Members of the Manipulative Physiotherapists Association of Australia (now Musculoskeletal Physiotherapy Australia) were surveyed to determine their use of cervical manipulation, compliance with and attitudes to the Australian Physiotherapy Association's (APA) Protocol for Pre-manipulative Testing of the Cervical Spine, and the incidence of adverse effects from cervical manipulation. The questionnaire was mailed to 740 members and returned by 480 members (65%). Cervical manipulation (84.5%) and passive mobilization (99.8%) were used by a high percentage of respondents. Most were familiar with the protocol with 63% supporting its continued endorsement. Adverse effects were reported at a rate of one per 1000 years of practice (or 0.003/week). The most common effects were symptoms potentially related to VBI (94.4% responses), with no reported major complications. Only 37.1% of respondents always informed the patient about potential dangers of cervical manipulation and consent was sought on every occasion by 33% of respondents. The results suggest that the use and interpretation of the protocol are variable among members of MPA. The risk of adverse effects from manipulative (musculoskeletal) physiotherapy practice, including cervical manipulation, appears to be very low. Recommendations for revision of the protocol were made on the basis of results of the survey and treatment diary, in addition to a review of the literature related to testing for vertebro-basilar insufficiency, adverse incidents related to cervical mobilizing and manipulative technique, differentiating features of VBI related dizziness and vertigo related to benign paroxysmal positional vertigo (BPPV) and current issues surrounding informed consent. Finally, a summary of the content of the new Clinical Guidelines for Pre-Manipulative Testing of the Cervical Spine (APA, 2000) is provided.