Suppr超能文献

超声引导下深部干针疗法与经皮电刺激疗法治疗肩胛提肌活跃性肌筋膜触发点的短期疗效:一项随机对照试验

Efficacy of Deep Dry Needling versus Percutaneous Electrolysis in Ultrasound-Guided Treatment of Active Myofascial Trigger Points of the Levator Scapulae in Short-Term: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

作者信息

Benito-de-Pedro Ana Isabel, Becerro-de-Bengoa-Vallejo Ricardo, Losa-Iglesias Marta Elena, Rodríguez-Sanz David, Calvo-Lobo César, Benito-de-Pedro María

机构信息

Facultad de Enfermería, Fisioterapia y Podología, Universidad Complutense de Madrid, 28040 Madrid, Spain.

Faculty of Health Sciences, Universidad Rey Juan Carlos, 28933 Alcorcón, Spain.

出版信息

Life (Basel). 2023 Apr 3;13(4):939. doi: 10.3390/life13040939.

Abstract

Deep dry needling (DDN) and percutaneous electrolysis (PE) provide the benefit of the mechanical effect of the needle, and PE adds the potential advantages of the galvanic current it incorporates in myofascial trigger points (MTrPs) therapy. The aim of this study was to compare the short-term efficacy between PE and DDN on active MTrPs of the levator scapulae by considering pain intensity. A simple-blind randomized controlled trial was carried out, recruiting patients suffering from non-specific neck pain lasting more than 3 months and with active MTrPs in the levator scapulae muscle (n = 52). Patients were divided into intervention (PE; n = 26) and control (DDN; n = 26) groups and received one treatment session on the active MTrPs of the levator scapulae. Patients were assessed for pain intensity, pressure pain threshold (PPT), cervical range of motion (CROM), neck disability and post-needling soreness, immediately after treatment, at 72 h and at 14 days. In addition, pain during treatment was recorded after the procedure. There were no significant differences for pain intensity, post-needling soreness and PPT. We found significant differences in CROM, immediately after treatment ( = 0.043), and at 72 h ( = 0.045), in favor of the PE group. Significant differences were found for neck disability ( < 0.047), immediately post-treatment, in favor of the DDN group. Moreover, there were significant differences for pain during the intervention ( < 0.002), in favor of the DDN group (4.54 ± 2.21) versus the PE group (6.54 ± 2.27). PE and DDN appear to have similar short-term effects. PE proved to be a more painful treatment than DDN. Clinical trial registry: NCT04157426.

摘要

深部干针疗法(DDN)和经皮电刺激疗法(PE)具有针刺的机械效应优势,并且PE在肌筋膜触发点(MTrP)治疗中还具有其所引入的直流电的潜在优势。本研究的目的是通过考虑疼痛强度来比较PE和DDN对肩胛提肌活跃MTrP的短期疗效。开展了一项单盲随机对照试验,招募了患有持续超过3个月的非特异性颈部疼痛且肩胛提肌中有活跃MTrP的患者(n = 52)。患者被分为干预组(PE;n = 26)和对照组(DDN;n = 26),并接受了一次针对肩胛提肌活跃MTrP的治疗。在治疗后即刻、72小时和14天时,对患者进行疼痛强度、压痛阈值(PPT)、颈椎活动范围(CROM)、颈部功能障碍和针刺后酸痛的评估。此外,在操作后记录治疗期间的疼痛情况。在疼痛强度、针刺后酸痛和PPT方面没有显著差异。我们发现在治疗后即刻(P = 0.043)和72小时(P = 0.045)时,CROM存在显著差异,PE组更具优势。在治疗后即刻,颈部功能障碍存在显著差异(P < 0.047),DDN组更具优势。此外,在干预期间的疼痛方面存在显著差异(P < 0.002),DDN组(4.54 ± 2.21)优于PE组(6.54 ± 2.27)。PE和DDN似乎具有相似的短期效果。事实证明,PE比DDN的治疗疼痛程度更高。临床试验注册号:NCT04157426。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/c0b0/10143630/ac41293ec855/life-13-00939-g001.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验