Abstract：
We aimed to compare the effectiveness and safety of Chuna manual therapy combined with usual care to those of usual care alone for treating whiplash injuries.
A two-arm, parallel, assessor-blinded, multicenter pragmatic randomized clinical trial.
Three hospitals in Korea.
Overall, 132 participants between 19 and 70 years of age, involved in traffic accidents and treated at three hospitals in Korea, >2 but <13 weeks prior to enrollment, with neck pain consistent with whiplash-associated disorder grades I and II and a numeric rating scale score ≥5 were included.
Participants were equally and randomly allocated to the Chuna manual therapy and usual care (n = 66) or usual care (n = 66) groups and underwent corresponding treatment for three weeks.
The primary outcome was the number of days to achieve a 50% pain reduction. Secondary outcomes included areas under the 50% numeric rating scale reduction curve: pain, disability, quality of life, and safety.
The Chuna manual therapy + usual care group (23.31 ± 21.36 days; p = 0.01) required significantly fewer days to achieve 50% pain reduction compared to the usual care group (50.41 ± 48.32 days; p = 0.01). Regarding pain severity, functional index, and quality of life index, Chuna manual therapy and usual care were more effective than usual care alone. Safety was acceptable in both groups.
In patients with subacute whiplash injury, Chuna manual therapy showed a rapid rate of recovery, high effectiveness, and safety.
A two-arm, parallel, assessor-blinded, multicenter pragmatic randomized clinical trial.
Three hospitals in Korea.
Overall, 132 participants between 19 and 70 years of age, involved in traffic accidents and treated at three hospitals in Korea, >2 but <13 weeks prior to enrollment, with neck pain consistent with whiplash-associated disorder grades I and II and a numeric rating scale score ≥5 were included.
Participants were equally and randomly allocated to the Chuna manual therapy and usual care (n = 66) or usual care (n = 66) groups and underwent corresponding treatment for three weeks.
The primary outcome was the number of days to achieve a 50% pain reduction. Secondary outcomes included areas under the 50% numeric rating scale reduction curve: pain, disability, quality of life, and safety.
The Chuna manual therapy + usual care group (23.31 ± 21.36 days; p = 0.01) required significantly fewer days to achieve 50% pain reduction compared to the usual care group (50.41 ± 48.32 days; p = 0.01). Regarding pain severity, functional index, and quality of life index, Chuna manual therapy and usual care were more effective than usual care alone. Safety was acceptable in both groups.
In patients with subacute whiplash injury, Chuna manual therapy showed a rapid rate of recovery, high effectiveness, and safety.
摘要：
我们旨在比较Chuna手动疗法结合常规护理与仅常规护理治疗鞭打伤的有效性和安全性。
双臂,平行,评估者盲化，多中心实用随机临床试验。
韩国有三家医院。
总的来说，132名年龄在19至70岁之间的参与者，参与交通事故，在韩国三家医院接受治疗，注册前>2但<13周，包括颈部疼痛与鞭打相关疾病的I级和II级以及数字评分≥5分的患者.
参与者被平均和随机分配到Chuna手动治疗和常规护理（n=66）或常规护理（n=66）组，并接受相应的治疗三周。
主要结果是达到50%疼痛减轻的天数。次要结局包括50%数字评分量表减少曲线下的面积：疼痛，残疾,生活质量,和安全。
与常规护理组（50.41±48.32天；p=0.01）相比，Chuna手动治疗+常规护理组（23.31±21.36天；p=0.01）需要明显更少的天数来实现50%的疼痛减轻。关于疼痛的严重程度，功能指数，和生活质量指数，Chuna手动治疗和常规护理比仅常规护理更有效。两组的安全性均可接受。
在亚急性鞭打损伤患者中，Chuna手动疗法显示了快速的恢复速度，高效,和安全。
双臂,平行,评估者盲化，多中心实用随机临床试验。
韩国有三家医院。
总的来说，132名年龄在19至70岁之间的参与者，参与交通事故，在韩国三家医院接受治疗，注册前>2但<13周，包括颈部疼痛与鞭打相关疾病的I级和II级以及数字评分≥5分的患者.
参与者被平均和随机分配到Chuna手动治疗和常规护理（n=66）或常规护理（n=66）组，并接受相应的治疗三周。
主要结果是达到50%疼痛减轻的天数。次要结局包括50%数字评分量表减少曲线下的面积：疼痛，残疾,生活质量,和安全。
与常规护理组（50.41±48.32天；p=0.01）相比，Chuna手动治疗+常规护理组（23.31±21.36天；p=0.01）需要明显更少的天数来实现50%的疼痛减轻。关于疼痛的严重程度，功能指数，和生活质量指数，Chuna手动治疗和常规护理比仅常规护理更有效。两组的安全性均可接受。
在亚急性鞭打损伤患者中，Chuna手动疗法显示了快速的恢复速度，高效,和安全。
