effectiveness of cervical traction and neural mobilization in patients with cervical radiculopathy

Conditions: Cervical Radiculopathy

Summary: the purpose of the study is to examine the effects of cervical traction with or without the addition of neural mobilization, in patients with cervical radiculopathy

background:cervical radiculopathy (cr) is a disorder of the peripheral nervous system where the resulted cervical nerve root (cnr) pathology produces a chronic pain and disability. based on some epidemiological findings, cr is a common clinical diagnosis since its annual incidence has been estimated to be 83 cases per 100,000, with an increased prevalence noted in the fifth decade of life. in addition, c6 and c7 nerve roots are most commonly involved in this disorder, mainly due to the high range of motion occurring between cervical vertebrae c5-c6 and c6-c7. cr is caused by a disc herniation, or a space-occupying lesion that can result in cnr inflammation, impingement, or both. in normal situations, cnrs ensure the normal function of sensation, movement and motor coordination of the upper limb. therefore, the development of cr can produce sensory and motor deficits in the involved limb, including pins and needles, numbness and muscle weakness, along with a neuropathic pain described as a burning or shooting pain. these symptoms lead patients to exhibit severe functional limitations such as difficulties to work, to sleep or to participate in hobbies. studies on this topic identified several socioeconomic and psychological deficits, from lost work and wages to prolonged pain and impaired social functioning, leading patients with cr to express symptoms of anxiety and depression. treatment of cr has been the subject of debate between physiotherapists and researchers. several non-operative treatment approaches have been advocated to reduce cr pain and their analgesic effect has been recognized in a number of randomized clinical trials with these in turn being analyzed in few systematic reviews. based on these studies, patients with cr can benefit from a multimodal treatment approach including the application of postural education, cervical traction and manual therapy techniques (mobilization, thrust manipulation etc.) applied to the cervical spine. however the small number of these studies as well as their poor methodological quality due to the short-term follow ups, lack of patient's homogeneity, randomization or control group etc., raise several questions about the validity of research findings and therefore much more studies are necessary. among manual therapy techniques that have been recommended to improve the patient's pain and functional limitations, neural mobilization (nm) has been advocated as an effective treatment option. nm introduced as an intervention for pain relief more than 25 years ago are techniques that involve a specific sequence of joint movements to mobilize the involved peripheral nerve in order to facilitate the reduced nerve gliding and reduced the increased neural mechanosensitivity. the application of nm is common but since now little research attention has been given to support its usage in patients with cr. recently, a case study and a randomized controlled study concluded that neural mobilization applied simultaneously with cervical traction can produce clinically meaningful improvements over a 4-week period, in terms of pain, disability, function, grip strength and cervical spine range of motion. however, both methodological designs did not allow determining whether nm provided these benefits. thus, the purpose of the present study was to examine the effects of cervical traction with or without the addition of nm, in patients with cr.

Eligibility criteria:
inclusion criteria: * unilateral sensory and motor deficits including sharp pain, muscle weakness and numbness in the upper arm * a positive result in a minimum three of four tests (spurling's test, distraction test, upper limb neurodynamic test 1 and ipsilateral cervical rotation of less than 60) of a clinical prediction rule. this clinical prediction rule has demonstrated 94% specificity (95% = 0.88 to 1.00), 24% sensitivity (95% = 0.05 to 0.43) and a positive likelihood ratio of 6.1 (95% = 2.0 to 18.6) when 3 of 4 items were positive exclusion criteria: * a current history of cervical myelopathy or signs of upper motor neuron disease * bilateral cr or other musculoskeletal conditions in the affected limb. * receive of any prescription or over-the-counter analgesia or anti-inflammatory medication during the prior two weeks

Keywords: neck pain neurodynamics spinal manipulative therapy