Effectiveness of neural mobilisation for the treatment of nerve-related cervicobrachial pain: a systematic review with subgroup meta-analysis.

ABSTRACT: Neural mobilisations (NM) have been advocated for the treatment of nerve-related cervicobrachial pain; however, it is unclear what types of patients with nerve-related cervicobrachial pain (if any) may benefit. Medline, Web of Science, Scopus, PeDro, Cinahl, and Cochrane databases were searched from inception until December 2022. Randomised controlled trials were included if they assessed the effectiveness of NM in nerve-related cervicobrachial pain, and outcome measures were pain intensity and/or disability. Studies were classified according to their inclusion/exclusion criteria as radiculopathy , Wainner cluster , Hall , and Elvey cluster or other . Meta-analyses with subgroup analyses were performed. Risk of bias was assessed using Cochrane Rob2 tool. Twenty-seven studies were included. For pain and disability reduction, NM was found to be more effective than no treatment (pooled pain mean difference [MD] = -2.81, 95% confidence interval [CI] = -3.81 to -1.81; pooled disability standardized mean difference = -1.55, 95% CI = -2.72 to -0.37), increased the effectiveness of standard physiotherapy as an adjuvant when compared with standard physiotherapy alone (pooled pain MD = -1.44, 95% CI = -1.98 to -0.89; pooled disability MD = -11.07, 95% CI = -16.38 to -5.75) but was no more effective than cervical traction (pooled pain MD = -0.33, 95% CI = -1.35 to 0.68; pooled disability MD = -10.09, 95% CI = -21.89 to 1.81). For disability reduction, NM was found to be more effective than exercise (pooled MD = -18.27, 95% CI = -20.29 to -17.44). In most comparisons, there were significant differences in the effectiveness of NM between the subgroups. Neural mobilisations was consistently more effective than all alternative interventions (no treatment, traction, exercise, and standard physiotherapy alone) in 13 studies classified as Wainner cluster . PROSPERO registration: CRD42022376087.

Undergraduate research implementation in physiotherapy: a hands-on and real experience of a randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Evidence-based practice (EBP) is the gold standard approach in physiotherapy, and it is essential that students are aware that it is the appropriate way to provide the patient with the best possible treatment. Undergraduate research (UR) can positively influence learning outcomes and research competencies related to EBP compared to traditional methods of higher education. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of implementing a research-based activity (i.e., active participation in a randomised controlled trial [RCT]) in the UR programme on the learning and acquisition of research methodology-related competencies by first-year physiotherapy students. METHODS: Students in the first academic year of the Bachelor´s Degree in Physiotherapy of University of Deusto (Donostia-San Sebastian, Spain) who were enrolled in the subject 'Introduction to Research Methodology' were invited to take part in a real RCT which consisted of three groups: intervention, placebo, and control group. While the RCT was carried out, researchers and/or participants roles were combined among students during the semester. At the end, a questionnaire that included open and closed questions was used to evaluate the effectiveness of the UR strategies used in students´ acquisition of theoretical knowledge, research competencies, self-efficacy of RCT skills and procedures. Lecturers also completed the questionnaire to evaluate their experience. RESULTS: From the 114 students enrolled in the subject, 102 participated in the RCT and 110 answered the final questionnaire. Regarding the development of research competencies, UR had a positive or very positive impact on critical thinking (67% and 18%, respectively) and in the assessment of methodological quality (66% and 23%, respectively). Furthermore, most students reported that the implementation of the RCT facilitated their knowledge of placebo, detection of bias, development of critical thinking and a better understanding of methodological issues in research. Lecturers reported an additional burden that was difficult to reconcile with daily duties. CONCLUSION: The novel UR program provided students with a new opportunity to improve their knowledge of RCT procedures, thus making the learning process more meaningful. Therefore, ways of teaching and learning focused on improving research and inquiry attitudes should be considered and integrated into the health care curriculum, especially in physiotherapy programs, to ensure the transfer of EBP for the provision of the best care. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian New Zealand Clinical Registry: ACTRN12622000263796p (14/02/2022).

Effectiveness of Specific Neck Exercise for Nonspecific Neck Pain; Usefulness of Strategies for Patient Selection and Tailored Exercise-A Systematic Review With Meta-Analysis.

OBJECTIVE: Specific neck exercises (SNE) targeting deep cervical flexors and extensors are commonly used for the treatment of nonspecific neck pain (NSNP). However, whether SNE are more effective than alternative exercise interventions (AEI) remains unclear. Furthermore, it has been postulated that SNE may be most effective when they are tailored and targeted to patients with evidence of motor control dysfunction, yet this notion also remains unproven. The objectives of this study were to compare the effectiveness of SNE with that of AEI for reducing pain and disability in people with NSNP and to assess whether the effectiveness of SNE is increased when the exercises are tailored and provided to patients with evidence of motor control dysfunction. METHODS: For this systematic review with meta-analysis, Medline, Web of Science, Scopus, and Physiotherapy Evidence Database were searched. Eligibility criteria included randomized controlled trials evaluating the effectiveness of SNE against that of AEI in people with NSNP. Meta-analysis included subgroup analyses to determine the effect of exercise tailoring and participant selection criteria on the effectiveness of SNE. RESULTS: Twelve studies were included. Meta-analysis revealed greater effectiveness of SNE in the short to medium term for reducing pain (pooled standardized mean difference [SMD] = -0.41; 95% CI = -0.76 to -0.06; P = .02) and disability (pooled SMD = -0.41; 95% CI = -0.78 to -0.04; P = .03) but no differences in the long term for pain (pooled SMD = -1.30; 95% CI = -3.35 to 0.75; P = .21) and disability (pooled SMD = -1.81; 95% CI = -4.29 to 0.67; P = .15), although evidence was limited for the latter. The effectiveness of SNE was not superior in studies that included only participants with motor control dysfunction or when exercises were tailored to each participant. Overall, the studies were of low quality. Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation revealed low certainty, serious risk of bias, and inconsistency of findings for short- to medium-term effects and very low certainty, serious risk of bias, and very serious inconsistency for long-term effects. CONCLUSION: The preferential use of SNE may be recommended to achieve better short- to medium-term outcomes, although the low quality of evidence affects the certainty of these findings. Currently used strategies for selecting patients and tailoring SNE are not supported by the evidence and therefore cannot be recommended for clinical practice. IMPACT: SNE are more effective than AEI for reducing pain and disability in patients with NSNP in the short to medium term, but overall evidence is of low quality, affecting the certainty of the findings. Tests of muscle dysfunction (mostly the craniocervical flexion test) currently used in studies to select patients and tailor SNE do not result in greater effectiveness of these exercises. LAY SUMMARY: Evidence suggests SNE are more effective than other forms of exercise, although evidence is overall of low quality. Use of the craniocervical flexion test in isolation to select participants and/or tailor SNE cannot be recommended.