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.
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.
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.
Effect of Lower Limb Neural Mobilization on Selective Neuromuscular Variables and Calf Muscle Thickness in Elderly Population With Sarcopenia
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effects of neural mobilization of sciatic nerve and its branches in plantar foot pressures and stabilometry.Scientific reports · 2024Trial
- Article
- Demographic and Occupational Determinants of Work-Related Musculoskeletal Disorders: A Cross-Sectional Study.Journal of functional morphology and kinesiology · 2025Article
- Perineural Electrical Dry Needling and Neural Mobilization for Chemotherapy-Induced Peripheral Neuropathy: Case Report.Journal of clinical medicine · 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
5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
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
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.