Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online 2025-10
What components and formats of rehabilitation interventions are more effective to reduce pain in patients with cervical radiculopathy? A Systematic review and component network meta-analysis
To estimate the comparative efficacy of rehabilitation interventions for pain reduction in cervical radiculopathy and evaluate the individual components of combined treatments to support clinical decision-making.
Data sources
A systematic search was conducted across the Cochrane, PubMed, Scopus, WOS, and PEDro databases up to 1 July 2025, for randomized controlled trials comparing rehabilitation interventions against no intervention or other rehabilitation approaches for cervical radiculopathy-related pain.
Review methods
We conducted a frequentist random effects network meta-analysis and a component network meta-analysis to isolate the effects of individual treatment components. We used CINeMA software to assess the confidence in our estimates.
Results
We included 36 trials comparing 25 interventions composed by eight active components. The components associated with a decrease in pain were neurodynamic techniques (SMD = -1.45; 95%CI: −1.88 to −1.02), cervical traction(SMD = -0.66; 95%CI: −1.08 to −0.25), articular treatment (SMD = -0.72; 95%CI:-1.29 to −0.15), and dry needling(SMD = -3.40; 95%CI: −5.40 to −1.39). The most promising interventions for reducing pain in cervical radiculopathy patients were a combination of the above components (except dry needling) with analgesic electrotherapy and strengthening exercises with a moderate confidence rating.
Conclusions
A combination of articular treatment, analgesic electrotherapy neurodynamic techniques strengthening exercises and cervical traction appears to offer the most effective pain relief for patients with cervical radiculopathy, with a moderate confidence rating. Individually, neurodynamic techniques, cervical traction, and articular treatment were the components associated with a significant reduction in pain. Although dry needling showed encouraging results, its limited presence in the network prevents drawing firm conclusions about its effectiveness.
WoodsBIHilibrandAS. Cervical radiculopathy: epidemiology, etiology, diagnosis, and treatment. Journal of Spinal Disorders and Techniques2015; 28: E251–E259.
2.
MurphyDRHurwitzELGerrardJK, et al.Pain patterns and descriptions in patients with radicular pain: does the pain necessarily follow a specific dermatome?Chiropractic and Osteopathy2009; 17: 1–9.
3.
CaretteSFehlingsMG. Cervical radiculopathy. N Engl J Med2005; 353: 392–399.
4.
TasoMSommernesJHKolstadF, et al.A randomised controlled trial comparing the effectiveness of surgical and nonsurgical treatment for cervical radiculopathy. BMC Musculoskelet Disord2020; 21: 1–9.
5.
CoreyDLComeauD. Cervical radiculopathy. Med Clin North Am2014; 98: 791–799. xii.
6.
MansfieldMSmithTSpahrN, et al.Cervical spine radiculopathy epidemiology: a systematic review. Musculoskeletal Care2020; 18: 555–567.
7.
NikolaidisIFouyasIPSandercockPA, et al.Surgery for cervical radiculopathy or myelopathy. Cochrane Database Syst Rev2010; 1 [Epub ahead of print].
8.
LiangLFengMCuiX, et al.The effect of exercise on cervical radiculopathy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Medicine (Baltimore)2019; 98: e17733.
9.
Borrella-AndrésSMarqués-GarcíaILucha-LópezMO, et al.Manual therapy as a management of cervical radiculopathy: a systematic review. BioMed Res Int2021; 2021: 9936981 [Epub ahead of print ].
10.
ZhuLIGUOWeiXUWangS. Does cervical spine manipulation reduce pain in people with degenerative cervical radiculopathy? A systematic review of the evidence, and a meta-analysis. Clin Rehabil2016; 30: 145–155.
11.
RomeoAVantiCBoldriniV, et al.Cervical radiculopathy: effectiveness of adding traction to physical therapy-A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Phys Ther2018; 98: 231–242.
12.
EfstathiouMAStefanakisMSavvaC, et al.Effectiveness of neural mobilization in patients with spinal radiculopathy: a critical review. J Bodyw Mov Ther2015; 19: 205–212.
13.
HuttonBSalantiGCaldwellDM, et al.The PRISMA extension statement for reporting of systematic reviews incorporating network meta-analyses of health care interventions: checklist and explanations. Ann Intern Med2015; 162: 777–784.
14.
HigginsJPTThomasJChandlerJ, et al.Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions version 6.2 (updated February 2021). Cochrane: John Wiley & Sons, 2021.
WainnerRSFritzJMIrrgangJJ, et al.Reliability and diagnostic accuracy of the clinical examination and patient self-report measures for cervical radiculopathy. Spine2003; 28: 52–62.
17.
ElveyRL. Physical evaluation of the peripheral nervous system in disorders of pain and dysfunction. J Hand Therapy: Official J Am Soc Hand Therapists1997; 10: 122–129.
18.
SterneJSavovićJPageM, et al.Rob 2: a revised tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials. Br Med J2019; 366: 14898.
19.
LachenbruchPACohenJ. Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). J Am Stat Assoc1989; 84: 1096.
20.
NikolakopoulouAMavridisDSalantiG. Demystifying fixed and random effects meta-analysis. Evid Based Ment Health2014; 17: 53–57.
21.
IntHoutJIoannidisJPARoversMM, et al.Plea for routinely presenting prediction intervals in meta-analysis. BMJ open2016; 6: e010247.
22.
RückerG. Network meta-analysis, electrical networks and graph theory. Res Synth Methods2012; 3: 312–324.
23.
RückerGPetropoulouMSchwarzerG. Network meta-analysis of multicomponent interventions. Biom J2020; 62: 808–821.
24.
TsokaniSSeitidisGMavridisD. Component network meta-analysis in a nutshell. BMJ Evidence-Based Medicine2023; 28: 183–186.
25.
RückerGSchwarzerG. Ranking treatments in frequentist network meta-analysis works without resampling methods. BMC Med Res Methodol2015; 15: 1–9 [Epub ahead of print].
26.
ChaimaniAHigginsJPTMavridisD, et al.Graphical tools for network meta-analysis in STATA. PLOS ONE2013; 8: e76654.
27.
SalantiG. Indirect and mixed-treatment comparison, network, or multiple-treatments meta-analysis: many names, many benefits, many concerns for the next generation evidence synthesis tool. Res Synth Methods2012; 3: 80–97.
28.
EfthimiouODebrayTPAvan ValkenhoefG, et al.Getreal in network meta-analysis: a review of the methodology. Res Synth Methods2016; 7: 236–263.
29.
DiasSWeltonNJCaldwellDM, et al.Checking consistency in mixed treatment comparison meta-analysis. Stat Med2010; 29: 932–944.
30.
HigginsJPTJacksonDBarrettJK, et al.Consistency and inconsistency in network meta-analysis: concepts and models for multi-arm studies. Res Synth Methods2012; 3: 98–110.
31.
RückerGSchwarzerG. Reduce dimension or reduce weights? Comparing two approaches to multi-arm studies in network meta-analysis. Stat Med2014; 33: 4353–4369.
32.
Gerta Rücker, Ulrike Krahn, Jochem König, Orestis Efthimiou, Annabel Davies. Theodoros Papakonstantinou GS. netmeta: Network Meta-Analysis using Frequentist Methods, 2023.
33.
NikolakopoulouAHigginsJPTPapakonstantinouT, et al.CINeMA: An approach for assessing confidence in the results of a network meta-analysis. PLoS Med2020; 17: 1–19 [Epub ahead of print].
34.
AfzalRGhousMShakil Ur RehmanS, et al.Comparison between manual traction, manual opening technique and combination in patients with cervical radiculopathy: randomized control trial. J Pak Med Assoc2019; 69: 1237–1241.
35.
AllisonGTNagyBMHallT. A randomized clinical trial of manual therapy for cervico-brachial pain syndrome – a pilot study. Man Ther2002; 7: 95–102.
36.
AlshamiAMBamhairDA. Effect of manual therapy with exercise in patients with chronic cervical radiculopathy: a randomized clinical trial. Trials2021; 22: 1–12.
37.
AnwarM. Effectiveness of neurodynamics in comparison to manual traction in the management of cervical radiculopathy. Int J Physiother2016; 3: 1237–1241.
38.
Albayrak AydinNYazicioǧluK. Cervical intermittent traction: does it really work incervical radiculopathy due to herniated disc?Turkiye Fiziksel Tip ve Rehabilitasyon Dergisi2012; 58: 277–282.
39.
DederingÅPeolssonAClelandJA, et al.The effects of neck-specific training versus prescribed physical activity on pain and disability in patients with cervical radiculopathy: a randomized controlled trial. Arch Phys Med Rehabil2018; 99: 2447–2456.
40.
FritzJMThackerayABrennanGP, et al.Exercise only, exercise with mechanical traction, or exercise with over-door traction for patients with cervical radiculopathy, with or without consideration of status on a previously described subgrouping rule: a randomized clinical trial. J Orthopaed Sports Phys Therapy2014; 44: 45–57.
41.
HalvorsenMFallaDGizziL, et al.Short-and long-term effects of exercise on neck muscle function in cervical radiculopathy: a randomized clinical trial. J Rehabil Med2016; 48: 696–704.
42.
MoustafaIMDiabAA. Multimodal treatment program comparing 2 different traction approaches for patients with discogenic cervical radiculopathy: a randomized controlled trial. J Chiropr Med2014; 13: 157–167.
43.
MoustafaIMDiabAATahaS, et al.Addition of a sagittal cervical posture corrective orthotic device to a multimodal rehabilitation program improves short- and long-term outcomes in patients with discogenic cervical radiculopathy. Arch Phys Med Rehabil2016; 97: 2034–2044.
44.
KhanK. Effectiveness of manual traction and other physiotherapy treatment in the management of painful cervical radiculopathy. Int J Physiotherapy2016; 3: 286–290.
45.
KhatwaniPYadavJKalraS. The effect of cervical lateral glide and manual cervical traction combined with nerual mobilization on patients with cervical radiculopathy. Indian J Physiother Occup Ther2015; 9: 152–158.
46.
KimDGChungSHJungHB. The effects of neural mobilization on cervical radiculopathy patients’ pain, disability, ROM, and deep flexor endurance. J Back Musculoskelet Rehabil2017; 30: 951–959.
47.
Riaz-KhanMShafiHAmjadI, et al.Efficacy of cervical spine mobilization versus peripheral nerve slider techniques (neurodynamics) in cervicobrachial pain syndrome. J Islam Int Med Coll2015.
48.
SaltEKellySSoundyA. Randomised controlled trial for the efficacy of cervical lateral glide mobilisation in the management of cervicobrachial pain. Open J Therapy Rehabilitation2016; 04: 132–145.
49.
Rodríguez-SanzDCalvo-LoboCUnda-SolanoF, et al.Cervical lateral glide neural mobilization is effective in treating cervicobrachial pain: a randomized waiting list controlled clinical trial. Pain Medicine (United States)2017; 18: 2492–2503.
50.
Rodríguez-SanzDLópez-LópezDUnda-SolanoF, et al.Effects of median nerve neural mobilization in treating cervicobrachial pain: a randomized waiting list-controlled clinical trial. Pain Pract2018; 18: 431–442.
51.
SavvaCKorakakisVEfstathiouM, et al.Cervical traction combined with neural mobilization for patients with cervical radiculopathy: a randomized controlled trial. J Bodyw Mov Ther2021; 26: 279–289.
52.
TahirSRanaAAGhaffarN, et al.Effect of cervical traction verses strengthening exercises in patients of cervical radiculopathy. Pak J Med Health Sci2022; 16: 186–188.
53.
YoungIAMichenerLAClelandJA, et al.Manual therapy, exercise, and traction for patients with cervical radiculopathy: a randomized clinical trial. Phys Ther2009; 89: 632–642.
54.
NarNH. Effect of neural tissue mobilization on pain in cervical radiculopathy patients. Indian J Physiother Occupational Therapy - An International Journal2014; 8: 144.
55.
NeeRJVicenzinoBJullGA, et al.Neural tissue management provides immediate clinically relevant benefits without harmful effects for patients with nerve-related neck and arm pain: a randomised trial. J Physiother2012; 58: 23–31.
56.
OjoawoAOOlabodeAD. Comparative effectiveness of transverse oscillatory pressure and cervical traction in the management of cervical radiculopathy: a randomized controlled study. Hong Kong Physiother J2018; 38: 149–160.
57.
PrabhakarRRamtekeG. Cervical spinal mobilization versus TENS in the management of cervical radiculopathy: a comparative, experimental randomized controlled trial. Indian J Physiother Occup Ther2011; 4: 105–107.
58.
RajalaxmiVLavanyaRKirupaK, et al.Efficacy of neural mobilization and cervical stabilization in cervicobrachial pain: a randomized controlled trial. Medico-Legal Update2020; 20: 1398–1403.
59.
RanganathUDowlePChandrasekharP. Effectiveness of Mwm, neurodynamics and conventional therapy versus neurodynamics and conventional therapy in unilateral cervical radiculopathy: a randomized control trial. Indian J Physiother Occup Ther2018; 12: 101–106.
60.
RavalVRVinod BabuKSai KumarN, et al.Effect of simultaneous application of cervical traction and neural mobilization for subjects with unilateral cervical radiculopathy. Int J Physiother2014; 1: 269.
61.
İnceSEyvazNDündarÜ, et al.Clinical efficiency of high-intensity laser therapy in patients with cervical radiculopathy: a 12-week follow-up, randomized, placebo-controlled trial. Am J Phys Med Rehabil2024; 103: 3–12.
62.
JelladAKalaiAAbbesI, et al.The effect of cervical traction on stabilometric parameters in cervical radiculopathy patients: a randomized crossover study. J Back Musculoskelet Rehabil2024; 1: 1–10.
63.
MoustafaIMDiabAAHarrisonDE. The efficacy of cervical lordosis rehabilitation for nerve root function and pain in cervical spondylotic radiculopathy: a randomized trial with 2-year follow-up. J Clin Med2022; 11: 1–20 [Epub ahead of print].
64.
RafiqSZafarHGillaniSA, et al.Comparison of neural mobilization and conservative treatment on pain, range of motion, and disability in cervical radiculopathy: a randomized controlled trial. PLoS One2022; 17: 1–13.
65.
ChhonkerKJainKSrivastavaN. Efficacy of neural tissue mobilization versus cervical mobilization along with manualtraction and surged faradic current on pain, disability and rom in chronic cervical radiculopathy patients. Indian J Physiother Occupational Therapy - An International J2023; 17: 34–39.
66.
DeenNAkhtarSQaziFH, et al.Comparative effectiveness of manual intermittent cervical longitudinal mobilization versus pain modalities in cervical radiculopathy: a double blinded randomized controlled study. J Back Musculoskelet Rehabil2023; 1: 1–12.
67.
Bala RathnaPMJothilingamM. Effect of Dry Needling in Patient with Cervical Radiculopathy in Reducing Pain and Increasing Rom Compared to Interferential Therapy.
68.
LiWChangYFengQ, et al.Balance chiropractic therapy for cervical spondylotic radiculopathy: a randomized controlled trial. Contemp Clin Trials Commun2024; 41: 101323.
69.
KumarBSArunBN. ROLE of hand function and hand-eye coordination exercises on cervical radiculopathy. Biomedicine (Taipei)2024; 44: 341–347.
70.
Boudier-RevéretMGilbertKKAllégueDR, et al.Effect of neurodynamic mobilization on fluid dispersion in median nerve at the level of the carpal tunnel: a cadaveric study. Musculoskeletal Sci Practice2017; 31: 45–51.
71.
BrownCLGilbertKKBrismeeJM, et al.The effects of neurodynamic mobilization on fluid dispersion within the tibial nerve at the ankle: an unembalmed cadaveric study. J Manual Manipulative Therapy2011; 19: 26–34.
72.
GilbertKKSmithMPSobczakS, et al.Effects of lower limb neurodynamic mobilization on intraneural fluid dispersion of the fourth lumbar nerve root: an unembalmed cadaveric investigation. J Manual Manipulative Therapy2015; 23: 239–245.
73.
NeeRJButlerD. Management of peripheral neuropathic pain: integrating neurobiology, neurodynamics, and clinical evidence. Phys Ther Sport2006; 7: 36–49.
74.
JelladABen SalahZBoudokhaneS, et al.The value of intermittent cervical traction in recent cervical radiculopathy. Ann Phys Rehabil Med2009; 52: 638–652.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
