From a Dosing Trial of Therapeutic Massage for Chronic Neck Pain
(Your Name) has sent you a message from Annals of Family Medicine
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the Annals of Family Medicine web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
3 + 1 =
Solve this simple math problem and enter the result. E.g. for 1+3, enter 4.
Citation Tools
Five-Week Outcomes From a Dosing Trial of Therapeutic Massage for Chronic Neck Pain
Karen J. Sherman, Andrea J. Cook, Robert D. Wellman, Rene J. Hawkes, Janet R. Kahn, Richard A. Deyo, Daniel C. Cherkin
The Annals of Family Medicine Mar 2014, 12 (2) 112-120; DOI: 10.1370/afm.1602

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Get Permissions
Share
Five-Week Outcomes From a Dosing Trial of Therapeutic Massage for Chronic Neck Pain
Karen J. Sherman, Andrea J. Cook, Robert D. Wellman, Rene J. Hawkes, Janet R. Kahn, Richard A. Deyo, Daniel C. Cherkin
The Annals of Family Medicine Mar 2014, 12 (2) 112-120; DOI: 10.1370/afm.1602
Twitter logo Facebook logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • INTRODUCTION
    • METHODS
    • RESULTS
    • DISCUSSION
    • Acknowledgments
    • Footnotes
    • References
  • Figures & Data
  • eLetters
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

Related Articles

  • PubMed
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • In This Issue: Building Blocks for Improving Practice
  • Google Scholar

More in this TOC Section

  • Teamwork Among Primary Care Staff to Achieve Regular Follow-Up of Chronic Patients
  • Shared Decision Making Among Racially and/or Ethnically Diverse Populations in Primary Care: A Scoping Review of Barriers and Facilitators
  • Convenience or Continuity: When Are Patients Willing to Wait to See Their Own Doctor?
Show more Original Research

Similar Articles

Subjects

  • Domains of illness & health:
    • Chronic illness
  • Methods:
    • Quantitative methods

Keywords

  • chronic neck pain
  • pain management
  • disability
  • massage
  • clinical trial
  • complementary and alternative medicine
  • holistic medicine

Content

  • Current Issue
  • Past Issues
  • Early Access
  • Plain-Language Summaries
  • Multimedia
  • Podcast
  • Articles by Type
  • Articles by Subject
  • Supplements
  • Calls for Papers

Info for

  • Authors
  • Reviewers
  • Job Seekers
  • Media

Engage

  • E-mail Alerts
  • e-Letters (Comments)
  • RSS
  • Journal Club
  • Submit a Manuscript
  • Subscribe
  • Family Medicine Careers

About

  • About Us
  • Editorial Board & Staff
  • Sponsoring Organizations
  • Copyrights & Permissions
  • Contact Us
  • eLetter/Comments Policy

© 2025 Annals of Family Medicine