ArticleJournal of athletic training2023
Mechanical Effects of a Specific Neurodynamic Mobilization of the Superficial Fibular Nerve: A Cadaveric Study.
Article in Journal of athletic training, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Description of the episeptal and interlaminar fascial tunnels for the superficial fibular nerve and its terminal branches.Surgical and radiologic anatomy : SRA · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
contextA specific neurodynamic mobilization for the superficial fibular nerve (SFN) has been suggested in the reference literature for manual therapists to evaluate nerve mechanosensitivity in patients. However, no authors of biomechanical studies have examined the ability of this technique to produce nerve strain. Therefore, the mechanical specificity of this technique is not yet established.
objectivesTo test whether this examination and treatment technique produced nerve strain in the fresh frozen cadaver and the contribution of each motion to total longitudinal strain.
designControlled laboratory study.
settingLaboratory. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): A differential variable reluctance transducer was inserted in 10 SFNs from 6 fresh cadavers to measure strain during the mobilization. A specific sequence of plantar flexion, ankle inversion, straight-leg raise position, and 30° of hip adduction was applied to the lower limb. The mobilization was repeated at 0°, 30°, 60°, and 90° of the straight-leg raise position to measure the effect of hip-flexion position.
resultsCompared with a resting position, this neurodynamic mobilization produced a significant amount of strain in the SFN (7.93% ± 0.51%, P < .001). Plantar flexion (59.34% ± 25.82%) and ankle inversion (32.80% ± 21.41%) accounted for the biggest proportions of total strain during the mobilization. No difference was noted among different hip-flexion positions. Hip adduction did not significantly contribute to final strain (0.39% ± 10.42%, P > .05), although high variability among limbs existed.
conclusionsAnkle motion should be considered the most important factor during neurodynamic assessment of the SFN for distal entrapment. These results suggest that this technique produces sufficient strain in the SFN and could therefore be evaluated in vivo for correlation with mechanosensitivity.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.