Department of Rehabilitation Sciences, College of Applied Medical Sciences, King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
Department of Building and Real-Estate, Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Kowloon, Hong Kong.
Biomed Res Int. 2020 Mar 10;2020:9361405. doi: 10.1155/2020/9361405. eCollection 2020.
Myofascial pain syndrome, thought to be the main cause of neck pain and shoulder muscle tenderness in the working population, is characterized by myofascial trigger points (MTrPs). This study aimed to examine the immediate and short-term effect of the combination of two therapeutic techniques for improving neck pain and muscle tenderness in male patients with upper trapezius active MTrPs. This study was a pretest-posttest single-blinded randomized controlled trial. Sixty male subjects with mechanical neck pain due to upper trapezius active MTrPs were recruited and randomly allocated into group A, which received muscle energy technique (MET) and ischemic compression technique (ICT) along with conventional intervention; group B, which received all the interventions of group A except ICT; and group C, which received conventional treatment only. Baseline (Pr), immediate postintervention (Po), and 2-week follow-up (Fo) measurements were made for all variables. Pain intensity and pressure pain threshold (PPT) were assessed by a visual analog scale (VAS) and pressure threshold meter, respectively. All the three groups received their defined intervention plans only. Repeated-measures analysis of variance was used to perform intra- and intergroup analyses. Cohen's test was used to assess the effect size of the applied interventions within the groups. The intergroup analysis revealed significant differences among groups A, B, and C in VAS and PPT at Po (VAS-Po: = 13.88, =0.0001; PPT-Po: = 17.17, =0.0001) and even after 2 weeks of follow-up (VAS-Fo: = 222.35, =0.0001; PPT-Fo: = 147.70, =0.0001). Cohen's revealed a significant treatment effect size within all groups except group C (only significant for VAS-Po-VAS-Pr: mean difference = 1.33, < 0.05, = 1.09); however, it showed a maximum effect size in group A for its variables (VAS-Fo-VAS-Pr: mean difference = 5.27, =0.01, = 4.04; PPT-Fo-PPT-Pr: mean difference = 2.14, < 0.01, = 3.89). Combination therapies (MET plus ICT) showed immediate and short-term (2-week follow-up) improvements in neck pain and muscle tenderness in male patients with upper trapezius active MTrPs.
肌筋膜疼痛综合征被认为是导致工作人群颈部疼痛和肩部肌肉压痛的主要原因,其特征是肌筋膜触发点(MTrPs)。本研究旨在探讨两种治疗技术联合应用对改善男性上斜方肌活动型 MTrPs 所致颈部疼痛和肌肉压痛的即刻和短期效果。这是一项前后测试单盲随机对照试验。招募了 60 名因上斜方肌活动型 MTrPs 而出现机械性颈部疼痛的男性受试者,并将其随机分为 A 组,接受肌肉能量技术(MET)和缺血性压迫技术(ICT)联合常规干预;B 组,接受 A 组的所有干预措施,但不接受 ICT;C 组,仅接受常规治疗。对所有变量进行基线(Pr)、即刻干预后(Po)和 2 周随访(Fo)测量。疼痛强度和压痛阈值(PPT)分别用视觉模拟量表(VAS)和压力阈值计进行评估。所有三组仅接受各自定义的干预计划。采用重复测量方差分析进行组内和组间分析。采用 Cohen's 检验评估组内应用干预措施的效应大小。组间分析显示,Po 时 A、B 和 C 组在 VAS 和 PPT 方面存在显著差异(VAS-Po: = 13.88,=0.0001;PPT-Po: = 17.17,=0.0001),甚至在 2 周随访时也存在显著差异(VAS-Fo: = 222.35,=0.0001;PPT-Fo: = 147.70,=0.0001)。Cohen's 检验显示,除 C 组外,所有组均有显著的治疗效果(仅 VAS-Po-VAS-Pr 差异显著:平均差异=1.33,<0.05,=1.09);然而,A 组的变量显示出最大的治疗效果(VAS-Fo-VAS-Pr:平均差异=5.27,=0.01,=4.04;PPT-Fo-PPT-Pr:平均差异=2.14,<0.01,=3.89)。联合治疗(MET 加 ICT)对男性上斜方肌活动型 MTrPs 患者的颈部疼痛和肌肉压痛有即刻和短期(2 周随访)改善。