Comparative Efficacy of Mulligan’s SNAG Technique and Maitland Mobilisation on Pain and Cervical Range of Motion in College Students With Non-Specific Upper Cervical Neck Pain
Abstract
Background. Non-specific upper cervical neck pain is common among college students due to prolonged screen time, poor posture, and academic stress, impacting daily function and quality of life. Manual therapy techniques such as Mulligan’s Sustained Natural Apophyseal Glides (SNAG) and Maitland mobilisation are frequently used to alleviate symptoms and improve cervical range of motion (ROM).
Aim. To evaluate and compare the effects of Mulligan’s SNAG technique and Maitland mobilisation on pain and cervical range of motion in college students with upper cervical neck pain.
Methods. This experimental study involved 50 college students (aged 18–28 years) with non-specific upper cervical pain, randomly divided into two groups. Group A received Mulligan’s SNAG with moist heat, and Group B received Maitland mobilisation with moist heat. Interventions were administered on alternate days for three weeks (nine sessions). Pain and cervical ROM were assessed pre- and post-intervention using the Numerical Pain Rating Scale (NPRS) and a universal goniometer.
Results. Intragroup analysis showed significant reductions in pain (Group A: mean NPRS score 6.40 to 3.16; Group B: mean NPRS 6.68 to 3.08; p < 0.001) and improvements in right and left cervical rotation ROM (p < 0.001). However, intergroup analysis showed no significant differences post intervention in pain or ROM (p > 0.05).
Conclusion: Both Mulligan’s SNAG and Maitland mobilisation are equally effective in reducing pain and improving cervical ROM in college students with non-specific upper cervical pain.
Keywords: Mulligan’s Sustained Natural Apophyseal Glides; Maitland mobilisation; manual therapy; non-specific neck pain
References
Alansari, S. M., Youssef, E. F., & Shanb, A. A. (2021). Efficacy of manual therapy on psychological status and pain in patients with neck pain: A randomized clinical trial. Saudi Medical Journal, 42(1), 82–90. https://doi.org/10.15537/smj.2021.1.25589 DOI: https://doi.org/10.15537/smj.2021.1.25589
Aman, J. E., Elangovan, N., Yeh, I.-L., & Konczak, J. (2015). The effectiveness of proprioceptive training for improving motor function: A systematic review. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 8, 1075. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2014.01075 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2014.01075
Apti, A., Kuru Çolak, T., & Akçay, B. (2023). Normative values for cervical and lumbar range of motion in healthy young adults. Journal of Turkish Spinal Surgery, 34(3), 113–117. https://doi.org/10.4274/jtss.galenos.2023.33042 DOI: https://doi.org/10.4274/jtss.galenos.2023.33042
Barbosa‐Silva, J., Luc, A., Sobral de Oliveira‐Souza, A. I., Martins de Abreu, R., Cipriano, J., de Schaetzen, M., Pitance, L., & Armijo‐Olivo, S. (2025). The effectiveness of Mulligan’s techniques in non‐specific neck pain: A systematic review and meta‐analysis. Physiotherapy Research International, 30(3), e70045. https://doi.org/10.1002/pri.70045 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/pri.70045
Bezzina, A., Austin, E., Nguyen, H., & James, C. (2023). Workplace psychosocial factors and their association with musculoskeletal disorders: A systematic review of longitudinal studies. Workplace Health & Safety, 71(12), 578–588. https://doi.org/10.1177/21650799231193578 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/21650799231193578
Cabezas-Yagüe, E., Martínez-Pozas, O., Gozalo-Pascual, R., Blanco, E. M., Paños, R. L., Jiménez-Ortega, L., Cuenca-Záldivar, J. N., & Romero, E. A. S. (2024). Comparative effectiveness of Maitland Spinal Mobilization versus myofascial techniques on pain and symptom severity in women with Fibromyalgia syndrome: A quasi-randomized clinical trial with 3-month follow up. Musculoskeletal Science and Practice, 73, 103160. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.msksp.2024.103160 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.msksp.2024.103160
Calero Cáceres , M. E., Molina Andrade, V. L., Peñafiel Luna, A. C., & Fernández Soto, G. F. (2024). Encouraging sustainable health in work environments: Maitland technique for cervicogenic headaches. Ibero-American Journal of Education & Society Research, 4(S), 239–246. https://doi.org/10.56183/iberoeds.v4iS.698 DOI: https://doi.org/10.56183/iberoeds.v4iS.698
GBD 2021 Neck Pain Collaborators. (2024). Global, regional, and national burden of neck pain, 1990–2020, and projections to 2050: A systematic analysis of the Global Burden of Disease Study 2021. The Lancet Rheumatology, 6(3), e142–e155. https://doi.org/10.1016/s2665-9913(23)00321-1 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S2665-9913(23)00321-1
Li, L.-L., Hu, X.-J., Di, Y.-H., & Jiao, W. (2022). Effectiveness of Maitland and Mulligan mobilization methods for adults with knee osteoarthritis: A systematic review and meta-analysis. World Journal of Clinical Cases, 10(3), 954. https://doi.org/10.12998/wjcc.v10.i3.954 DOI: https://doi.org/10.12998/wjcc.v10.i3.954
Núñez‐Cabaleiro, P., & Leirós‐Rodríguez, R. (2022). Effectiveness of manual therapy in the treatment of cervicogenic headache: A systematic review. Headache: The Journal of Head and Face Pain, 62(3), 271–283. https://doi.org/10.1111/head.14278 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/head.14278
Paquin, J.-P., Tousignant-Laflamme, Y., & Dumas, J.-P. (2021). Effects of SNAG mobilization combined with a self-SNAG home-exercise for the treatment of cervicogenic headache: A pilot study. Journal of Manual & Manipulative Therapy, 29(4), 244–254. https://doi.org/10.1080/10669817.2020.1864960 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/10669817.2020.1864960
Raghav, S., Pushp, S., Meena, R. K., & Singh, A (2016). A comparative study on the effect of Mulligan’s technique (SNAG’s) versus deep transverse friction massage on patient with mechanical neck pain. Physiotherapy and Occupational Therapy Journal, 9(3), 109–114. http://dx.doi.org/10.21088/potj.0974.5777.9316.5 DOI: https://doi.org/10.21088/potj.0974.5777.9316.5
Ramieri, A., Costanzo, G., & Miscusi, M. (2022). Functional anatomy and biomechanics of the cervical spine. Cervical Spine: Minimally Invasive and Open Surgery, 11–31. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-94829-0_2 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-94829-0_2
Rao, R. V., Balthillaya, G., Prabhu, A., & Kamath, A. (2018). Immediate effects of Maitland mobilization versus Mulligan mobilization with movement in osteoarthritis knee: A randomized crossover trial. Journal of Bodywork and Movement Therapies, 22(3), 572–579. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbmt.2017.09.017 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbmt.2017.09.017
Shabbir, M., Arshad, N., Naz, A., & Saleem, N. (2021). Clinical outcomes of Maitland mobilization in patients with myofascial chronic neck pain: A randomized controlled trial. Pakistan Journal of Medical Sciences, 37(4), 1172. https://doi.org/10.12669/pjms.37.4.4220 DOI: https://doi.org/10.12669/pjms.37.4.4220
Thomas, J. S., Clark, B. C., Russ, D. W., France, C. R., Ploutz-Snyder, R., Corcos, D. M., & RELIEF Study Investigators. (2020). Effect of spinal manipulative and mobilization therapies in young adults with mild to moderate chronic low back pain: A randomized clinical trial. JAMA Network Open, 3(8), e2012589–e2012589. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.12589 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.12589
Vigotsky, A. D., & Bruhns, R. P. (2015). The role of descending modulation in manual therapy and its analgesic implications: A narrative review. Pain Research and Treatment, 2015(1), 292805. https://doi.org/10.1155/2015/292805 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1155/2015/292805
Xu, X., & Ling, Y. (2025). Comparative safety and efficacy of manual therapy interventions for cervicogenic headache: A systematic review and network meta-analysis. Frontiers in Neurology, 16, 1566764. https://doi.org/10.3389/fneur.2025.1566764 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fneur.2025.1566764
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Author(s). Published by Lithuanian Sports University.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
