Effect of neurodynamic mobilization on lower limb function in patients with mild post-traumatic knee osteoarthritis

doi:10.5312/wjo.v17.i1.111927

Advanced Search

BPG is committed to discovery and dissemination of knowledge

Home / Archive / Volume 17, Issue 1

This Article

Google Scholar

Academic Content and Language Evaluation of This Article

CrossCheck and Google Search of This Article

Academic Rules and Norms of This Article

Citation of this article

Corresponding Author of This Article

Research Domain of This Article

Article-Type of This Article

Open-Access Policy of This Article

Times Cited Counts in Google of This Article

Number of Hits and Downloads for This Article

Total Article Views (0)

All Articles published online

The chart showing PDF series, HTML series, Figures (1-1) series, Tables (1-7) series.

Item

Count

PDF

HTML

Figures (1-1)

Tables (1-7)

Sum=21

Publishing Process of This Article

The chart showing Browse series, Download series.

Item

Count

Browse

Download

Sum=25

Jan 18, 2026 (publication date) through Jan 9, 2026

Times Cited of This Article

Times Cited (0)

Journal Information of This Article

Publication Name

World Journal of Orthopedics

ISSN

2218-5836

Publisher of This Article

Baishideng Publishing Group Inc, 7041 Koll Center Parkway, Suite 160, Pleasanton, CA 94566, USA

Randomized Controlled Trial

World J Orthop. Jan 18, 2026; 17(1): 111927
Published online Jan 18, 2026. doi: 10.5312/wjo.v17.i1.111927

Table 1 Basic information about the subjects, mean ± SD

Group	Number	Gender	Age (years)	Height (cm)	Weight (kg)	Body mass index (kg/m²)
Control group	16	M = 14	30.31 ± 9.02	170.94 ± 6.61	69.19 ± 7.56	23.63 ± 1.61
Control group	16	F = 2	30.31 ± 9.02	170.94 ± 6.61	69.19 ± 7.56	23.63 ± 1.61
Observation group	16	M = 14	29.63 ± 9.25	171.75 ± 5.03	71.25 ± 8.89	24.09 ± 2.18
Observation group	16	F = 2	29.63 ± 9.25	171.75 ± 5.03	71.25 ± 8.89	24.09 ± 2.18
t value			0.213	-0.391	-0.707	-0.672
P value			0.833	0.698	0.485	0.507

M: Male; F: Female.

Full Size Table

Table 2 Comparison of visual analogue scale scores between control and observation group, mean ± SD

	Control group	Observation group	F value	P value	F_{time/group/interactive value} value	P_{time/group/interactive value} value
Pre	5.25 ± 0.35	6.00 ± 0.35	2.288	0.141	170.455/0.094/13.364	0.000/0.001/0.001
Post	3.00 ± 0.32^b	2.00 ± 0.32^b^,^c	5.000	0.033	170.455/0.094/13.364	0.000/0.001/0.001
F value	44.182	139.636
P value	0.000	0.000

^bP < 0.01 within group.

^cP < 0.05 vs control.

Full Size Table

Table 3 Comparison of active range of knee joint between observation group and control group

	Control group	Observation group	F value	P value	F_{time/group/interactive value} value	P_{time/group/interactive value} value
Pre	78.41 ± 4.28	77.71 ± 3.66	0.234	0.632	413.257/0.001/0.128	0.000/0.981/0.723
Post	99.72 ± 7.67^b	99.71 ± 7.45^b	0.006	0.938	413.257/0.001/0.128	0.000/0.981/0.723
F value	395.724	421.837
P value	0.001	0.001

^bP < 0.01 within group.

Full Size Table

Table 4 Comparison of Lysholm score between observation group and control group

	Control group	Observation group	F value	P value	F_{time/group/interactive value} value	P_{time/group/interactive value} value
Pre	67.02 ± 1.77	65.46 ± 7.64	15.271	0.433	498.726/2.147/20.385	0.001/0.153/0.001
Post	83.41 ± 3.21^b	88.79 ± 4.12^b^,^d	0.892	0.001	498.726/2.147/20.385	0.001/0.153/0.001
F value	315.892	203.419
P value	0.001	0.001

^bP < 0.01 within group.

^dP < 0.01 vs control.

Full Size Table

Table 5 Comparison of stork stand test between the observation group and the control group

	Control group	Observation group	F value	P value	F_{time/group/interactive value} value	P_{time/group/interactive value} value
Pre	5.80 ± 1.31	5.61 ± 0.80	5.692	0.606	125.847/22.143/13.756	0.001/0.001/0.001
Post	10.32 ± 0.29^b	13.43 ± 1.47^b^,^d	29.521	0.001	125.847/22.143/13.756	0.001/0.001/0.001
F value	352.147	972.834
P value	0.001	0.001

^bP < 0.01 within group.

^dP < 0.01 vs control.

Full Size Table

Table 6 Comparison of single hop test distance between the observation group and the control group

	Control group	Observation group	F value	P value	F_{time/group/interactive value} value	P_{time/group/interactive value} value
Pre	0.17 ± 0.06	0.20 ± 0.05	0.892	0.352	158.921/1.742/0.521	0.001/0.179/0.476
Post	0.33 ± 0.15^b	0.38 ± 0.07^b	1.315	0.260	158.921/1.742/0.521	0.001/0.179/0.476
F value	25.307	145.571
P value	0.001	0.001

^bP < 0.01 within group.

Full Size Table

Table 7 Comparison of Y-balance test scores between the observation group and the control group

	Control group	Observation group	F value	P value	F_{time/group/interactive value} value	P_{time/group/interactive value} value
Pre	72.11 ± 6.38	69.09 ± 8.31	1.217	0.279	201.892/0.001/8.089	0.001/0.981/0.008
Post	84.43 ± 8.21^b	89.63 ± 5.99^b^,^c	4.420	0.044	201.892/0.001/8.089	0.001/0.981/0.008
F value	63.871	138.024
P value	0.001	0.001

^bP < 0.01 within group.

^cP < 0.05 vs control.

Full Size Table

Citation: Hu JR, He MX, Wei SS, Ren HW, Liu CH, Liu XL, Chen ZC. Effect of neurodynamic mobilization on lower limb function in patients with mild post-traumatic knee osteoarthritis. World J Orthop 2026; 17(1): 111927
URL: https://www.wjgnet.com/2218-5836/full/v17/i1/111927.htm
DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.5312/wjo.v17.i1.111927