Chronic neck pain is a prevalent and debilitating condition affecting a substantial
portion of the global population (1). Among the various therapeutic interventions,
suboccipital distraction and manual traction emerge as two distinctive approaches, each
holding promise in alleviating upper cervical pain, improving range of motion, and
enhancing functional disability (2). The upper cervical region, comprising the atlas and
axis vertebrae, plays a crucial role in supporting the head's weight and facilitating
complex movements (3). Dysfunction in this area can lead to persistent pain and
restricted mobility, warranting effective interventions for improved patient outcomes.
This study aims to delve into the comparative effectiveness of suboccipital distraction
versus manual traction, exploring their impact on upper cervical pain, range of motion,
and functional disability in individuals suffering from chronic neck pain. Chronic neck
pain is a multifaceted issue, often stemming from a combination of structural,
biomechanical, and psychosocial factors (4). The upper cervical spine is particularly
susceptible to dysfunction due to its intricate anatomy and constant engagement in
supporting the head's movements. Suboccipital distraction, involving the gentle
separation of the atlas and axis vertebrae, has gained attention as a therapeutic
technique that targets specific structures in the upper cervical region. On the other
hand, manual traction, characterized by the application of force to elongate the cervical
spine, is another widely used intervention. Despite the prevalence of these approaches,
there is a paucity of research directly comparing their efficacy in the context of
chronic neck pain. Understanding the nuanced effects of suboccipital distraction and
manual traction is crucial for optimizing treatment strategies and tailoring
interventions to individual patient needs. Chronic neck pain is a multifaceted issue that
affects a significant portion of the global population, with variations in prevalence
across different regions. Studies conducted in Asia have reported a considerable number
of individuals suffering from chronic neck pain. For instance, a survey in Japan found
that approximately 23% of the population experienced persistent neck pain (5). In Europe,
studies indicate varying prevalence rates, with a cross-European investigation estimating
the prevalence to be around 15% (6). The situation in North America is also noteworthy,
with a study conducted in the United States revealing that about 20% of the adult
population reported chronic neck pain lasting more than three months (7). These regional
disparities highlight the need for comprehensive research that considers diverse
populations. Understanding the prevalence of chronic neck pain in different continents is
crucial for contextualizing the importance of interventions such as suboccipital
distraction and manual traction. Rationale for this study lies in the need for
evidence-based guidance in selecting the most effective intervention for chronic neck
pain, especially focusing on the upper cervical region. By comparing the outcomes of
suboccipital distraction and manual traction, this research aims to contribute valuable
insights into their respective impacts on pain reduction, range of motion improvement,
and functional disability alleviation. Such knowledge is essential for clinicians seeking
to provide personalized and efficient care to patients grappling with chronic neck pain.
Moreover, the comparative effectiveness of these interventions can inform future
treatment protocols, guiding healthcare professionals in making informed decisions based
on empirical evidence. As the burden of chronic neck pain continues to rise globally,
optimizing therapeutic approaches becomes imperative, and this study strives to bridge
existing gaps in knowledge, paving the way for more effective and targeted interventions.
The significance of this study is underscored by the potential implications for clinical
practice and patient outcomes. With chronic neck pain being a widespread and often
persistent condition, identifying the most effective intervention can substantially
improve the quality of life for affected individuals. Suboccipital distraction and manual
traction represent distinct therapeutic modalities, and a direct comparison will offer
valuable insights into their relative efficacy.