Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37990512›Full record

SynthesisClinical rehabilitation2024

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

Frederico Mesquita Baptista, Ellen Nery, Eduardo Brazete Cruz, Vera Afreixo, Anabela G Silva

Registry-linked trialOpen access · hybridAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Clinical rehabilitation, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07515144 (Effect of Lower Limb Neural Mobilization on Selective Neuromuscular Variables and Calf Muscle Thickness in Elderly Population With Sarcopenia), which is not on this map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
1.7field-weighted citation impact, top 16% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

NCT07515144 naenrolling by invitationnot on this mapstarted 2025, after this paper: background citation

Effect of Lower Limb Neural Mobilization on Selective Neuromuscular Variables and Calf Muscle Thickness in Elderly Population With Sarcopenia

TypeinterventionalSponsorINTI International UniversityRan2025 to 2026Enrolled52ConditionsSarcopneia in Elderly IndividualsArmsNeural Mobilization, Otago Exercise
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Frederico Mesquita BaptistaCINTESIS.UA@RISE, Department of Medical Sciences, University of Aveiro, Aveiro, Portugal.ORCID 0000-0003-1842-6539
Ellen NeryCINTESIS.UA@RISE, Department of Medical Sciences, University of Aveiro, Aveiro, Portugal.
Eduardo Brazete CruzDepartamento Fisioterapia, Instituto Politécnico de Setúbal, Escola Superior de Saúde, Setúbal, Portugal / CHRC - Comprehensive Health Research Center, Setubal, Portugal.
Vera AfreixoDepartment of Mathematics, CIDMA - Center for Research and Development in Mathematics and Applications, University of Aveiro, Aveiro, Portugal.
Anabela G SilvaCINTESIS.UA@RISE, School of Health Sciences, University of Aveiro, Aveiro, Portugal.
Centre for Health Technology and Services Research · PTInstituto Politecnico de Setubal · PTUniversity of Aveiro · PT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo 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.

methodsTwo 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.

resultsThirty-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.

conclusionsNeural 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.

Indexed as

Low Back PainMusculoskeletal PainAdultFunctional StatusHumansNeck PainPain MeasurementPhysical Functional Performancedisabilitymusculoskeletal disordersneural mobilisationpainPhysical therapy

Identifiers

PMID37990512
PMCPMC10725147
OpenAlexW4388909644

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.