Dataset Information

Effectiveness of electrophysical modalities in the sensorimotor rehabilitation of radial, ulnar, and median neuropathies: A meta-analysis.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

People with ulnar, radial or median nerve injuries can present significant impairment of their sensory and motor functions. The prescribed treatment for these conditions often includes electrophysical therapies, whose effectiveness in improving symptoms and function is a source of debate. Therefore, this systematic review aims to provide an integrative overview of the efficacy of these modalities in sensorimotor rehabilitation compared to placebo, manual therapy, or between them.

Methods

We conducted a systematic review according to PRISMA guidelines. We perform a literature review in the following databases: Biomed Central, Ebscohost, Lilacs, Ovid, PEDro, Sage, Scopus, Science Direct, Semantic Scholar, Taylor & Francis, and Web of Science, for the period 1980-2020. We include studies that discussed the sensorimotor rehabilitation of people with non-degenerative ulnar, radial, or median nerve injury. We assessed the quality of the included studies using the Risk of Bias Tool described in the Cochrane Handbook of Systematic Reviews of Interventions and the risk of bias across studies with the GRADE approach described in the GRADE Handbook.

Results

Thirty-eight studies were included in the systematic review and 34 in the meta-analysis. The overall quality of evidence was rated as low or very low according to GRADE criteria. Low-level laser therapy and ultrasound showed favourable results in improving symptom severity and functional status compared to manual therapy. In addition, the low level laser showed improvements in pinch strength compared to placebo and pain (VAS) compared to manual therapy. Splints showed superior results to electrophysical modalities. The clinical significance of the results was assessed by effect size estimation and comparison with the minimum clinically important difference (MCID).

Conclusions

We found favourable results in pain relief, improvement of symptoms, functional status, and neurophysiological parameters for some electrophysical modalities, mainly when applied with a splint. Our results coincide with those obtained in some meta-analyses. However, none of these can be considered clinically significant.

Trial registration

PROSPERO registration number CRD42020168792; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/display_record.php?RecordID=168792.

SUBMITTER: Bula-Oyola E

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7971482 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:It is not yet clear which of the various electrophysical modalities used in clinical practice is the one that contributes most positively when added to an exercise program in patients with knee osteoarthritis (OA). The aim of the present study was to analyze the clinical effects of the inclusion of interferential current therapy (ICT), shortwave diathermy therapy (SDT) and photobiomodulation (PHOTO) into an exercise program in patients with knee OA. METHODS:This prospective, five-arm, randomised, placebo-controlled trial was carried out with blinded participants and examiners. We recruited 100 volunteers aged 40 to 80?years with knee OA. Participants were allocated into five groups: exercise, exercise + placebo, exercise + ICT, exercise + SDT, and exercise + PHOTO. The outcome measures included Western Ontario and McMaster Universities (WOMAC), numerical rating pain scale (NRPS), pressure pain threshold (PPT), self-perceived fatigue and sit-to-stand test (STST), which were evaluated before and after 24 treatment sessions at a frequency of three sessions per week. RESULTS:In all groups, there was a significant improvement (p?<?0.05) in all variables over time, except pressure pain threshold. We observed significant differences (p?<?0.05) between the groups for WOMAC function (exercise vs. exercise + placebo, mean difference [MD]?=?5.55, 95% confidence interval [CI]?=?3.63 to 7.46; exercise vs. exercise + ICT, MD?=?3.40, 95% CI?=?1.46 to 5.33; exercise vs. exercise + SDT, MD?=?4.75, 95% CI?=?1.85 to 7.64; exercise vs. exercise + PHOTO, MD?=?5.45, 95% CI?=?3.12 to 7.77) and WOMAC pain, with better scores achieved by the exercise group. However, these differences were not clinically relevant when considering the minimum clinically important difference. CONCLUSION:The addition of ICT, SDT or PHOTO into an exercise program for individuals with knee OA is not superior to exercise performed in isolation in terms of clinical benefit. clinicaltrials.gov: NCT02636764, registered on March 29, 2014.