The effectiveness of neurodynamic techniques in patients with diabetic peripheral neuropathy: Study protocol for a randomized sham-controlled trial

Background

Diabetic peripheral neuropathy (DPN) is one of the most common complications of diabetes mellitus (DM). DPN is the primary risk factor for diabetic foot ulcers that can cause amputation. Although several observational studies have investigated the morphological and biomechanical characteristics of peripheral nerves in DPN, interventional studies regarding the effectiveness of neurodynamic techniques (NDT) in DPN patients are confined to a handful. The effects of NDT on neuropathy severity, nerve conduction parameters, quality of life (QoL), and mechanosensitivity have not been explored yet in this population.

Materials and Methods

Forty type 2 DPN (T2DPN) patients, diagnosed based on an electrodiagnosis study, will be recruited into two groups. The experimental group will receive the tibial nerve's real proximal and distal slider techniques in addition to DPN standard treatment as a basic treatment, and the control group will receive the tibial nerve's sham proximal and distal slider techniques along with the basic treatment for eight sessions twice a week. Baseline and post-intervention assessments will be based on the Michigan diabetic neuropathy score (MDNS) (primary outcome), tibial nerve conduction parameters, neuropathy-specific quality of life (Neuro QoL) questionnaire, and straight leg raising range of motion (SLR ROM) (secondary outcomes).

Results

This study is expected to last approximately seven months, depending on recruitment. The results of the study will be published in a peer-reviewed journal.

Conclusions

The present study will evaluate the efficacy of NDT on the primary and secondary outcome measurements in DPN patients.

Mechanism, application and effect evaluation of nerve mobilization in the treatment of low back pain: A narrative review

Lower back pain is a prevalent condition affecting people across all age groups and causing significant personal and societal burdens. While numerous treatments exist, nerve mobilization has emerged as a promising approach for managing lower back pain. Nerve mobilization involves applying gentle and rhythmic movements to the affected nerves, promoting normal nerve function and releasing tension. It has been well documented that nerve mobilization can be effective in reducing pain and improving function in patients with lower back pain, but the underlying mechanisms have not been clarified. This study aims to review the mechanisms of nerve mobilization in the management of lower back pain, its application, and effectiveness evaluation, and provide a potential solution for managing lower back pain.

Neurodynamics Is an Effective Intervention for Carpal Tunnel Syndrome

Clinical Scenario: Carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS) is the most common entrapment neuropathy of the upper-extremity. Due to the involvement of the median nerve, long-term compression of this nerve can lead to hand dysfunction and disability that can impact work and daily life. As such, early treatment is warranted to prevent any long-term damage to the median nerve. Conservative management is utilized in those with mild to moderate CTS. Neural mobilizations can aid in the reduction of neural edema, neural mobility, and neural adhesion while improving nerve conduction. Clinical Question: Is neurodynamics effective in reducing pain and reported symptoms in those with CTS? Summary of Key Findings: Four studies were included, with 2 studies utilizing passive neural mobilizations, one study using active techniques, and one study using active neural mobilizations with splinting. All studies showed large effect size for pain, symptom severity, and physical function. Clinical Bottom Line: Neurodynamics is an effective treatment for CTS. Splinting is only effective when combined with neurodynamics. Strength of Recommendation: Level B evidence to support the use of neurodynamics for the treatment of CTS.

[Effect of electroacupuncture at "Jiaji" (EX-B 2) points combined with nerve mobilization on motor function and mRNA and protein expression of RhoA in rabbits with sciatic nerve injury]

OBJECTIVE

To observe the effects of electroacupuncture (EA) at "Jiaji" (EX-B 2) points combined with nerve mobilization on protein and mRNA expression of RhoA in rabbits with sciatic nerve injury, and to provide theoretical basis for the treatment of peripheral nerve injury by EA at "Jiaji" (EX-B 2) points combined with nerve mobilization.

METHODS

A total of 180 New Zealand rabbits were randomly divided into a normal control group, a model control group, a nerve mobilization group, an EA group, an EA plus nerve mobilization group, 36 rabbits in each group. Each group was further divided into a 1-week subgroup, 2-week subgroup and 4-week subgroup, 12 rabbits in each subgroup. The sciatic nerve injury model was made by clamping method. The rabbits in the normal control group did not receive any intervention. The rabbits in the model control group was normally fed after operation. The rabbits in the nerve mobilization group were treated with nerve mobilization; the manipulation lasted for 1 s and relaxed for 5 s, 10 times per day, 6 days per week. The rabbits in the EA group were treated with EA at "Jiaji" (EX-B 2) points (L₄-L₆), once a day, 30 min each time, 6 times per week. The rabbits in the EA plus nerve mobilization group were treated with EA at "Jiaji" (EX-B 2) points, followed by nerve mobilization. The function of sciatic nerve on the injured side was evaluated by toe tension reflex and modified Tarlov score; the tissues of corresponding segments of spinal cord L₄-L₆ and sciatic nerve were taken; the expression of RhoA gene was detected by real-time PCR and the expression of RhoA protein was detected by Western Blot.

RESULTS

① Toe tension reflex and modified Tarlov score: at 1, 2 and 4 weeks, the scores in the model control group were lower than those in the normal control group (all P<0.01). The scores in the subgroup of nerve mobilization group, EA group and EA plus nerve mobilization group were higher than those in the model control group (all P<0.01), and the scores in the subgroup of EA plus nerve mobilization group were higher than those in the nerve mobilization group and the EA group (all P<0.01); the recovery was the best at 4 weeks. ② The mRNA and protein expression of RhoA: in segment of spinal cord, at 1, 2 and 4 weeks, the expression in the model control group was higher than that in the normal control group (all P<0.01). The expression in the subgroup of nerve mobilization group, EA group and EA plus nerve mobilization group was lower than that in the model control group (all P<0.01), and the expression in the subgroup of EA plus nerve mobilization group was lower than that in the nerve mobilization group and the EA group (all P<0.01); at 1 week and 4 weeks, the expression in the nerve mobilization group was lower than that in the EA group (all P<0.01); at 2 weeks, the expression in the nerve mobilization group was higher than that in the EA group (all P<0.01). In the sciatic nerve, at 1, 2 and 4 weeks, the expression in the model control group was higher than that in the normal control group (all P<0.01). The expression in the subgroup of nerve mobilization group, EA group and EA plus nerve mobilization group was lower than that in the model control group (all P<0.01); at 2 weeks and 4 weeks, the expression in the EA plus nerve mobilization group was lower than that in the nerve mobilization group and EA group (all P<0.01); at 1 week, the expression in the nerve mobilization group was lower than that in the EA group and EA plus nerve mobilization group (all P<0.01), but the differences between the EA group and the EA plus nerve mobilization group were not significant (P>0.05); at 2 weeks, the expression in the nerve mobilization group was higher than that in the EA group (all P<0.01); at 4 weeks, the expression in the nerve mobilization group was lower than that in the EA group (all P<0.01).

CONCLUSION

The nerve mobilization and EA at "Jiaji" (EX-B 2) points could both promote the repair of injured sciatic nerve, which may be related to the down-regulation of RhoA expression, and the combination of the two methods has better effects.

Neurodynamic mobilization in a collegiate long jumper with exercise-induced lateral leg and ankle pain: A case report

STUDY DESIGN

Case Report.

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this case report is to describe nerve mobilization in the treatment of lower extremity neuropathic pain in a female collegiate long jumper.

CASE DESCRIPTION

A 21 year-old long jumper presented 7 months after onset of ankle and leg pain. She complained of "aching" pain over the lateral ankle, radiating proximally to just superior to the lateral knee. Neurodynamic testing of the sural and superficial branch of the fibular nerves was positive. Interventions/Outcomes: Persistent neuropathic pain which impeded sport participation in a collegiate athlete did not improve using traditional rehabilitation intervention, but did ameliorate as a result of an intervention which included self-administered, supervised nerve mobilization of the sural and superficial branch of fibular nerve. The patient improved in all outcome measures including the Lower Extremity Functional Scale (LEFS), Numerical Pain Rating Scale (NPRS), and the Global Rating of Change (GROC).

DISCUSSION

In a female collegiate athlete with persistent neuropathic pain, initial improvements were achieved with traditional rehabilitation, but her pain continued. Considerable additional improvements were achieved following the addition of self-administered, supervised nerve mobilization. Neurodynamic testing should be performed on patients with possible peripheral nerve involvement and treatment commenced if positive.

The Effectiveness of Neural Mobilization for Neuromusculoskeletal Conditions: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Study Design Systematic review with meta-analysis. Objectives To determine the efficacy of neural mobilization (NM) for musculoskeletal conditions with a neuropathic component. Background Neural mobilization, or neurodynamics, is a movement-based intervention aimed at restoring the homeostasis in and around the nervous system. The current level of evidence for NM is largely unknown. Methods A database search for randomized trials investigating the effect of NM on neuromusculoskeletal conditions was conducted, using standard methods for article identification, selection, and quality appraisal. Where possible, studies were pooled for meta-analysis, with pain, disability, and function as the primary outcomes. Results Forty studies were included in this review, of which 17 had a low risk of bias. Meta-analyses could only be performed on self-reported outcomes. For chronic low back pain, disability (Oswestry Disability Questionnaire [0-50]: mean difference, -9.26; 95% confidence interval [CI]: -14.50, -4.01; P<.001) and pain (intensity [0-10]: mean difference, -1.78; 95% CI: -2.55, -1.01; P<.001) improved following NM. For chronic neck-arm pain, pain improved (intensity: mean difference, -1.89; 95% CI: -3.14, -0.64; P<.001) following NM. For most of the clinical outcomes in individuals with carpal tunnel syndrome, NM was not effective (P>.11) but showed some positive neurophysiological effects (eg, reduced intraneural edema). Due to a scarcity of studies or conflicting results, the effect of NM remains uncertain for various conditions, such as postoperative low back pain, cubital tunnel syndrome, and lateral epicondylalgia. Conclusion This review reveals benefits of NM for back and neck pain, but the effect of NM on other conditions remains unclear. Due to the limited evidence and varying methodological quality, conclusions may change over time. Level of Evidence Therapy, level 1a. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2017;47(9):593-615. Epub 13 Jul 2017. doi:10.2519/jospt.2017.7117.