Study Design: Randomized clinical trial.Objectives: To analyze the immediate treatment effects of cervical mobilization and therapeutic ultrasound in patients with neurogenic cervicobrachial pain. Background: Different treatment modalities have been described for patients with neurogenic cervicobrachial pain. Although it has been suggested that a more specific approach, like cervical mobilization, would be more effective, effect studies are scarce. Methods and Measures: Twenty patients with subacute peripheral neurogenic cervicobrachial pain were assessed. Besides other criteria, patients were included if a cervical segmental motion restriction was present which could be regarded as a possible cause of the neurogenic disorder. Patients were randomly assigned to a mobilization or ultrasound group. Mobilization consisted of a contralateral lateral glide technique. The range of elbow extension, symptom distribution, and pain intensity during the neural tissue provocation test for the median nerve were used as outcome measures. Results were analyzed using a 2-way mixed-design ANOVA. Results: Significant differences in treatment effects between the 2 groups could be observed for all outcome measures (PՅ.0306). For the mobilization group, the increase in elbow extension from 137.3°to 156.7°, the 43.4% decrease in area of symptom distribution, and the decreased pain intensity from 7.3 to 5.8 were significant (PՅ.0003). For the ultrasound group, there were no significant improvements (PՆ.0521). Conclusions: When a cervical dysfunction can be regarded as a cause of the neurogenic disorder or as a contributing factor that impedes natural recovery, a cervical lateral glide mobilization has positive immediate effects in patients with subacute peripheral neurogenic cervicobrachial pain. This movement-based approach seems preferable to ultrasound. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2003;33:369-378.

A variety of chemically different compounds inhibit the replication of several serotypes of rhinoviruses (common-cold viruses). We noticed that one of these antiviral compounds, WIN 51711, had an antiviral spectrum clearly distinctive from a consensus spectrum or other capsid-binding compounds, although all of them were shown to share the same binding site. A systematic evaluation of all known rhinovirus capsid-binding compounds against all serotyped rhinoviruses was therefore initiated. Multivariate analysis of the results revealed the existence of two groups of rhinoviruses, which we will call antiviral groups A and B. The differential sensitivity of members of these groups to antiviral compounds suggests the existence of a dimorphic binding site. The antiviral groups turned out to be a reflection of a divergence of rhinovirus serotypes on a much broader level. Similarities in antiviral spectra were highly correlated with sequence similarities, not only of amino acids lining the antiviral compound-binding-site, but also of amino acids of the whole VP1 protein. Furthermore, analysis of epidemiological data indicated that group B rhinoviruses produced more than twice as many clinical infections per serotype than group A rhinoviruses did. Rhinoviruses belonging to the minor receptor group were without exception all computed to lie in the same region of antiviral group B.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract