Center of Rehabilitation Therapy, The First Rehabilitation Hospital of Shanghai, Shanghai, China.
Department of Sport Rehabilitation, School of Kinesiology, Shanghai University of Sport, Shanghai, China.
J Back Musculoskelet Rehabil. 2023;36(4):783-798. doi: 10.3233/BMR-220045.
Ischemic compression is widely used to clinically treat neck pain. However, no meta-analysis has been conducted to evaluate the effects of this process on neck pain.
This study aimed to evaluate the effects of ischemic compression on the myofascial trigger points for improving neck pain-related symptoms (mainly pain, joint mobility limitation and function limitation) and to compare ischemic compression with other therapies.
Electronic searches were conducted in PubMed, OVID, Web of Science, EBSCO, SCOUPS, Cochrane Library, PEDro, Wanfang, CNKI and Chinese VIP Database in June 2021. Only randomised controlled trials on the effects of ischemic compression on neck pain were included. The major outcomes were pain intensity, pressure pain threshold, pain-related disability and range of motion.
Fifteen studies involving 725 participants were included. Significant differences were observed between ischemic compression and sham/no treatment group in pain intensity, pressure pain threshold and range of motion immediately and in the short term. Significant effect sizes of dry needling were observed over ischemic compression in terms of improving pain intensity (SMD = 0.62; 95% CI: 0.08 to 1.16; P= 0.02), pain-related disability (SMD = 0.68; 95% CI: 0.19 to 1.17; P= 0.007) and range of motion (MD =-2.12; 95% CI: -2.59 to -1.65; P< 0.001) immediately after treatment. Dry needling also showed a significant small effect size for the short-term reduction of pain (SMD = 0.44; 95% CI: 0.04 to 0.85; P= 0.03).
Ischemic compression can be recommended in the immediate and short-term pain relief and increase in the pressure pain threshold and range of motion. Dry needling is superior to ischemic compression in relieving pain and improving pain-related disability and range of motion immediately after treatment.
缺血性压迫广泛用于临床治疗颈部疼痛。然而，目前尚未有荟萃分析评估这种方法对颈部疼痛相关症状（主要是疼痛、关节活动度受限和功能受限）的影响。
本研究旨在评估缺血性压迫对肌筋膜触发点的影响，以改善与颈部疼痛相关的症状（主要是疼痛、关节活动度受限和功能受限），并比较缺血性压迫与其他治疗方法的效果。
2021 年 6 月，我们对 PubMed、OVID、Web of Science、EBSCO、SCOUPS、Cochrane Library、PEDro、万方、中国知网和中国生物医学文献数据库进行了电子检索，仅纳入了关于缺血性压迫对颈部疼痛影响的随机对照试验。主要结局指标为疼痛强度、压痛阈、疼痛相关残疾和活动范围。
纳入了 15 项研究，共 725 名参与者。缺血性压迫与假治疗/无治疗组在疼痛强度、压痛阈和活动范围方面，即刻和短期随访时差异均有统计学意义。与缺血性压迫相比，干针在改善疼痛强度（SMD=0.62；95%CI：0.08 至 1.16；P=0.02）、疼痛相关残疾（SMD=0.68；95%CI：0.19 至 1.17；P=0.007）和活动范围（MD=-2.12；95%CI：-2.59 至-1.65；P<0.001）方面具有显著的大效应量，即刻治疗后即刻。干针在短期减轻疼痛方面也具有显著的小效应量（SMD=0.44；95%CI：0.04 至 0.85；P=0.03）。
缺血性压迫可推荐用于即刻和短期缓解疼痛，并提高压痛阈和活动范围。干针在即刻减轻疼痛、改善疼痛相关残疾和活动范围方面优于缺血性压迫。
