Effects of Neurodynamics Versus Neurodynamic Sustained Natural Apophyseal Glide in Lumbosacral Radiculopathy
Life Sciences- Physiotherapy
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.22376/ijlpr.2023.13.6.L211-L226Keywords:
Neurodynamic, Neurodynamic sustained natural apophyseal glide, Low back pain, Lumbosacral radiculopathyAbstract
Lumbosacral radiculopathy is a frequently reported health issue in middle-aged people, with a prevalence varying fromabout 2.2% to 8%. Neurodynamic mobilization (NM) and Neurodynamic sustained natural apophyseal glide (N-SNAG) techniqueswere proven effective for Lumbosacral radiculopathy. But controversies are prevalent regarding the effectiveness of their treatmentin previous studies. N-SNAG is also a comparatively new technique that is clinically being used around, but more literature is neededto analyze its effectiveness. Hence, we aimed to evaluate the efficacy of N-SNAG in comparison with NM and conventional generalexercises in treating lumbosacral radiculopathy on pain, mobility, disability, muscle activation, and health-related quality of life(HRQL). One hundred and twenty-seven patients aged between 30 and 50 years were randomly allocated into 3 different treatmentgroups, where the first and second groups received N-SNAG and NM with general exercises, and the third (control) group receivedgeneral exercises only. Range of motion of lumbar and hip flexion, active straight leg raising, low back pain, radiculopathy pain, muscleactivation of biceps femoris and gastrocnemius muscles, disability, and HRQL were evaluated at baseline, and the end of 1st week, 2ndweek, 7th week and 18th week for all the groups. Two-way repeated measure ANOVA with Bonferroni’s t-test revealed significant(p<0.05) improvement in the range of lumbar and hip flexion, LBP, radiculopathy pain, active SLR, disability, and HRQL in both withingroups and between groups. Muscle activation of biceps femoris and gastrocnemius also improved significantly (p<0.05) in all threegroups, but no significant (p>0.05) differences were seen between groups. The study concludes that N-SNAG is more efficient thanNM and general exercise in improving pain, lumbar and hip flexion range, SLR, disability, Muscle activation, and HRQL in Lumbosacralradiculopathy patients.
References
Alexander CE, Varacallo M. Lumbosacral radiculopathy. Stat. 2021.
Lee-Robinson A, Lee AT. Clinical and diagnostic findings in patients with lumbar radiculopathy and polyneuropathy. Am J Clin Med. 2010;7:80-5.
Paraseth TK, Gajendran M, James D. Approach to chronic low back pain in a Rural Mission Hospital: an audit report. CHRISMED J Health Res. 2018;5(1):43. doi: 10.4103/CJHR.CJHR_40_17.
Bogduk N. On the definitions and physiology of back pain, referred pain, and radicular pain. Pain. 2009;147(1-3):17-9. doi: 10.1016/j.pain.2009.08.020, PMID 19762151.
Hahne AJ, Ford JJ, Mcmeeken JM. Conservative management of lumbar disc herniation with associated radiculopathy: a systematic review. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2010;35(11):E488-504. doi: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e3181cc3f56, PMID 20421859.
Boyles R, Toy P, Mellon J, Hayes M, Hammer B. Effectiveness of manual physical therapy in the treatment of cervical radiculopathy: A systematic review. J Man Manip Ther. 2011;19(3):135-42. doi: 10.1179/2042618611Y.0000000011, PMID 22851876.
Pradhan A, Jothilingam M, Agarwal S, RayChaudhuri G. Exercise and manual therapy for treatment of low back pain with or without lumbosacral radiculopathy: A narrative review. Ann Rom Soc Cell Biol. 2021;25:9627-37.
Shacklock M. Neurodynamics. Physiotherapy. 1995;81(1):9-16. doi: 10.1016/S0031-9406(05)67024-1.
Bonser RJ, Hancock CL, Hansberger BL, Loutsch RA, Stanford EK, Zeigel AK, et al. Changes in hamstring range of motion after neurodynamic sciatic sliders: A critically appraised topic. J Sport Rehabil. 2017;26(4):311-5. doi: 10.1123/jsr.2015-0166, PMID 27632844.
Hussien HM, Abdel-Raoof NA, Kattabei OM, Ahmed HH. Effect of mulligan concept lumbar SNAG on chronic nonspecific low back pain. J Chiropr Med. 2017;16(2):94-102. doi: 10.1016/J.JCM.2017.01.003, PMID 28559749.
Fiaad MN, Elsayed WH, Kamal M, Takla N, El ZAM. Mulligan mobilization vs. spinal manipulation effect on low back pain. J Adv Pharm Educ Res. 2020;10:70-5.
Hearn A, Rivett DA. Cervical SNAGs: A biomechanical analysis. Man Ther. 2002;7(2):71-9. doi: 10.1054/math.2002.0440, PMID 12151243.
Pradeep S, Heggannavar A, Metgud S. Effect of sciatic nerve neurodynamic sustained natural apophyseal glides on individuals with pelvic crossed syndrome: A randomized controlled trial. Indian J Phys Ther Res. 2020;2(1):35-40. doi: 10.4103/ijptr.ijptr_40_19.
Kumar D. Manual of mulligan concept. International ed. New Delhi: Create Space Independent Publishing Platform; 2014. p. 237-9.
Pradhan A, Jothilingam M, Agarwal S, Manikumar M. Effects of neurodynamic sustained natural apophyseal glides versus conventional physiotherapy exercises in the treatment of lumbosacral radiculopathy. Chin J Med Genet. 2022;32(3):472-7.
Mahmoud ELDesoky MT. Efficacy of neural mobilization on low back pain with s1 radiculopathy. Int J Physiother. 2016;3(3):362-70. doi: 10.15621/IJPHY/2016/V3I3/100847.
Ellis RF, Hing WA, McNair PJ. Comparison of longitudinal sciatic nerve movement with different mobilization exercises: an in vivo study utilizing ultrasound imaging. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2012;42(8):667-75. doi: 10.2519/jospt.2012.3854, PMID 22711174.
Kumar V, Goyal M, Rajendran N. Effect of neural mobilization on monosynaptic reflex – a pretest posttest experimental design. Int J Physiother Res. 2013;3:58-62.
Santos FM, Silva JT, Giardini AC, Rocha PA, Achermann APP, Alves AS et al. Neural mobilization reverses behavioral and cellular changes that characterize neuropathic pain in rats. Mol Pain. 2012;8:57. doi: 10.1186/1744-8069-8-57, PMID 22839415.
Vicenzino B, Paungmali A, Teys P. Mulligan’s mobilization-with-movement, positional faults and pain relief: current concepts from a critical review of literature. Man Ther. 2007;12(2):98-108. doi: 10.1016/j.math.2006.07.012, PMID 16959529.
Thakur A, Mahapatra AK. Effect of mulligan spinal mobilization with leg movement and Shacklock neural tissue mobilization in lumbar radiculopathy: A randomized controlled trial. J Med Thesis. 2015;2:27-30.
Yadav S, Arora Nijhawan M, Panda P. Effectiveness of spinal mobilization with leg movement (smwlm) in patients with lumbar radiculopathy (L5 / S1 nerve root) in lumbar disc herniation. Int J Physiother Res. 2014;2:712-30.
Moulson A, Watson T. A preliminary investigation into the relationship between cervical snags and sympathetic nervous system activity in the upper limbs of an asymptomatic population. Man Ther. 2006;11(3):214-24. doi: 10.1016/J.MATH.2006.04.003, PMID 16820316.
Hearn A, Rivett DA. Cervical SNAGs: a biomechanical analysis. Man Ther. 2002;7(2):71-9. doi: 10.1054/MATH.2002.0440, PMID 12151243.
Rainville J, Hartigan C, Martinez E, Limke J, Jouve C, Finno M. Exercise as a treatment for chronic low back pain. Spine J. 2004;4(1):106-15. doi: 10.1016/S1529-9430(03)00174-8, PMID 14749199.
Sarkari E, Multani N. Efficacy of neural mobilization in sciatica. J Exerc Sci Physiother. 2007;3:136-41.
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
Copyright (c) 2023 Anwesh Pradhan, Muthukumaran Jothilingam, Shabnam Agarwal
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
