English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

We read the article by Dusunceli et al. (1) about the efficacy of neck stabilization exercises for neck pain with interest. The authors present a well-designed study with interesting findings, which concludes that neck stabilization exercises in conjunction with physical therapy agents are superior to isometric and stretching exercises in conjunction with physical therapy agents and to physical therapy agents alone. However, we have some difficulty in interpreting their findings. First, the authors did not specify how the participants were recruited. We consider this information essential in order to assess the applicability of the results from this study to patients with neck pain in general. Participants recruited from, for instance, primary care may differ from those recruited from specialized clinics, regarding severity or duration of complaints. Furthermore, it is unclear how patients with neck pain were informed about the existence of the study. We assume that an advertisement in a newspaper attracts a different kind of patients from a referral by a general practitioner. Again, in order to assess the external validity of the study results, this information is necessary. Secondly, we have some questions about the statistical analysis. In the results section, the authors reported that a significant difference in visual analogue scale (VAS) pain scores among the groups was found at 9 and 12 months follow-up. However, the p-values in Table II in our judgement represent merely the comparison of VAS pain score at follow-up with VAS pain score at baseline. As a result, no conclusions about the significance of the difference between the groups and the efficacy of the treatments can be drawn. We would be interested in the authors’ thoughts on these comments.

Comments on”Efficacy of neck stabilization exercises for neck pain” and Response to Letter to the Editor by van Es et al.