Afsah Ayub1, Muhammad Osama2, Shakeel Ahmad3. 1. Shifa International Hospital, Islamabad, Pakistan. 2. Institute of Rehabilitation Sciences, Foundation University, Islamabad, Pakistan. 3. Riphah College of Rehabilitation Sciences, Islamabad, Pakistan.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Neural mobilization is an effective technique in the management of cervical radiculopathy (CR). However, the difference between active versus passive upper extremity (UE) neural mobilization techniques in the management of cervical radiculopathy is not well established. OBJECTIVE: To determine the role of active versus passive UE neural mobilization in females with cervical radiculopathy. METHODS: A double blind randomized controlled trial was conducted at Shifa International Hospital from Sep 2016 to Feb 2017, and 44 females were included and randomized into 2 groups, receiving 12 treatment sessions in total. Group A received active whereas Group B received passive UE neural mobilization, along with cervical traction and Unilateral Posterior Anterior (UPA) glide regardless of the group. Numeric pain rating scale (NPRS), Neck Disability Index (NDI) and cervical range of motion (ROM) were used as outcome measurement tools. Non-parametric tests of significance were used for inter group and intra group comparison (Mann-Whitney U test and Wilcoxon test). RESULTS: A statistically significant difference was observed between pre and post NPRS, NDI and ROM scores after 4 weeks of treatment for both groups (p< 0.05). However, no significant differences were observed in post treatment scores of active and passive neural mobilization groups (p> 0.05). CONCLUSION: Both active and passive neural mobilization is effective in the management of cervical radiculopathy. One of the interventions is not superior to the other.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: Neural mobilization is an effective technique in the management of cervical radiculopathy (CR). However, the difference between active versus passive upper extremity (UE) neural mobilization techniques in the management of cervical radiculopathy is not well established. OBJECTIVE: To determine the role of active versus passive UE neural mobilization in females with cervical radiculopathy. METHODS: A double blind randomized controlled trial was conducted at Shifa International Hospital from Sep 2016 to Feb 2017, and 44 females were included and randomized into 2 groups, receiving 12 treatment sessions in total. Group A received active whereas Group B received passive UE neural mobilization, along with cervical traction and Unilateral Posterior Anterior (UPA) glide regardless of the group. Numeric pain rating scale (NPRS), Neck Disability Index (NDI) and cervical range of motion (ROM) were used as outcome measurement tools. Non-parametric tests of significance were used for inter group and intra group comparison (Mann-Whitney U test and Wilcoxon test). RESULTS: A statistically significant difference was observed between pre and post NPRS, NDI and ROM scores after 4 weeks of treatment for both groups (p< 0.05). However, no significant differences were observed in post treatment scores of active and passive neural mobilization groups (p> 0.05). CONCLUSION: Both active and passive neural mobilization is effective in the management of cervical radiculopathy. One of the interventions is not superior to the other.