Department of Biomedical Sciences, College of Veterinary Medicine, King Faisal University, Al-Ahsa 31982, Saudi Arabia; Department of Pharmacology, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Kafrelsheikh University, Kafrelsheikh 33516, Egypt.
Department of Pharmaceutical Sciences, College of Clinical Pharmacy, King Faisal University, Al-Ahsa 31982, Saudi Arabia; Department of Pharmacology, Faculty of Medicine, Minia University, El-Minia 61511, Egypt.
Complement Ther Med. 2024 Nov;86:103085. doi: 10.1016/j.ctim.2024.103085. Epub 2024 Sep 15.
Headaches, a widespread neuromuscular ailment, pose a significant burden on individuals and society, necessitating both pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions. Dry needling (DN) has surfaced as a notable non-pharmacological alternative for addressing headaches. We aim to compare DN intervention with the control group in the management of different types of headaches.
A comprehensive meta-analysis was conducted, encompassing a systematic exploration of five electronic databases up to May 2023, with studies assessed for validity using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. Eligible studies included those with a control group, which could consist of sham interventions, physiotherapy, or pharmacological treatments. Outcomes related to disability, headache intensity, and frequency were extracted and analyzed.
Out of 4304 studies screened, 13 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were included in this systematic review, of them 10 RCTs were included in the meta-analysis. A significant decline in the disability score and headache intensity was evident in the DN group compared to the control group, one and three-month follow-ups. Specifically, substantial reductions in headache frequency were prominent after one and three months post-intervention.
Dry needling manifests as a potent intervention, diminishing headache intensity and frequency, albeit with lower impact on disability scores. The observed benefits were especially pronounced after one and three months, though the heterogeneous nature of some data analyses mandates further detailed studies to gain a clearer understanding of DN's efficacy on the assessed outcomes.
头痛是一种广泛存在的神经肌肉疾病，给个人和社会带来了巨大负担，需要药物和非药物干预。干针疗法（DN）作为一种重要的非药物治疗选择，已被提出用于治疗头痛。我们旨在比较 DN 干预与对照组在不同类型头痛管理中的效果。
进行了全面的荟萃分析，系统地检索了截至 2023 年 5 月的五个电子数据库，并使用 Cochrane 偏倚风险工具评估研究的有效性。纳入的研究包括对照组（假干预、物理治疗或药物治疗）的随机对照试验（RCT）。提取并分析与残疾、头痛强度和频率相关的结局。
在筛选出的 4304 项研究中，有 13 项 RCT 被纳入本系统评价，其中 10 项 RCT 被纳入荟萃分析。与对照组相比，DN 组在一个和三个月随访时，残疾评分和头痛强度显著下降。具体而言，干预后一个月和三个月头痛发作频率显著降低。
干针疗法是一种有效的干预措施，可降低头痛强度和频率，但对残疾评分的影响较小。观察到的益处在一个月和三个月后更为明显，但由于部分数据分析的异质性，需要进一步的详细研究来更清楚地了解 DN 在评估结局方面的疗效。
