The effectivity of trigger point dry needling in improving pain on people with upper trapezius myalgia

2020 ◽  
Vol 30 ◽  
pp. 87-91
Author(s):  
Djohan Aras ◽  
Ibtisam Mangputri Al-Ihsan ◽  
Erfan Sutono
2016 ◽  
Vol 34 (3) ◽  
pp. 171-177 ◽  
Author(s):  
E Segura-Ortí ◽  
S Prades-Vergara ◽  
L Manzaneda-Piña ◽  
R Valero-Martínez ◽  
JA Polo-Traverso

Background Treatment of active myofascial trigger points includes both invasive and non-invasive techniques. Objectives To compare the effects of upper trapezius trigger point dry needling (DN) and strain–counterstrain (SCS) techniques versus sham SCS. Study Design Randomised controlled trial. Method 34 study subjects with active trigger points were randomly assigned to one of three treatment groups, and received either three sessions of DN (n=12), six sessions of SCS (n=10), or sham SCS (n=12) over a 3-week period. Subjective pain response and subjects’ own ratings of perceived disability were measured. Results The analysis of variance mixed model showed a significant time effect for pain (p<0.001), elicited pain (p<0.001), pain pressure threshold (p<0.01), and neck disability index (p=0.016). Pain at rest decreased in all groups, as follows: DN 18.5 mm (95% CI 4.3 to 32.7 mm); SCS 28.3 mm (95% CI 12.4 to 44.1 mm); sham SCS 21.9 mm (95% CI 3.5 to 40.1 mm). Reductions in disability score (points) were significant in the SCS group (5.5, 95% CI 1.6 to 9.4) but not in the DN (1.4, 95% CI −4.9 to 2.1) or sham SCS (1.8, 95% CI −6.4 to 2.7) groups. There was no significant group×time interaction effect for any variables studied. Conclusions There were no differences between the sham SCS, SCS, and DN groups in any of the outcome measures. DN relieved pain after fewer sessions than SCS and sham SCS, and thus may be a more efficient technique. Future studies should include a larger sample size. Trial Registration Number NCT01290653.


2016 ◽  
Vol 21 ◽  
pp. 204-209 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ameneh Yeganeh Lari ◽  
Farshad Okhovatian ◽  
Sedigheh sadat Naimi ◽  
Alireza Akbarzadeh Baghban

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Luis Martín-Sacristán ◽  
Cesar Calvo-Lobo ◽  
Daniel Pecos-Martín ◽  
Josue Fernández-Carnero ◽  
Jose Luis Alonso-Pérez

Abstract The purpose was to determine the efficacy of deep dry needling (DDN) applied on an active myofascial trigger point (MTrP) versus a latent-MTrP versus a non-MTrP location, on pain reduction and cervical disability, in patients with chronic neck pain. A randomized, double-blind clinical trial design was used. A sample of 65 patients was divided into non-MTrP-DDN, active-MTrP-DDN and latent-MTrP-DDN groups. The visual analog scale (VAS), reproduction of the patient’s pain, number of local twitch responses, pressure pain threshold (PPT) and Neck Disability Index (NDI) were assessed before, during and after the intervention and up to 1 month post-intervention. The active-MTrP-DDN-group reduced pain intensity more than non-MTrP-DDN-group after a week and a month (p<0.01). Active-MTrP-DDN-group showed the greatest improvement in tibialis muscle PPT. An association was found with a higher percentage of subjects in whom their neck pain was reproduced when the active-MTrP (77.3%) and the latent-MTrP (81.8%) were treated. The application of DDN on an active-MTrP in the upper trapezius muscle shows greater improvements in pain intensity after one week and one month post-intervention, as well as lesser improvement in PPT in the tibialis muscle, compared to DDN applied in latent-MTrPs or outside of MTrPs in patients with neck pain


2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
Mishka Dhai

Introduction: Myofascial pain syndrome is a condition of collective sensory, motor and autonomic symptoms caused by myofascial trigger points, which are hyper-irritable foci in a muscle and palpated as a taut, tender, ropey band. There are many types of treatment for myofascial pain syndrome; dry needling is one of the most effective forms. Dry needling involves the insertion of a needle into the myofascial trigger points in order to break up the contractile elements and any somatic components that may contribute to trigger point hyperactivity, and to stimulate sensitive nerve ending in the area. Although therapeutic, an unpleasant side effect of dry needling is the post-needling soreness. Various modalities have been utilised to decrease post-needling soreness, such as ice, heat and action potential simulation, to mention a few, however no study has been conducted to date that documents low intensity laser therapy and its effect on post-needling soreness. This study therefore aimed to evaluate the effect of low intensity laser therapy on post-needling soreness in trigger point 2 of the upper trapezius muscle. Methodology: This study was designed as a randomised, controlled pre-test and post-test experimental trial. Forty participants were randomly allocated into two equal groups of 20 participants each. Group 1 received the needling and laser therapy; Group 2 received needling and placebo laser. Algometer and Numerical Pain Rating Scale 11 (NRS 11) readings were taken immediately before the dry needling procedure; after the laser or placebo laser therapy; and again, at the follow-up visit 24 hours later. Subjects used a 24- hour pain diary which was completed at three-hour intervals, to record any post-needling soreness. The NRS 11 scale was used immediately before the needling and again at the follow-up visit 24 hours later. Results: Statistical analysis was done using SPSS version 24.0 to conduct inferential and deductive statistics. A significance of p=0.05 was set. Baseline demographics and outcome measurements were compared between the two groups using t-tests or ANOVA where appropriate. An inter-group analysis revealed that objectively and subjectively all groups experienced some degree of post-needling soreness, which deceased significantly over time. This decrease of pain was not significantly related to the treatment group, and there is no evidence of the differential time effect with the treatment. An inter-group analysis yielded no statistically significant results regarding the effectiveness of the treatments received by the patients. This could be because of the small sample size or because low intensity laser therapy is not a useful intervention. Conclusion: The results from this study revealed that both treatment groups responded equally in the alleviation of pain. It can thus be concluded that low intensity laser therapy had no significant beneficial effects on post-needling soreness.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document