Neurodynamic exercises provide no additional benefit to extension-oriented exercises in people with chronic low back-related leg pain and a directional preference: A randomized clinical trial

Filho, Luís Fernando Sousa; Santos, Magda; Vasconcelos, Danielle Brito Matos; Soares, Erilaine Araujo; Santos, Gabriel Henrique Freire dos; Júnior, Walderi Monteiro da Silva

doi:10.1016/j.jbmt.2022.01.007

Cited by 2 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 36 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Of these, 27 reports were excluded and 40 remained for this systematic review, considering that 14 studies were included from other sources. Taking into account that two reports were related to the same study, 49 , 50 a total of 39 studies were included 49 – 88 ( Figure 1 ). The excluded reports are listed in Supplemental File 4 with the reasons for exclusion.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Included studies (n = 39) cover 10 musculoskeletal conditions: hand osteoarthritis (n = 3), 49 , 50 , 80 , 87 lateral epicondylitis (n = 4), 61 , 83 , 84 , 86 ankle sprain (n = 1), 72 shoulder impingement syndrome (n = 1), 85 rheumatoid arthritis (n = 2), 78 , 79 unspecified musculoskeletal pain (n = 1), 77 fibromyalgia (n = 1), 76 plantar heel pain syndrome (n = 1), 75 low back pain (n = 17), 58 – 60 , 62 – 71 , 73 , 74 , 81 , 82 and neck pain (n = 8). 51 – 57 , 88 …”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Fourteen randomised controlled trials 59 , 60 , 62 – 66 , 69 – 71 , 73 , 74 , 81 , 82 and three quasi-randomised trials 58 , 67 , 68 were included in the review (n = 701). Four trials used neural mobilisation as a single intervention 62 , 65 , 70 , 74 while 13 used neural mobilisation as an element of a multimodal intervention.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Four trials used neural mobilisation as a single intervention 62 , 65 , 70 , 74 while 13 used neural mobilisation as an element of a multimodal intervention. 58 – 60 , 63 , 64 , 66 – 69 , 71 , 73 , 81 , 82 Three studies applied sliding techniques, 59 , 71 , 74 10 applied tensioning techniques, 58 , 60 , 63 – 68 , 73 , 81 one used combined sliding and tensioning techniques, 82 and one compared a sliding technique against a tensioning technique. 69 Active neural mobilisation was performed in two studies, 59 , 82 passive neural mobilisation was applied in one study, 81 and combined passive and active techniques were used in 12 studies.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…58,60,[63][64][65][66][67][68][69]71,73,74 In two studies, no details on the neural mobilisation were given. 62,70 For pain intensity, 10 randomised controlled trials 59,60,62,63,66,70,71,74,81,82 eight at high risk of bias 59,62,63,66,70,71,81,82 and two at low risk of bias 60,74 and two quasi-randomised trials at critical risk of bias 67,68 were included in the meta-analysis (n = 476). The results showed a large and significant effect favouring the neural mobilisation group (effect size = −1.10, 95% confidence interval: −1.96; −0.24; very low certainty of evidence).…”

Section: Low Back Painmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Effectiveness of Neural Mobilisation on Pain Intensity, Functional Status, and Physical Performance in Adults with Musculoskeletal Pain – A Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis

Baptista,

Nery,

Cruz

et al. 2023

Clin Rehabil

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective To investigate up-to-date evidence of the effectiveness of neural mobilisation techniques compared with any type of comparator in improving pain, function, and physical performance in people with musculoskeletal pain. Data sources The following sources were consulted: PubMed, Web of Science, CENTRAL, CINAHL, Scopus, and PEDro databases; scientific repositories; and clinical trial registers. The last search was performed on 01/06/2023. Methods Two reviewers independently assessed the studies for inclusion. We included randomised, quasi-randomised, and crossover trials on musculoskeletal pain in which at least one group received neural mobilisation (alone or as part of multimodal interventions). Meta-analyses were performed where possible. The RoB 2 and the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation tools were used to assess risk of bias and to rate the certainty of evidence, respectively. Results Thirty-nine trials were identified. There was a significant effect favouring neural mobilisation for pain and function in people with low back pain, but not for flexibility. For neck pain, there was a significant effect favouring neural mobilisation as part of multimodal interventions for pain, but not for function and range of motion. Regarding other musculoskeletal conditions, it was not possible to conclude whether neural mobilisation is effective in improving pain and function. There was very low confidence for all effect estimates. Conclusions Neural mobilisation as part of multimodal interventions appears to have a positive effect on pain for patients with low back pain and neck pain and on function in people with low back pain. For the other musculoskeletal conditions, results are inconclusive.

show abstract