Soft Tissue Mobilization Versus Therapeutic Ultrasound for Subjects With Neck and Arm Pain

Cervical Radiculopathy Clinical Trial

Official title:

The Effects of Soft Tissue Mobilization Versus Therapeutic Ultrasound for Subjects With Neck and Arm Pain With Evidence of Neural Mechanical Sensitivity: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Clinical Trial Details — Status: Completed

Administrative data

• NCT number: NCT02081456
• Other study ID #: 20-242
• Status: Completed
• Phase: N/A
• Start date: November 2009
• Est. completion date: June 2012

Study information

• Verified date: October 2018
• Source: University of Nevada, Las Vegas
• Contact: n/a
• Is FDA regulated: No
• Study type: Interventional

Clinical Trial Summary

The purpose of this study is to investigate effects of soft tissue mobilization versus therapeutic ultrasound in subjects with neck and arm pain who demonstrate neural mechanical sensitivity.

Description:

To investigate the immediate effects of soft tissue mobilization (STM) versus therapeutic ultrasound (US) in patients with neck and arm pain who demonstrate neural mechanical sensitivity. Twenty-three patients with neck and arm pain and a positive upper limb neurodynamic test (ULNT) were randomly assigned to receive STM or therapeutic US during a single session. Outcome measures were collected immediately before and after treatment, and at 2-4 day follow-up. Primary outcomes were the Global Rating of Change (GROC), range of motion (ROM) during the ULNT, and pain rating during the ULNT. Secondary measures included the Neck Disability Index (NDI), Patient-Specific Functional Scale (PSFS), Numeric Pain Rating Scale (NPRS), and active range of shoulder abduction motion combined with the wrist neutral or wrist extension.

Recruitment information / eligibility

• Status: Completed
• Enrollment: 23
• Est. completion date: June 2012
• Est. primary completion date: June 2012
• Accepts healthy volunteers: No
• Gender: All
• Age group: 18 Years to 65 Years

Eligibility

Inclusion Criteria:

1. Active movement dysfunction that could be related to mechanical sensitivity of the neural structures of the upper limb. (i.e. painful shoulder abduction with elbow extension that is limited more when the wrist is extended than when the wrist is in neutral.)

2. Positive response to upper limb neural provocation testing (ULNT 1) (see description below for details)

3. Tenderness to palpation over the cervical nerve trunks, brachial plexus, or along the median nerve.

4. Tender points or taut bands in the muscles of the upper quadrant including the scalenes, cervical paraspinals, trapezius, deltoid, pectoralis major or minor, rotator cuff, biceps, triceps, coracobrachialis, brachialis, radiobrachialis, pronator teres, supinator, forearm extensor, forearm flexor, pronator quadratus, and hand intrinsic muscles.

Exclusion Criteria:

1. Red flags noted in the medical screening questionnaire such as tumor, fracture, history of metabolic disease, prolonged history of corticosteroid use.

2. Signs of central nervous system involvement such as hyper-reflexia (exaggerated response to deep tendon reflex testing), unsteadiness during gait, ataxia, disturbed vision, nystagmus, altered taste, positive Babinski's or Hoffman's reflexes.

3. Cervical spine surgery within the last 3 months.

4. Litigation associated with their neck and/or upper limb pain.

5. Insufficient English language skills to complete the questionnaires and follow-up instructions.

6. Inability to complete the treatment and follow-up schedule.

7. Current pregnancy.

Related Conditions & MeSH terms

• Cervical Radiculopathy
• Radiculopathy

Intervention

Other:
• Soft Tissue Mobilization
Patients in the STM group received treatment in supine, with their head resting on one pillow and the involved UE positioned in abduction and external rotation to preload the neural structures of the upper limb. Manual pressure was applied to the soft tissues of the upper quadrant in a deep, stroking manner with the intention to improve the mobility of the soft tissues surrounding the pathway of the neural structures of the upper limb as well as any tender or tight tissues. The therapist spent approximately 7 minutes on the neck and scapular region, 4 minutes on the upper arm, and 4 minutes on the forearm and hand. The therapist was allowed to vary the time spent on each region according to his/her assessment of the patient's condition. The procedure lasted a total of 15 minutes.

Device:
• Therapeutic Ultrasound
Patients received therapeutic US applied for a period of 5 minutes to the most painful region of the neck, then a second 5-minute dose at the most painful region of the upper extremity. The US dose was 0.5 w/cm2, with sonation time 50% and frequency 1 MHz.40,52 The patient lay supine with the hand of the involved upper extremity placed on the abdomen and the elbow supported on a pillow. The two US doses and interaction time with the patient lasted a total of 15 minutes in an attempt to have equal patient/therapist contact between the two groups.

Locations

Country	Name	City	State
n/a

Sponsors (1)

Lead Sponsor	Collaborator
Emilio J Puentedura, PT, DPT, PhD

Outcome

Type	Measure	Description	Time frame	Safety issue
Primary	Upper Limb Neurodynamic Tesnion (UNLT) Range of Motion		up to 2-4 day follow up
Primary	Numeric Pain Rating Scale	Measures perceived level of pain on a scale from 0 to 10, where 0 indicates 'no pain' and 10 indicates 'worst imaginable pain'. Therefore, lower scores are better. Outcome results are given and mean changes from pre to post interventions, therefore, a negative value indicates improvement.	up to 2-4 day follow up
Secondary	Neck Disability Index	Measure of perceived disability on a scale of 0 to 50, where 0 indicates no disability and 50 indicates maximum disability. Therefore, lower scores are better. Outcome results are given and mean changes from pre to post interventions, therefore, a negative value indicates improvement.	2-4 day follow up
Secondary	Patient Specific Functional Scale	Perceived ability to perform specific activities on a scale of 0 to 30, where 0 indicates complete inability to perform and 30 indicates able to perform activity at the same level as before injury or problem. Therefore higher scores are better. Outcome results are given and mean changes from pre to post interventions, therefore, a positive value indicates improvement.	at 2-4 day follow up