The purpose of this study was to apply the joint mobilization technique to the level of segments with pain and to the level of segments with hypomobility respectively and compare the immediate effects of the joint mobilization technique on the pain, the active cervical range of motion (ROM), and treatment satisfaction of patients with acute mechanical neck pain. After the baseline assessment, forty-two patients were randomized into two groups: a painful group (n1=21) that received joint mobilization at the most painful cervical spine level and a hypomobile group (n2=21) that received joint mobilization at the most hypomobile cervical level. The patients received an intervention that applied unilateral posterior-anterior gliding for 5 minutes and two repetitions of 10 times of active extension motion with distraction. In the Wilcoxon signed-rank test, the painful group and the hypomobile group were improved significantly in all pain variables (p<.001), while the painful group was improved significantly in the active cervical flexion (p<.001), extension (p<.001), left side-bending (p<.01), right side-bending (p=.001), left rotation (p<.001), and right rotation (p<.001). The hypomobile group was significantly improved in active cervical flexion (p=.001), extension (p<.001), left side-bending (p<.05), right side-bending (p=.001), left rotation (p=.001), and right rotation (p<.01) after intervention. In the Mann-Whitney U test, there was no significant difference in any of the dependent variables after the intervention between the two groups, but the painful group was slightly superior to the hypomobile group in all variables except for the right lateral flexion ROM and treatment satisfaction. These outcomes suggest that the cervical joint mobilization may be applied to either the level of painful segments or the hypomobile segments for the treatment of patients with acute mechanical neck pain.

The purpose of this study was to identify the effects of mechanical traction applied to the knee joint on pain, knee range of motion (ROM), timed up and go (TUG) and Western Ontario and MacMaster Universities Osteoarthritis (WOMAC) in patients with knee osteoarthritis (KOA) of Kellgren-Lawrence radiological rating scale Ⅱ or Ⅲ. Twenty three patients participated in the experiment for a period of four weeks. After baseline assessment, the patients with KOA were randomized into two groups: the traction group (n1=12), which received traction with general physical therapy; and the control group (n2=11), which received general physical therapy only on unilateral knee joints. Patients received interventions once a day, three times a week, for four weeks. Wilcoxon signed-rank test was used to analyze the change of dependent variances within the group during pre and post intervention. Mann-Whitney U test was used to analyze the change of dependent variances as TUG and passive ROM between the two groups. Analysis of covariance was used to analyze the change of dependent variances as numeric pain rating scale (NPRS) and WOMAC score between the two groups. In Wilcoxon signed-rank test, the traction group improved significantly with regard to NPRS (p<.01), passive knee flexion ROM (p<.01), passive knee extension (p<.05), TUG (p<.01) and WOMAC scores (p<.01) after intervention for four weeks, but not for the control group. In the Mann-Whitney U test and analysis of covariance, no significant difference was seen among all the dependent variances after intervention for four weeks between the two groups. These outcomes suggest that further studies should be carried out to determine the effects of mechanical traction prior to using it for the treatment of patients with knee osteoarthritis.