The effectiveness of high-intensity laser therapy in individuals with neck pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVES: The primary objective of this meta-analysis was to determine whether high-intensity laser therapy (HILT) was effective in improving pain intensity, cervical range of motion (ROM), functional activity, and quality of life (QOL) in individuals with neck pain. DATA SOURCES: PubMed, PEDro, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched from inception to March 26, 2022. STUDY SELECTION: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) involving HILT for neck pain were selected. DATA EXTRACTION AND DATA SYNTHESIS: Two raters were independent in data extraction. The methodological quality was evaluated using the PEDro scale, and the level of evidence was assessed using the GRADE system. RevMan5.4 was used for meta-analysis. RESULTS: Eight RCTs were included and their PEDro scores were moderate to high. Compared with placebo, HILT was effective in improving pain intensity (SMD 2.12, 95%CI 1.24 to 3.00; moderate quality evidence), cervical flexion (SMD 1.31, 95%CI 0.27 to 2.35; moderate quality evidence), extension (SMD 1.43, 95%CI 0.24 to 2.63; moderate quality evidence), right lateral flexion (SMD 1.36, 95%CI 0.15 to 2.56; low-quality evidence). There was a trend of better outcome in functional activity after HILT (SMD 1.73, 95%CI -0.05 to 3.54; low quality evidence). LIMITATIONS: There was limited information available on QOL. CONCLUSION: HILT may be considered as an adjunctive treatment modality for neck pain. There was moderate quality evidence that HILT may improve pain intensity and cervical ROM in individuals with neck pain, but there was low quality evidence that HILT was not effective in improving functional activity. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION NUMBER: PROSPERO CRD42021254078 CONTRIBUTION OF THE PAPER.

Reliability of shear-wave elastography in assessing the stiffness of the nuchal fascia and the thickness of upper cervical muscles.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the reliability of shear-wave elastography (SWE)in assessing the stiffness of the nuchal fascia and the thickness of upper cervical muscles in neutral head posture (NHP) or forward head posture (FHP). METHODS: Sixteen healthy adults (mean age: 21.69 ± 1.01years, 9 females) were included. SWE mode was chosen to measure the nuchal fascia shear modulus and muscle thickness was measured in B-mode. Measurements were collected by two independent investigators on two different days. The intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) was used to measure the relative reliability, and the standard error of measurement (SEM) were used to measure the absolute reliability. RESULTS: Intra­rater (ICC = 0.63-0.89) and inter-rater (ICC = 00.54-0.82) reliability for the nuchal fascia shear modulus were moderate to excellent. Intra­rater (ICC = 00.64-0.96) and inter-rater (ICC = 00.48-0.86) reliability for upper cervical muscles thickness were moderate to excellent. The SEM percentage oscillated from 3.27% to 13.55%. There were significant differences(P < 0.05) between NHP and FHP on nuchal fascia shear modulus, right side splenius capitis muscle thickness and left side semispinalis capitis muscle thickness, but no significant differences(P > 0.05) were observed between the right and left sides. The upper cervical muscles thickness of males was significantly thicker(P < 0.01) than females while no significant differences were observed (P > 0.05) on the nuchal fascia shear modulus. CONCLUSIONS: Ultrasound-based SWE may be a reliable tool for assessing the stiffness of the nuchal fascia and the thickness of upper cervical muscles in clinical practice. REGISTRATION NUMBER: ChiCTR2200055736.

Effect of Repetitive Peripheral Magnetic Stimulation on Patients With Low Back Pain: A Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this meta-analysis was to investigate the effects of repetitive peripheral magnetic stimulation (rPMS) on pain intensity, functional mobility, and kinesiophobia in individuals with low back pain (LBP). DATA SOURCES: The PubMed, Physiotherapy Evidence Database, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science databases were systematically searched from inception until November 25, 2022. STUDY SELECTION: Eligible randomized controlled trials contained information on the population (LBP), intervention (rPMS), and outcomes (pain intensity, functional mobility, and kinesiophobia). Participants in the rPMS intervention group were compared with those in sham or other control groups. Two independent researchers searched for, screened, and qualified the articles. DATA EXTRACTION: Two independent researchers extracted key information from each eligible study. The authors' names, year of publication, setting, total sample size, rPMS parameters, baseline/mean difference (MD), and 95% confidence interval (CI) were extracted using a standardized form, and the methodological quality was assessed using the Physiotherapy Evidence Database score and GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation) system. DATA SYNTHESIS: Of 733 studies identified, 6 randomized controlled trials (n = 139) were included for meta-analysis. Compared with sham rPMS or other therapy, rPMS showed significant efficacy in reducing pain intensity (visual analog scale: MD, -1.89; 95% CI, -3.32 to -0.47; P<.05; very low-quality evidence). Significant efficacy was also found in terms of functional disability (Oswestry Disability Index: MD, -8.39; 95% CI, -13.65 to -3.12; P<.001; low-quality evidence). However, there was no statistically significant between-group difference on the Tampa scale of kinesiophobia (MD, -1.81; 95% CI, -7.60 to 3.98; P>.05; very low-quality evidence). CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis found very low- to low-quality evidence that rPMS can be used to reduce pain intensity and improve functional disability in individuals with LBP. However, no significant effect of rPMS on kinesiophobia was found.

The Effectiveness of High-Frequency Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation on Patients with Neuropathic Orofacial Pain: A Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials.

Background: Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) has been widely used in the treatment of neuropathic orofacial pain (NOP). The consistency of its therapeutic efficacy with the optimal protocol is highly debatable. Objective: To assess the effectiveness of rTMS on pain intensity, psychological conditions, and quality of life (QOL) in individuals with NOP based on randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Methods: We carefully screened and browsed 5 medical databases from inception to January 1, 2022. The study will be included that use of rTMS as the intervention for patients with NOP. Two researchers independently completed record retrieval, data processing, and evaluation of methodological quality. Quality and evidence were assessed using the PEDro scores and the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) system. Results: Six RCTs with 214 participants were included in this systematic review: 2 studies were considered level 1 evidence, and 4 were considered level 2 evidence. Six studies found that high-frequency rTMS had a pain-relieving effect, while 4 studies found no improvement in psychological conditions and QOL. Quality of evidence (GRADE system) ranged from moderate to high. No significant side effects were found. Conclusions: There is moderate-to-high evidence to prove that high-frequency rTMS is effective in reducing pain in individuals with NOP, but it has no significant positive effect on psychological conditions and QOL. High-frequency rTMS can be used as an alternative treatment for pain in individuals with NOP, but further studies will be conducted to unify treatment parameters, and the sample size will be expanded to explore its influence on psychological conditions and QOL.

Traditional Chinese Mind and Body Exercises for Neck Pain: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

BACKGROUND: Neck pain is common and can have a significant impact on patients' physical functionality, mobility, and quality of life (QOL). In clinical practice, traditional Chinese mind and body exercise (TCMBE) is a combination of different types of exercise based on traditional Chinese medicine, including qigong, tai chi, the 12-words-for-life-nurturing exercise, and so on, and many studies have found that it is safe and effective at helping patients with neck pain. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to investigate the effectiveness of TCMBE on pain intensity, functional mobility, and QOL in individuals with neck pain. METHODS: The PubMed, MEDLINE, PEDro, and Embase databases were systematically searched for relevant studies. Randomized controlled trials reporting the effects of TCMBE on pain intensity, functional mobility, and QOL in individuals with neck pain were included. Screening, data extraction, and literature quality assessments were performed independently by two reviewers. RevMan5.4 software was used for data analysis. RESULTS: Six studies with 716 participants met the inclusion criteria. Compared with the control groups, TCMBE had no therapeutic advantage in improving pain intensity (visual analogue scale: mean difference (MD) = 1.8, 95% confidence interval (CI): -7.70 to 11.46, and P = 0.70); functional mobility (neck disability index: MD = 0.15, 95% CI: -6.37 to 6.66, and P = 0.96; neck pain and disability scale: MD = 1.31, 95% CI: -4.10 to 6.71, and P = 0.64); or 36-item short-form health survey (SF-36) scores for physical function (MD = 5.58, 95% CI: -8.03 to 19.18, and P = 0.42), general health (MD = 1.87, 95% CI: -4.99 to 8.72, and P = 0.59), body pain (MD = 2.26, 95% CI: -3.80 to 8.32, and P = 0.46), vitality (MD = 6.24, 95% CI: -1.49 to 13.98, and P = 0.11), social function (MD = 8.06, 95% CI: -4.85 to 20.98, and P = 0.22), role physical (MD = -1.46, 95% CI: -8.54 to 5.62, and P = 0.69), or role emotional (MD = 6.5, 95% CI: -3.45 to 16.45, and P = 0.2). However, TCMBE was less effective at improving mental health results based on the SF-36 survey (MD = 3.37, 95% CI: 0.5 to 6.24, and P = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: Based on the meta-analysis, there is insufficient evidence to support the clinical use of TCMBE in improving pain intensity and enhancing functional mobility and QOL in individuals with neck pain.