The Effectiveness of Neuromobilization in Patients With Cervical Radiculopathy: A Systematic Review With Meta-Analysis

Author:

Paraskevopoulos Eleftherios1ORCID,Koumantakis George1ORCID,Papandreou Maria1ORCID

Affiliation:

1. Laboratory of Advanced Physiotherapy, Department of Physiotherapy, University of West Attica, Athens, Greece

Abstract

Context: Neuromobilization exercises (NE) could be a useful therapeutic tool to induce analgesia and increase function and range of motion (ROM) in patients with musculoskeletal pathologies with neuropathic components; however, the effectiveness of this intervention in patients with cervical radiculopathy (CR) is unknown. Objective: To determine the effectiveness of NE in CR on pain, function, and ROM. Design: Systematic review and meta-analysis. Evidence Acquisition: An electronic search was performed in the MEDLINE, Scopus, PEDro, and EBSCO databases from inception until June 2022. The authors included randomized clinical trials that evaluated the effectiveness of NE against control groups or other interventions that aimed to treat patients with CR. Evidence Synthesis: Seven clinical trials met the eligibility criteria, and for the quantitative synthesis, 5 studies were included. For the studies that compared NE with a control group, the standardized mean difference for pain was −1.33/10 (95% confidence interval [CI], −1.80 to −0.86; P < .01; I2 = 0%), for function with the Neck Disability Index was −1.21/50 (95% CI, −1.67 to −0.75; P < .01; I2 = 0%), and for neck flexion and extensions was 0.66 (95% CI, 0.23 to 1.10; P < .01; I2 = 0%) and 0.47 (95% CI, 0.04 to 0.90; P < .01; I2 = 0%), respectively, with evidence of clinical effectiveness. These findings were based on moderate-quality evidence according to the Grading of Recommendation, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation rating. In studies that compared NE with other interventions, the meta-analysis failed to demonstrate the statistical or clinical superiority of NE. Conclusions: Moderate quality of evidence suggests that NE may be superior to no treatment for pain, function, and ROM in patients with CR. In contrast, NE are not superior to other interventions in the same outcomes, based on low- to very low-quality evidence. More high-quality research is needed to assess the consistency of these results.

Publisher

Human Kinetics

Subject

Rehabilitation,Physical Therapy, Sports Therapy and Rehabilitation,Orthopedics and Sports Medicine,Biophysics

Reference58 articles.

1. Cervical radiculopathy;Iyer S,2016

2. Cervical traction combined with neural mobilization for patients with cervical radiculopathy: a randomized controlled trial;Savva C,2021

3. Effectiveness of neural mobilization in patients with spinal radiculopathy: a critical review;Efstathiou MA,2015

4. Study protocol for a randomised controlled multicentre study: the Foraminotomy ACDF cost-effectiveness trial (FACET) in patients with cervical radiculopathy;Broekema A,2017

5. Lack of uniform diagnostic criteria for cervical radiculopathy in conservative intervention studies: a systematic review;Thoomes EJ,2012

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3