Related Experiment Video
Updated: Aug 20, 2025
Author Spotlight: Unveiling the Therapeutic Effects of FSN Treatment – Bridging Research and Clinical Applications in Neuropathic Pain
Published on: June 30, 2023
The Effectiveness of Neuromobilization in Patients With Cervical Radiculopathy: A Systematic Review With
Eleftherios Paraskevopoulos1, George Koumantakis1, Maria Papandreou1
1Laboratory of Advanced Physiotherapy, Department of Physiotherapy, University of West Attica, Athens,Greece.
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.
