Suppr超能文献

干针疗法与拉伸联合应用与单纯拉伸对膝关节疼痛患者腘绳肌柔韧性的效果:一项随机对照试验

THE EFFECTIVENESS OF DRY NEEDLING AND STRETCHING VS. STRETCHING ALONE ON HAMSTRING FLEXIBILITY IN PATIENTS WITH KNEE PAIN: A RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL.

作者信息

Mason John S, Crowell Michael, Dolbeer Jeffery, Morris Jamie, Terry Aspen, Koppenhaver Shane, Goss Donald Lee

机构信息

Womack Army Medical Center, FT Bragg, NC, USA.

Baylor University-Keller Army Community Hospital, Division 1 Sports Physical Therapy Fellowship, West Point, NY, USA.

出版信息

Int J Sports Phys Ther. 2016 Oct;11(5):672-683.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Recently, dry needling has emerged as a popular treatment for muscular pain and impairments. While there are numerous studies detailing the benefits of dry needling for pain, few studies exist examining the effects on soft tissue mobility.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to determine if the addition of hamstring dry needling to a standard stretching program results in greater improvements in hamstring flexibility compared to sham dry needling and stretching in subjects with atraumatic knee pain. Additionally, squat range of motion, knee pain, and the Lower Extremity Functional Scale were compared between the two groups.

STUDY DESIGN

Double blinded randomized controlled trial.

METHODS

Thirty-nine subjects were randomized to receive either dry needling (n = 20) or sham (n = 19) dry needling in addition to hamstring stretching, to all detected hamstring trigger points on two visits. All dependent variables were measured at baseline, immediately post intervention, and 1, 3, and 7 days after the initial treatment. Each subject also performed hamstring stretching three times daily for one week.

RESULTS

Significant improvements in hamstring range of motion and all other dependent variables were observed across time regardless of treatment group. However, the lack of significant time by group interactions indicated the improvements were not different between dry needling and sham dry needling groups.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of the current randomized controlled trial suggest that two sessions of dry needling did not improve hamstring range of motion or other knee pain-related impairments more than sham dry needling in a young active population with atraumatic knee pain.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapy, Level 2.

摘要

背景

最近,干针疗法已成为治疗肌肉疼痛和功能障碍的一种流行方法。虽然有许多研究详细阐述了干针疗法对疼痛的益处,但很少有研究探讨其对软组织活动度的影响。

目的

本研究的目的是确定在标准拉伸方案中增加腘绳肌干针疗法,与假干针疗法和拉伸相比,是否能使无创伤性膝关节疼痛的受试者的腘绳肌柔韧性得到更大改善。此外,还比较了两组之间的深蹲活动范围、膝关节疼痛和下肢功能量表。

研究设计

双盲随机对照试验。

方法

39名受试者被随机分为接受干针疗法组(n = 20)或假干针疗法组(n = 19),除了腘绳肌拉伸外,在两次就诊时对所有检测到的腘绳肌触发点进行治疗。所有因变量在基线、干预后即刻、初始治疗后1天、3天和7天进行测量。每位受试者还每天进行3次腘绳肌拉伸,持续1周。

结果

无论治疗组如何,随着时间的推移,观察到腘绳肌活动范围和所有其他因变量都有显著改善。然而,组间缺乏显著的时间交互作用表明,干针疗法组和假干针疗法组之间的改善没有差异。

结论

目前随机对照试验的结果表明,在患有无创伤性膝关节疼痛的年轻活跃人群中,两次干针治疗在改善腘绳肌活动范围或其他与膝关节疼痛相关的功能障碍方面并不比假干针治疗更有效。

证据水平

治疗,2级。

相似文献

引用本文的文献

本文引用的文献

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验