SEARCH · Search PubMed

Search Search PubMed

Search indexed PubMed citations on genomics, clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health. Explore titles, authors and supplied subject terms, then open the PubMed record.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

2 recordsLinked to original sources

PubMed2026

Ultrasound-guided high-voltage vs conventional pulsed radiofrequency in elderly cervical radiculopathy: A randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Elderly patients with cervical radiculopathy present therapeutic challenges owing to comorbidities and medication-related risks. Long-term pharmacotherapy and surgical interventions are often suboptimal, necessitating evaluation of optimized pulsed radiofrequency strategies under image guidance. OBJECTIVES: This superiority trial compared the efficacy and safety of ultrasound-guided cervical nerve root high-voltage pulsed radiofrequency (HVP-PRF) versus conventional pulsed radiofrequency (C-PRF) for pain management in elderly patients with cervical radiculopathy. METHODS: This single-center, parallel-group, assessor-blinded randomized controlled trial enrolled patients aged 60-85 years with cervical radiculopathy, randomly assigned (1:1) to HVP-PRF (70 V) or C-PRF (45 V). Procedures were performed under ultrasound guidance with sensory/motor stimulation confirmation and temperature ≤42°C. The primary outcome was change in upper-limb radiating pain on the Numeric Rating Scale (ΔNRS) from baseline to 3 months. Secondary outcomes included Neck Disability Index (NDI), neck pain NRS, Patient Global Impression of Change, responder rates, rescue analgesia use, and adverse events. Follow-up occurred at 1 week, 1, and 3 months. RESULTS: A total of 104 patients were randomized and 101 received treatment. At 3 months, HVP-PRF demonstrated significantly greater radiating pain improvement versus C-PRF (adjusted mean difference 1.24, 95% CI 0.46-2.02, P=0.002). Functional improvement (NDI) was superior in the HVP-PRF group at 3 months (AMD 6.47, 95% CI 2.11-10.83, P=0.004). Responder rates (≥50% pain reduction) were higher with HVP-PRF at 3 months (68.75% vs. 42.22%, OR 3.01, P=0.011) and 6 months (65.22% vs. 43.18%, OR 2.52, P=0.035). Rescue analgesic use was lower in the HVP-PRF group during 1-3 months intervals (both P<0.05). Adverse event rates were comparable (27.45% vs. 32.00%). CONCLUSION: Under ultrasound visualization and electrical stimulation-based target confirmation with temperature control ≤42°C, HVP-PRF provided greater and more durable relief of upper limb radiating pain compared with C-PRF in elderly patients with cervical radiculopathy, with a comparable safety profile.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Adding Rib Mobilization to Diaphragm Release Techniques in Patients With Non-Specific Neck Pain: Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Non-specific neck pain (NSNP) is a frequent issue that can negatively affect both mobility and function. Recently, there has been growing interest in newer therapeutic approaches, including rib mobilization and diaphragm release techniques, as potential ways to address NSNP and support better outcomes for those affected. PURPOSE: To find out the immediate effects of how (DRT) combined with (RMT) affects the level of pain and the extent to which patients' functional abilities are improved in cases of NSNP. METHODS: For this prospective RCT, 96 participants aged 20 to 45 years were randomly assigned to one of three equal groups based on their pain score (VAS). Group B engaged in (DRT) for 40 minutes, three times weekly for 8 weeks, in contrast to Group A, which got both RMT combined with DRT. Group C (active control) received advice and some exercises. Measurements were collected before and after the intervention; the primary outcomes included pain severity, evaluated using a visual analog scale (VAS); active neck range of motion (ROM), measured with a cervical range of motion (CROM) device; and neck flexion endurance. Additionally, the secondary outcome of neck-related disability was assessed using the Neck Disability Index (NDI). RESULTS: No statistically significant difference was identified among the three groups at baseline; nevertheless, a treatment effect emerged after 8 weeks (p = 0.001 and f-value = 4.15, ƞ2 = 0.306). A statistically significant time-treatment interaction was seen when comparing the pre- and post-treatment periods in groups A and B (p = 0.001, f-value = 3.16, ƞ2 = 0.251). CONCLUSION: The addition of rib mobilization to diaphragm release techniques in patients with non-specific neck pain resulted in statistically significant improvements in pain intensity, cervical flexion, right lateral rotation, left lateral rotation, right rotation, and neck flexor endurance, with moderate to large effect sizes for pain reduction and cervical motion. However, no statistically significant differences were observed between groups for cervical extension, left rotation, or the Neck Disability Index (NDI), and only a marginal clinical improvement in NDI was noted in Group A. The observed benefits in the combined intervention group may not be attributable solely to rib mobilization. The increased treatment complexity and greater therapist interaction inherent in the combined approach could also have influenced the outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT07133646.

Humans↗