经皮电神经刺激导电手套肌筋膜松解术治疗颈部肌筋膜综合征的疗效:一项随机临床试验研究
Efficacy of Myofascial Release With Transcutaneous Electrical Nerve Stimulation Conductive Glove for Neck Myofascial Syndrome: A Randomized Clinical Trial Study.
作者信息
Iakovidis Paris, Lytras Dimitrios, Kasimis Konstantinos, Koutras Georgios, Kottaras Anastasios, Chasapis Georgios, Ntinou Stefania Rafailia, Kostoglou Athanasia, Kotsi Esmeralda
机构信息
Laboratory of Biomechanics and Ergonomics, Department of Physiotherapy, Faculty of Health Sciences, International Hellenic University, Sindos, Thessaloniki, Greece.
Laboratory of Biomechanics and Ergonomics, Department of Physiotherapy, Faculty of Health Sciences, International Hellenic University, Sindos, Thessaloniki, Greece.
出版信息
J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 2023 Jun-Dec;46(5-9):254-270. doi: 10.1016/j.jmpt.2024.02.008. Epub 2024 Aug 10.
OBJECTIVE
The purpose of this study was to assess the efficacy of a myofascial release (MR) protocol applied with a transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) conductive glove.
METHODS
Eighty individuals with neck myofascial syndrome were randomly divided into 4 groups: (1) MR protocol with a TENS conductive glove (MR+TENS), (2) MR protocol without TENS (MR), (3) conventional TENS protocol (TENS), and (4) placebo TENS (control). All participants attended 6 sessions over a period of 3 weeks. The following measures were evaluated at baseline, at the third week, and at the 1-month follow-up: Pain with the visual analog scale (VAS pain), upper trapezius pressure pain threshold (PPT) with pressure algometry, cervical range of motion (ROM) with goniometry, and disability with the neck disability index (NDI). A 2-way ANOVA with repeated measurements was applied.
RESULTS
Significant changes between the 3 intervention groups and the control group were noted in the VAS and the NDI scores (P < .05) with the MR+TENS group exhibiting the biggest difference. Additionally, MR significantly increased PPT compared to TENS, and even further when applied with the conductive glove (P < .05). Regarding lateral flexion ROM, MR was equally effective either alone or in combination with the glove compared to TENS (P < .05). In contrast, TENS did not appear to affect neck PPT and ROM (P > .05). Finally, no difference between the groups was detected in cervical rotation ROM (P > .05).
CONCLUSION
The MR protocol appears to be more effective in dealing with pain, disability, and lateral flexion ROM than conventional TENS. A TENS conductive glove significantly improves the effects of MR, possibly due to the combined mechanical and electrical stimulation of the muscle.
目的
本研究旨在评估经皮电神经刺激(TENS)导电手套应用的肌筋膜放松(MR)方案的疗效。
方法
80例颈部肌筋膜综合征患者被随机分为4组:(1)使用TENS导电手套的MR方案(MR+TENS),(2)不使用TENS的MR方案(MR),(3)传统TENS方案(TENS),以及(4)安慰剂TENS(对照组)。所有参与者在3周内参加6次治疗。在基线、第3周和1个月随访时评估以下指标:视觉模拟量表(VAS疼痛)评分的疼痛程度、压力痛觉测定法测量的上斜方肌压力痛阈(PPT)、量角器测量的颈椎活动范围(ROM)以及颈部功能障碍指数(NDI)评估的功能障碍程度。应用重复测量的双向方差分析。
结果
在VAS和NDI评分方面,3个干预组与对照组之间存在显著差异(P <.05),其中MR+TENS组差异最大。此外,与TENS相比,MR显著提高了PPT,与导电手套联合使用时提高得更多(P <.05)。关于侧屈ROM,与TENS相比,MR单独使用或与手套联合使用时同样有效(P <.05)。相比之下,TENS似乎并未影响颈部PPT和ROM(P >.05)。最后,在颈椎旋转ROM方面未检测到组间差异(P >.05)。
结论
与传统TENS相比,MR方案在处理疼痛、功能障碍和侧屈ROM方面似乎更有效。TENS导电手套显著提高了MR的效果,这可能是由于对肌肉的机械和电刺激联合作用所致。