Effectiveness of Neural Mobilization Techniques in the Management of Musculoskeletal Neck Disorders with Nerve-Related Symptoms: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis with a Mapping Report

Author:

Varangot-Reille Clovis1ORCID,Cuenca-Martínez Ferran12ORCID,Arribas-Romano Alberto3ORCID,Bertoletti-Rodríguez Rodrigo1,Gutiérrez-Martín Álvaro1,Mateo-Perrino Fernando1,Suso-Martí Luis24ORCID,Blanco-Díaz María5ORCID,Calatayud Joaquín6ORCID,Casaña José6ORCID

Affiliation:

1. Departamento de Fisioterapia, Centro Superior de Estudios Universitarios La Salle, Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, Madrid, Spain

2. Motion in Brains Research Group, Institute of Neuroscience and Sciences of the Movement (INCIMOV), Centro Superior de Estudios Universitarios La Salle, Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, Madrid, Spain

3. Department of Physical Therapy, Occupational Therapy, Rehabilitation and Physical Medicine, Universidad Rey Juan Carlos, Alcorcón, Spain

4. Department of Physiotherapy, Universidad CEU Cardenal Herrera, CEU Universities, Valencia, Spain

5. Surgery and Medical Surgical Specialities Department, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, University of Oviedo, Oviedo, Asturias, Spain

6. Exercise Intervention for Health Research Group (EXINH-RG), Department of Physiotherapy, University of Valencia, Valencia, Spain

Abstract

Abstract Objective The objective was to assess the effectiveness of neural mobilization (NM) techniques in the management of musculoskeletal neck disorders with nerve-related symptoms (MND-NRS). Methods We conducted a systematic review with meta-analysis, using pain intensity, disability, perceived function, cervical range of motion, and mechanosensitivity as the main outcome measures. Results The systematic review included 22 studies (n = 978). More favorable outcomes were observed for NM on pain intensity compared with control interventions (standardized mean differences (SMDs) −0.92; 95% CI −1.66−0.18), but not compared with other treatments (OTs) (SMD 1.06; 95% CI −0.02 to 2.15). Regarding neck pain intensity, no significant differences were found in favor of NM compared with OTs (SMD 0.37; 95% CI −0.35 to 1.1). However, between-treatment differences were found in favor of OT on arm-pain intensity (SMD 0.57; 95% CI 0.08–1.05). In addition, the grouped MA did not show statistically significant differences between NM and OT outcomes on the cervical range of motion (SMD 0.16; 95% CI −0.06 to 0.38). However, compared with no intervention, NM was associated with significantly improved outcomes in cervical rotation (SMD 0.91; 95% CI 0.61–1.22). Similar results were found regarding disability (SMD −0.08; 95% CI −0.36−0.20, and SMD −1.44; 95% CI −2.28−0.6, respectively). Finally, NM was associated with more favorable outcomes on mechanosensitivity compared with OT (SMD 0.79; 95% CI 0.15–1.42) and greater improvements in function compared with no intervention (SMD 0.89; 95% CI 0.16–1.62). Conclusions NM appeared to be effective to improve overall pain intensity when embedded in a physiotherapy treatment in the management of MND-NRS. When compared with no intervention, it was effective to improve neck rotation, disability, and function. However, it was not superior to other types of treatments in improving overall pain intensity, neck pain intensity, arm pain intensity, cervical range of motion and disability, except for mechanosensitivity.

Publisher

Oxford University Press (OUP)

Subject

Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine,Clinical Neurology,General Medicine

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