Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
Filter by Categories
Activity Report
Author’s Reply
Authors’ Response
Book Review
Brief Report
Case Report
Case Series
Commentary
Current Issue
Editorial
Erratum
Guest Editor Profile
Guest Editorial
Letter to Editor
Letter to the Editor
Letters to Editor
Original Article
Protocol
Radiology Quiz
Review Article
Surgical Technique
Systematic Article
Systematic Review
Systematic Review Article
Technical Note
Technical Notes
Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
Filter by Categories
Activity Report
Author’s Reply
Authors’ Response
Book Review
Brief Report
Case Report
Case Series
Commentary
Current Issue
Editorial
Erratum
Guest Editor Profile
Guest Editorial
Letter to Editor
Letter to the Editor
Letters to Editor
Original Article
Protocol
Radiology Quiz
Review Article
Surgical Technique
Systematic Article
Systematic Review
Systematic Review Article
Technical Note
Technical Notes
Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
Filter by Categories
Activity Report
Author’s Reply
Authors’ Response
Book Review
Brief Report
Case Report
Case Series
Commentary
Current Issue
Editorial
Erratum
Guest Editor Profile
Guest Editorial
Letter to Editor
Letter to the Editor
Letters to Editor
Original Article
Protocol
Radiology Quiz
Review Article
Surgical Technique
Systematic Article
Systematic Review
Systematic Review Article
Technical Note
Technical Notes
View/Download PDF

Translate this page into:

Systematic Review
ARTICLE IN PRESS
doi:
10.25259/JMSR_553_2025

Cervical proprioception and its role in balance disorders: Implications for rehabilitation: A systematic review

Department of Physiotherapy, Maharishi Markandeshwar Deemed to be University, Ambala, Haryana, India
Department of Physiotherapy, NIMS College of Physiotherapy and Occupational Therapy, NIMS University, Jaipur, Rajasthan, India.

*Corresponding author: Nikita Vaid, Department of Physiotherapy, Maharishi Markandeshwar Deemed to be University, Ambala, Haryana, India. nikivaid72@gmail.com

Licence
This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial-Share Alike 4.0 License, which allows others to remix, transform, and build upon the work non-commercially, as long as the author is credited and the new creations are licensed under the identical terms.

How to cite this article: Vaid N, Saini N. Cervical proprioception and its role in balance disorders: Implications for rehabilitation: A systematic review. J Musculoskelet Surg Res. doi: 10.25259/JMSR_553_2025

Abstract

Postural stability depends on the integration of visual, vestibular, and somatosensory inputs, with cervical proprioception providing critical information about head and neck position. Disruption of cervical afferent input, commonly observed in chronic neck pain, whiplash-associated disorders, and cervicogenic dizziness, may contribute to dizziness, postural instability, and balance impairment. This systematic review with narrative synthesis examined the role of cervical proprioceptive dysfunction in balance disorders and evaluated the effectiveness of physiotherapy-based rehabilitation. A literature search of PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, Web of Science, and physiotherapy evidence database (PEDro) identified studies published between January 2015 and July 2025. Forty-one studies, including randomized controlled trials, observational studies, and systematic reviews, were included. Across studies, individuals with neck-related disorders consistently demonstrated impaired cervical proprioception, most commonly assessed using joint position error, alongside increased postural sway and reduced static and dynamic balance compared with healthy controls. Rehabilitation approaches emphasizing cervical sensorimotor training, vestibular–cervical integration, and multimodal exercise programs were associated with improvements in proprioceptive accuracy, balance, and dizziness-related outcomes. Manual therapy demonstrated greater benefit when combined with active exercise-based rehabilitation rather than when applied alone. Technology-assisted interventions showed short-term benefits, although the evidence remains limited. These findings support targeted assessment and rehabilitation of cervical sensorimotor function as a key component in the management of neck-related dizziness and balance impairment.

Keywords

Cervical spine
Cervicogenic dizziness
Neck pain
Postural balance
Proprioception
Rehabilitation

INTRODUCTION

Postural control relies on the coordinated contribution of the visual, vestibular, and somatosensory systems.[1] The cervical spine plays a significant role within this multisensory network by providing continuous afferent information regarding head orientation and movement.[2] This input supports postural stability and facilitates coordinated eye and head movements.[3] The upper cervical region, particularly the C0–C3 segments (with C0 referring to the occiput), contains a high density of muscle spindles and joint receptors that detect subtle changes in muscle length, tension, and joint position.[4] These sensory signals project to the vestibular nuclei and cerebellum, where they are integrated with visual and vestibular inputs to generate appropriate postural responses [Figure 1].[5] Altered cervical afferent input resulting from trauma, chronic neck pain, degenerative changes, whiplash-associated disorders (WAD), or sustained postural loading can disrupt the integration of visual, vestibular, and proprioceptive information.[6] This sensory mismatch may contribute to cervicogenic dizziness (CGD), characterized by non-rotatory dizziness, unsteadiness, and impaired balance, often exacerbated by neck movement or prolonged static postures.[7] Increasing evidence indicates that cervical proprioceptive disturbances are common in individuals with chronic neck pain and WAD, highlighting their clinical relevance.[8] Assessment of cervical proprioception commonly includes joint position error (JPE) testing, head–neck repositioning tasks, and balance assessments performed during cervical movement or perturbation [Table 1].[9] These assessments assist clinicians in identifying impairments in cervical sensorimotor control and in developing targeted rehabilitation programs.[10] Physiotherapy interventions, including sensorimotor retraining, postural correction, manual therapy, vestibular–cervical integration exercises, and technology-assisted approaches such as virtual reality (VR) and biofeedback, aim to restore accurate sensory processing and improve functional stability.[11,12] Given the increasing recognition of cervical proprioceptive dysfunction as a contributor to dizziness and balance impairments, this review aimed to examine current research on cervical proprioception, its role in CGD, and the effectiveness of physiotherapy-based interventions to inform clinical practice.[13,14]

Integration of visual, vestibular, and cervical proprioceptive systems in postural control.
Figure 1:
Integration of visual, vestibular, and cervical proprioceptive systems in postural control.
Table 1: Common assessments of cervical proprioception and balance.
Tool Description Reliability/validity Clinical utility
JPE test Head repositioning accuracy ICC 0.77–0.93; moderate validity Gold standard; >4.5° considered abnormal
Romberg+head turns Stance with cervical motion Moderate Screens proprioceptive deficits
Dynamic posturography Balance under sensory perturbation High reliability Quantifies dynamic balance
Single-leg stance+cervical motion Balance with perturbations Fair–good Functional test; predicts fall risk

JPE: Joint position error, ICC: Intra-class correlation coefficient

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Study design

This study was conducted as a systematic review with narrative synthesis. A systematic and reproducible methodology was applied to identify, screen, and select relevant studies using predefined eligibility criteria. Owing to heterogeneity across study designs, outcome measures, and intervention protocols, a quantitative meta-analysis was not feasible. Consequently, the findings were synthesized using a structured narrative approach.

Search strategy

A systematic literature search of PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, Web of Science, and PEDro identified relevant studies published between January 2015 and July 2025 using terms related to cervical proprioception, sensorimotor control, balance, CGD, and physiotherapy, combined using Boolean operators (AND/OR). Full search strategies are provided in the Supplementary Material [Appendix S1], and reference lists of included studies were screened for additional articles.

Supplementary Table

Inclusion criteria

Studies published in English between January 2015 and July 2025 were included if they involved human participants with altered cervical proprioception, balance impairment, or CGD. Eligible designs comprised randomized controlled trials (RCTs), cohort and quasi-experimental studies, and systematic reviews evaluating physiotherapy-based interventions and reporting at least one relevant proprioceptive, balance, or clinical outcome such as JPE, postural sway, dynamic balance tests, dizziness handicap inventory (DHI), or the neck disability index.

Exclusion criteria

Studies were excluded if they involved only surgical or pharmacological interventions, non-human participants, or unpublished sources such as conference abstracts, theses, case reports, or other gray literature. Studies were also excluded if they did not report clearly defined cervical proprioception or balance outcomes or if methodological details were insufficient for reliable evaluation.

Data extraction

Two reviewers independently extracted data from all eligible studies. Extracted data included study design, year of publication, sample size, participant characteristics, diagnostic criteria, clinical features, and intervention details such as treatment type, frequency, duration, and comparison groups. Primary outcomes were cervical proprioception with particular emphasis on JPE and static or dynamic balance performance. Secondary outcomes included DHI, neck pain, and functional outcomes. Study characteristics, structured according to the patient, intervention, comparison, outcomes, and study design framework, are presented in Tables 2a and 2b.

Table 2a: PICOS summary of included studies.
Study Population (P) Intervention (I) Comparator (C) Outcomes (O) Study design
(S)
Dosage
Maruthey et al., 2025[1] Office workers with neck pain Proprioceptive and postural correction training Control exercise program JPE RCT NR
Nusser et al., 2021[2] Adults with chronic neck pain (n=24) VR-based neck-specific sensorimotor training Standard physiotherapy Proprioception, pain Pilot RCT 6 weeks
Emam et al., 2024[3] Adults with cervicogenic headache Proprioceptive training Conventional physiotherapy Postural stability, pain RCT NR
Saadat et al., 2019[4] Adults with chronic neck pain (n=40) Sensorimotor training+physiotherapy Physiotherapy alone JPE, pain (VAS), NDI, ROM RCT 3 sessions/week for 6 weeks
Wah et al., 2021[5] Smartphone users with balance impairment Proprioceptive training+CCFT Standard exercise program Static Balance RCT 3 sessions/week for 6 weeks
Espí-López et al., 2021[6] Adults with nonspecific neck pain Proprioceptive exercise program Conventional care Pain, function RCT NR
Duray et al., 2018[7] Adults with chronic neck pain (n=40) Proprioceptive training No- intervention control Balance, postural stability RCT 2–3 sessions/week for 4 weeks
Sremakaew et al., 2023[11] Adults with chronic neck pain Multimodal sensorimotor and balance training Comparator interventions Balance, sensorimotor control Factorial RCT NR
Piromchai et al., 2023[23] Adults with CGD (n=40) Cervical self-exercise program Usual care DHI, dizziness, balance, JPE RCT Daily home exercises for 6 weeks
Rahnama et al., 2023[24] Adults with mechanical neck pain (n=45) Deep cervical muscle training Conventional exercise Proprioception, pain RCT 3 sessions/week for 8 weeks
Oliveira et al., 2022[28] Adults with chronic neck pain (n=44) VR-based sensorimotor training Conventional exercises Cervical JPE RCT 2–3 sessions/week for 6 weeks
Reid et al., 2015[19] Adults with CGD Cervical manual therapy Sham/control Dizziness, balance RCT Long-term follow-up
Suvarnnato T et al., 2019[25] Adults with chronic mechanical neck pain (n=56) Deep cervical muscle Sensorimotor training Conventional cervical exercises JPE, balance RCT 3 sessions/week for 6 weeks
Asante et al., 2019[26] Adults with nonspecific neck pain (n=60) Proprioceptive retraining Standard care JPE, accuracy Quasi- experimental study 4–6 weeks
Zhang et al., 2023[27] Adults Cervical proprioception measurement device Reference standard Reliability, validity Validation cohort study Not applicable
Alahmari et al., 2017[22] Healthy adults Cervical proprioception assessment Younger versus older adults JPE Cross- sectional cohort Not applicable
de Zoete RM., 2020[36] Adults with chronic idiopathic neck disorders Head repositioning assessment Not applicable Repositioning accuracy Observational cohort study Not applicable
Kang et al.,2015[37] Adults with chronic neck pain (n=36) Sensorimotor training (SMT) Conventional physiotherapy Proprioception, balance RCT 3 sessions/week for 6 weeks
Goo et al., 2024[41] Adults with CGD Cervical stabilization exercises with visual feedback Pre- intervention status JPE, craniovertebral angle RCT 3 sessions per week for 4 weeks

PICOS: Patient, intervention, comparison, outcomes, study design, RCT: Randomized controlled trial, VAS: Visual Analog Scale, NDI: Neck disability index, JPE: Joint position error, ROM: Range of motion, SMT: Sensorimotor training, CCFT: Cranio-cervical Flexor training, DHI: Dizziness handicap inventory, NR: Not reported dosage is not applicable for observational, validation, or cross-sectional studies, CGD: cervicogenic dizziness

Table 2b: PICOS characteristics of review studies included in the narrative synthesis.
Study Population (P) Interventions
(I)
Comparator (C) Outcome measures (O) Study design (S) Dosage
Stanton et al., 2016[15] Adults with chronic neck pain Rehabilitation approaches targeting proprioception Healthy controls and/or usual-care or no-intervention groups Cervical JPE, head repositioning accuracy, proprioceptive acuity Systematic review Varied across included studies (typically 4–8 weeks in intervention trials)
Norasteh et al., 2025[9] Adults with altered cervical posture Exercise therapy Conventional exercise, postural advice, or no-exercise controls JPE, cervical reposition accuracy, and postural alignment measures Systematic review Varied; most trials reported 4–6-week programs
Zaidi et al., 2025[16] Adults with chronic neck pain Sensorimotor training Traditional physiotherapy, general exercise, or minimal intervention JPE, static and dynamic balance tests, pain intensity (VAS/NPRS), NDI Systematic review Typically 6–8 weeks, 2–3 sessions/week
Gill-Lussier et al., 2023[17] Adults with cervicogenic dizziness Cervical and vestibular rehabilitation Usual care, vestibular-only or cervical-only interventions, no treatment Dizziness severity (DHI), balance performance, postural sway, cervical proprioception (JPE where reported) Scoping review Varied widely; most interventions 4–8 weeks
De Vestel et al., 2022[31] Adults with cervicogenic dizziness Vestibular– cervical rehabilitation Vestibular rehab alone, cervical therapy alone, usual care, or no treatment DHI scores, balance measures, dizziness frequency/intensity, functional stability Systematic review and meta- analysis Intervention duration ranged from 4 to 12 weeks across studies
De Hertogh et al.,2025[33] Adults with cervicogenic dizziness Cervical, vestibular, and multimodal rehabilitation approaches Usual care, sham interventions, cervical-only therapy, or no treatment Dizziness severity (DHI), static and dynamic balance outcomes, and postural control measures Systematic review Typically 4–6 weeks; some studies up to 8 weeks
Kundakci et al., 2018[34] Adults with chronic dizziness Exercise-based vestibular rehabilitation Usual care or no intervention Dizziness severity DHI, Balance BBS Systematic review Varied across the included studies
Carrasco- Uribarren et al., 2025[14] Adults with cervical dizziness Manual therapy Sham manual therapy, vestibular rehab, exercise therapy, and usual care Dizziness severity (DHI), balance outcomes, cervical mobility, symptom intensity Systematic review & meta- analysis Short-term interventions, commonly 2–6 weeks
Luznik et al., 2025[18] Adults with chronic neck pain Cervical sensorimotor control training Conservative therapies Pain, proprioception, functional outcomes Systematic review and meta- analysis Varied across included studies
Treleaven, 2017[38] Adults with neck pain Sensorimotor control mechanisms Not applicable Dizziness, balance impairment, sensorimotor integration outcomes Narrative review Not applicable
Li et al., 2022[12] Adults with cervicogenic dizziness Sensorimotor control concepts Not applicable Cervical proprioception, dizziness mechanisms, and clinical assessment Narrative review Not applicable

PICOS: Patient, intervention, comparison, outcomes, study design, JPE: Joint position error, VAS: Visual Analog Scale, NPRS: Numeric Pain Rating Scale, NDI: Neck disability index, DHI: Dizziness handicap inventory, BBS: Berg balance scale

Risk of bias and quality assessment

Risk of bias and methodological quality were assessed independently by two reviewers (NV and NS) using tools appropriate to the study design. RCTs were evaluated using the PEDro scale [Table 3a], cohort and quasi-experimental studies using the Newcastle–Ottawa scale [Table 3b], and systematic reviews using the AMSTAR-2 tool [Table 3c]. Any disagreements were resolved through discussion. Overall, the included systematic reviews demonstrated moderate to high methodological quality.

Table 3a: Risk of bias assessment of randomized controlled trials (PEDro scale).
Study Random allocation Concealed allocation Baseline comparable Participant blinding Therapist blinding Assessor blinding
Maruthey et al., 2025[1] Yes No Yes No No Yes
Nusser et al., 2021[2] Yes No Yes No No Yes
Emam et al., 2024[3] Yes No Yes No No Yes
Saadat et al., 2019[4] Yes No Yes No No Yes
Wah et al., 2021[5] Yes No Yes No No Yes
Duray et al., 2018[7] Yes No Yes No No Yes
Piromchai et al., 2023[23] Yes No Yes No No Yes
Rahnama et al., 2023[24] Yes No Yes No No Yes
Oliveira et al., 2022[28] Yes No Yes No No Yes
Espí-López et al., 2021[6] Yes No Yes No No Yes
Study ≥85% follow-up ITT analysis Between-group comparison Point estimates and variability PEDro score (0–10)
Maruthey et al., 2025[1] Yes Yes Yes Yes 8
Nusser et al., 2021[2] Yes No Yes Yes 7
Emam et al., 2024[3] Yes Yes Yes Yes 8
Saadat et al., 2019 [4] Yes No Yes Yes 7
Wah et al., 2021[5] Yes Yes Yes Yes 8
Duray et al., 2018[7] Yes No Yes Yes 7
Piromchai et al., 2023[23] Yes No Yes Yes 7
Rahnama et al., 2023[24] Yes Yes Yes Yes 8
Oliveira et al., 2022[28] Yes Yes Yes Yes 8
Espí-López et al., 2020[6] Yes No Yes Yes 7

ITT: Intention to treat, PEDro: Physiotherapy evidence database

Table 3b: Risk of bias assessment of cohort and quasi-experimental studies (Newcastle– Ottawa scale).
Study Design Selection Comparability Outcome NOS score Overall risk
Abdelkader et al., 2020[8] Controlled clinical study 3 1 2 6 Moderate
Asante et al., 2019[26] Comparative cross-sectional study 3 1 2 6 Moderate
Zhang et al., 2023[27] Validation cohort 4 1 3 8 Low
Peng et al., 2021[29] Pre–post cohort 3 1 2 6 Moderate
Alahmari et al., 2017[22] Cross-sectional cohort 4 0 2 6 Moderate
de Zoete et al., 2020[36] Longitudinal Observational cohort study 3 0 2 5 Moderate
Table 3c: Methodological quality of systematic reviews (AMSTAR-2).
Study Protocol registration Literature search Risk of bias evaluation Publication bias assessment Methodological limitations Overall confidence
Norasteh et al., 2025[9] Yes Yes Yes Partially addressed Minor Moderate
Stanton et al., 2016[15] Yes Yes Yes Not reported Minor Moderate
Zaidi et al., 2025[16] Yes Yes Yes Not reported One critical Low–moderate
Gill-Lussier et al., 2023[17] No Yes Descriptive appraisal Not assessed Inherent to design Moderate
Luznik et al., 2025[18] Yes Yes Yes Yes Minor Moderate
De Vestel et al., 2022[31] Yes Yes Yes Yes None identified High
Carrasco-Uribarren et al., 2025[14] Yes Yes Yes Yes Minor High

Influence of methodological limitations on findings

Interpretation of the findings was influenced by study quality. The certainty of evidence for key outcomes was assessed using the GRADE approach [Supplementary Table S2] and was affected by risk of bias, heterogeneity, and imprecision. These methodological limitations precluded meta-analysis and support the use of narrative synthesis.

Data synthesis

The included studies demonstrated substantial variation in participant characteristics, intervention protocols, outcome measures, and follow-up durations, precluding quantitative meta-analysis. Findings were therefore synthesized narratively. Studies were grouped by primary intervention type, including sensorimotor training, manual therapy, postural and strengthening exercises, vestibular–cervical rehabilitation, and technology-assisted interventions [Table 4]. Within each category, findings were compared to identify consistent results and methodological limitations. Where sufficient data were available, results were examined by clinical subgroup (chronic neck pain, CGD, and WAD) and by intervention duration (4–6 or 6–8 weeks). Quantitative subgroup analyses and forest plots were not performed because outcome measures and effect sizes were reported inconsistently across studies.

Table 4: Rehabilitation interventions and evidence strength.
Intervention Key components Level of evidence Main outcomes
Sensorimotor training Head repositioning drills, gaze stabilization, eye–head coordination exercises High (RCTs, systematic reviews) Improved JPE scores and objective balance metrics.
Manual therapy Cervical mobilization and manipulation (C0–C3) Moderate (reviews, RCTs) Pain relief, enhanced cervical range of motion, and short-term dizziness reduction.
Strengthening and postural training Deep cervical flexor and scapular stabilizer endurance exercises Moderate Reduced postural sway and improved sustained head control.
Vestibular–cervical integration Dual-task balance, reflex integration, and dynamic balance exercises Moderate–high Superior long-term reduction in dizziness and fall risk.
Emerging technology VR, wearable inertial sensors, and biofeedback systems Early (pilot RCTs, feasibility studies) Enhanced training specificity, patient engagement, and objective feedback.

RCTs: Randomized controlled trials, JPE: Joint position error, VR: Virtual reality

RESULTS

A total of 41 studies met the inclusion criteria, including 23 primary studies and 18 review-based studies. Primary studies comprised 13 RCTs (including 1 pilot and 1 factorial trial), 6 cohort or observational studies, 1 quasi-experimental study, and 3 controlled pre–post studies [Figure 2]. The review-based studies included seven systematic reviews, three systematic reviews with meta-analysis, one scoping review, three narrative reviews, one conceptual review, and three reviews with mixed or overlapping methodologies.[15,16] Study populations included adults with chronic neck pain, WAD, cervical spondylosis, and CGD, with several studies including healthy controls.[17-21] Across study designs, cervical proprioceptive impairment and balance deficits were consistently reported. Altered cervical proprioception, most commonly assessed using JPE, was observed in approximately 50–75% of individuals with chronic neck pain or WAD.[22,23] The prevalence of CGD among individuals with persistent neck symptoms ranged from 20% to 58%. Compared with healthy controls, individuals with neck-related disorders demonstrated greater JPE, reduced head–neck repositioning accuracy, impaired neuromuscular coordination, and increased postural sway, with the most pronounced deficits observed in CGD and WAD. Most intervention studies evaluated active, exercise-based rehabilitation, particularly cervical sensorimotor and proprioceptive training, and typically delivered 2–3 times/week for 4–8 weeks. RCTs reported reductions in JPE of approximately 2–5° and improvements in static and dynamic balance, with the most consistent benefits observed in programs incorporating gaze stability, eye–head coordination, and vestibular–cervical integration.[24]

PRISMA-style flow diagram of search strategy.
Figure 2:
PRISMA-style flow diagram of search strategy.

Manual therapy was associated with short-term improvements in pain, cervical mobility, and dizziness, with greater benefits when combined with active exercise-based rehabilitation.[24-26] Strengthening and postural exercise programs targeting the deep cervical flexors and scapular stabilizers improved postural control, reduced postural sway, and enhanced proprioceptive accuracy, particularly in chronic neck pain. Vestibular–cervical rehabilitation, primarily examined in CGD populations and typically delivered over approximately 6 weeks, consistently reduced dizziness severity and improved balance, with combined approaches outperforming single-modality interventions.[25,26] Technology-assisted interventions, including VR and biofeedback, demonstrated short-term improvements in proprioceptive accuracy and head–neck control but were limited by small sample sizes and short follow-up durations.

Overall, methodological quality ranged from moderate to high. RCTs were generally well designed, although participant blinding was rarely feasible. Cohort and quasi-experimental studies demonstrated a moderate risk of bias, primarily due to small sample sizes and potential confounding, while systematic reviews were of acceptable quality, with inconsistent reporting of publication bias [Table 3a-c].

DISCUSSION

This review highlights the clinical importance of cervical proprioceptive dysfunction in balance disorders associated with neck-related conditions. The consistent association between altered cervical afferent input, dizziness, and postural instability supports the interpretation that cervical proprioception directly contributes to impaired postural control rather than being a secondary effect of neck pain.[27-30] These findings align with sensorimotor control models emphasizing the integration of cervical, vestibular, and visual inputs. Rehabilitation approaches targeting cervical sensorimotor function appear to address mechanisms of sensory mismatch more effectively than passive interventions. Improvements in joint position sense and reductions in dizziness following structured exercise programs suggest enhanced multisensory integration, particularly in individuals with CGD.[31-33] The greater effectiveness of multimodal and vestibular–cervical rehabilitation strategies further supports the value of integrated interventions, with combined approaches demonstrating superior balance and dizziness outcomes compared with single-modality treatments.[34-36] Manual therapy may contribute by improving cervical mobility and reducing nociceptive input; however, its clinical benefit appears most significant when used to facilitate active rehabilitation rather than as a standalone intervention.[37-40] The interpretation of the evidence is limited by methodological constraints, including small sample sizes, heterogeneous outcome measures, limited blinding, and short follow-up durations. Alignment with standardized diagnostic frameworks, such as the International Classification of Headache Disorders, 3rd edition (ICHD-3), may improve diagnostic consistency and research comparability; therefore, comprehensive clinical assessment remains essential. Although technology-assisted interventions, including VR and biofeedback-based training, show promise for enhancing cervical proprioceptive rehabilitation,[40,41] the current evidence remains preliminary, and practical barriers may limit widespread clinical implementation.

Future research should focus on RCTs that use ICHD-3– aligned diagnostic criteria, standardized outcome reporting, and follow-up periods exceeding 6 months to evaluate treatment durability. Improved reporting of effect sizes, adverse events, and implementation factors, including cost-effectiveness, would strengthen the evidence base and support translation into clinical practice.

Limitations

This review is limited by heterogeneity in study populations, interventions, outcome measures, and follow-up durations, which precluded meta-analysis. Many studies also had small sample sizes, limited blinding, and short follow-up periods, which reduced confidence in their long-term effectiveness. Inconsistent outcome assessment and incomplete reporting of standardized effect sizes restricted quantitative comparisons, and evidence for technology-assisted rehabilitation remains preliminary. Despite these limitations, this review provides a comprehensive synthesis of current evidence and identifies priorities for future research in cervical proprioception and balance rehabilitation.

CONCLUSION

Altered cervical proprioception is strongly associated with dizziness, postural instability, and balance impairment in individuals with neck-related disorders. Multimodal rehabilitation targeting cervical sensorimotor control, particularly when combined with vestibular and manual therapy, demonstrates moderate-certainty evidence for short-term improvements in joint position accuracy and balance. However, variability in diagnostic criteria, intervention protocols, and outcome measures, as well as limited long-term follow-up, restricts conclusions regarding treatment durability. Advancing the field will require standardized diagnostics, consistent reporting of outcomes, and more extended follow-up periods to enhance clinical applicability.

Recommendations:

Cervical sensorimotor training should be incorporated into the routine management of individuals with cervical proprioceptive dysfunction or neck-related dizziness. Interventions may include joint position retraining, eye–head coordination, and gaze-stability exercises, with progression based on individual tolerance. Manual therapy may be used as an adjunct to support active rehabilitation, while combined cervical–vestibular rehabilitation is recommended for CGD. Technology-assisted interventions may serve as supplementary options where available. Future research should adopt standardized diagnostic criteria, uniform outcome measures, and extended follow-up durations to evaluate the durability of treatment effects.

Authors’ contribution:

NV: Conceived and designed the study. NV and NS: Conducted the research and collected and organized the data. NV and NS: Analyzed and interpreted the data. All authors critically reviewed and approved the final manuscript and take responsibility for its content and similarity index.

Ethical approval:

Institutional Review Board approval is not required. This study is based exclusively on published literature and did not involve human participants. This review was prospectively registered in PROSPERO (Registration number: CRD420251172088).

Declaration of patient consent:

Patient’s consent is not required as there are no patients in this study.

Use of artificial intelligence (AI) -assisted technology for manuscript preparation:

The authors confirm that there was no use of artificial intelligence (AI)-assisted technology for assisting in the writing or editing of the manuscript and no images were manipulated using AI.

Conflicts of interest:

There are no conflicting relationships or activities.

Financial support and sponsorship: This study did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.

References

  1. , , , , , , et al. Effect of proprioceptive training on neck pain intensity, joint position sense, and functional performance among non-specific neck pain desk-job workers with kinesiophobia. J Health Sci Med Res. 2025;43:e20251166.
    [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  2. , , , . Effects of virtual reality-based neck-specific sensorimotor training in patients with chronic neck pain: A randomized controlled pilot trial. J Rehabil Med. 2021;53:jrm00151.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. , , , , . Proprioceptive training improves postural stability and reduces pain in cervicogenic headache: A randomized clinical trial. J Clin Med. 2024;13:6777.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. , , , , , , et al. Sensorimotor training plus traditional physiotherapy for chronic neck pain: A randomized controlled trial. J Bodyw Mov Ther. 2019;23:901-7.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. , , . Effects of proprioceptive and craniocervical flexor training on static balance in smartphone users with balance impairment. J Pain Res. 2021;14:1935-47.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. , , , , , , et al. Efficacy of a proprioceptive exercise program in patients with nonspecific neck pain: A randomized controlled trial. Eur J Phys Rehabil Med. 2021;57:397-405.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. , , , . Proprioceptive training improves balance in chronic neck pain: A randomized controlled study. Agri. 2018;30:130-7.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. , , , , , . Decreased neck proprioception and postural stability after induced cervical flexor muscle fatigue. J Musculoskelet Neuronal Interact. 2020;20:421-8.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. , , , , , , et al. Exercise therapy to improve cervical proprioception in individuals with asymptomatic forward head posture: A systematic review. PLoS One. 2025;20:e0330665.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. , , , , . Sensorimotor tests in patients with neck pain and associated disorders: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Sci Rep. 2024;14:12764.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. , , , , , , et al. Effectiveness of adding cervical sensorimotor rehabilitation to manual therapy and exercise for neck pain. Musculoskelet Sci Pract. 2023;63:102690.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. , , , , , , et al. Proprioceptive cervicogenic dizziness: Pathogenesis, diagnosis, and treatment. J Clin Med. 2022;11:6293.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. , , , , , , et al. Measurement properties of cervical joint position error in people with and without neck pain. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2024;25:44.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. , , , , , , et al. Is manual therapy effective for cervical dizziness? A systematic review and meta-analysis. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2025;26:659.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. , , , , , , et al. Evidence of impaired proprioception in chronic idiopathic neck pain: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Phys Ther. 2016;96:876-87.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. , , , , , , et al. Effectiveness of sensorimotor training on pain, cervical joint position sense, range of motion, balance, and disability in chronic neck pain: A systematic review. Heliyon. 2025;11:e43409.
    [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  17. , , . Proprioceptive cervicogenic dizziness care trajectories: A scoping review. J Clin Med. 2023;12:1884.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  18. , , , , . Effectiveness of cervical sensorimotor control training for chronic neck pain disorders. Monten J Sports Sci Med. 2025;14:1-12.
    [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  19. , , , , . Manual therapy for cervicogenic dizziness: Long-term outcomes. Man Ther. 2015;20:148-56.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  20. , , . Proprioception in musculoskeletal rehabilitation: Basic science and linical interventions. Man Ther. 2015;20:368-77.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  21. , , , , , , et al. Joint position sense error in people with neck pain: A systematic review. Man Ther. 2015;20:736-44.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  22. , , , , . Association of age with cervical joint position error. J Adv Res. 2017;8:201-7.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  23. , , , . Efficacy of self-exercise in cervicogenic dizziness. Front Neurol. 2023;14:1121101.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  24. , , , . Effects of two exercise programs on neck proprioception in chronic neck pain. Med Sci. 2023;11:56.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  25. , , , , , , et al. Effects of deep cervical muscle exercises on disability and pain. J Pain Res. 2019;12:915-25.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  26. , , , , . Comparative joint position error in non-specific neck disorders. S Afr J Physiother. 2019;75:568.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. , , , , . Reliability and validity of a novel device for evaluating cervical proprioception. Pain Ther. 2023;12:671-82.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  28. , , , . Virtual reality-based sensorimotor training improves cervical joint position sense. Musculoskelet Sci Pract. 2022;58:102516.
    [Google Scholar]
  29. , , , , . Cervical proprioception impairment in neck pain. Pain Ther. 2021;10:143-64.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  30. , , , . How to diagnose cervicogenic dizziness. Arch Physiother. 2017;7:12.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  31. , , . Therapeutic management of cervicogenic dizziness: A systematic review. J Man Manip Ther. 2022;30:273-83.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  32. , . Physical therapy in cervicogenic dizziness. Saudi J Health Sci. 2020;9:1-6.
    [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  33. , , , , , , et al. Dizziness and neck pain: Perspectives on cervicogenic dizziness. Front Neurol. 2025;16:1545241.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  34. , , , . Effectiveness of exercise-based vestibular rehabilitation in chronic dizziness. F1000Res. 2018;7:276.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  35. , , . Neck pain and proprioception revisited. Phys Ther. 2016;96:671-8.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  36. , , , . Cervical sensorimotor control over time in chronic neck pain. Phys Ther. 2020;100:268-82.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  37. , , . Impact of head repositioning accuracy on cervical stabilization exercise. Phys Ther Rehabil Sci. 2015;4:49-54.
    [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  38. . Dizziness and sensorimotor control in traumatic neck pain. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2017;47:492-502.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  39. , , , , . Sensory, motor, and psychosocial characteristics of chronic neck pain. Phys Ther. 2021;101:pzab104.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  40. , , . Effects of cervical mobilization on balance and proprioception. J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 2024;47:175-86.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  41. , , , , . Effects of cervical stabilization with visual feedback on craniovertebral angle and proprioception. Medicine (Baltimore). 2024;103:e36845.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Show Sections