Electrical dry needling versus a non-invasive multicomponent intervention in the treatment of myofascial trigger points in patients with chronic low back pain: A randomised clinical trial.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the effects of electrical dry needling with a non-invasive multi-component intervention in patients with chronic low back pain. DESIGN: A randomised single-blind clinical trial. SETTING: Outpatient Physiotherapy Clinic; home. PARTICIPANTS: Sixty-four patients with chronic low back pain aged 30-65 years. INTERVENTIONS: Six-week electrical dry needling on myofascial trigger points, and a non-invasive multicomponent intervention (home exercise programme, stretching and ischemic compression). MAIN MEASURES: Pain (Visual Analogue Scale), disability (Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire and Oswestry Disability Index), kinesiophobia (Tampa Scale of Kinesiophobia), quality of life and sleep (Short Form 36-item Health Survey and Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index), isometric endurance of trunk flexor muscles (McQuade test), lumbar mobility in flexion (finger-to-floor distance), and pressure pain threshold (algometer) were assessed at baseline, after 6 weeks, and after 2 months. RESULTS: ANOVA showed statistically significant differences in group-by-time interaction for most pain pressure thresholds of myofascial trigger points (P < 0.05), for disability (Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire: F = 6.14, P = 0.016; and Oswestry Disability Index: F = 7.36, P = 0.009), for trunk anteflexion (F = 10.03, P = 0.002) and for habitual sleep efficacy (F = 6.65, P = 0.012), use of hypnotics (F = 4.77, P = 0.033) and total score of quality of sleep (F = 8.23, P = 0.006). CONCLUSIONS: In comparison to a non-invasive multicomponent intervention, electrical dry needling has more positive effects on disability, pain intensity, kinesiophobia, and reducing patients' sensitivity to myofascial trigger points pressure, at post-treatment and at 2 months. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04804228. Registered on May 28th, 2021. Available at https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04804228.

Electrical dry needling versus conventional physiotherapy in the treatment of active and latent myofascial trigger points in patients with nonspecific chronic low back pain.

BACKGROUND: Chronic low back pain is considered to be one of the main causes of absenteeism from work and primary and specialized consultations. The symptoms of nonspecific chronic low back pain may be accompanied by the activation of myofascial trigger points in the muscles, together with local and/or referred pain. Electrical dry needling is increasingly used in the treatment of lumbar myofascial pain. Conventional physiotherapy, however, is a popular approach to chronic pathologies, and there is evidence of different modalities of physiotherapy being used in the treatment of chronic low back pain. The aim of this study has been to determine the effectiveness of electrical dry needling versus conventional physiotherapy when applied to active and latent myofascial trigger points in patients with nonspecific chronic low back pain. METHODS: This is a controlled, randomized, two-arm, double-blind study. A total of 92 patients with chronic low back pain (time to onset ≥ 3 months, Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire score ≥ 4) will be recruited from the University of Almería. Participants will be divided into two study groups (n = 40) to receive treatment of low back pain with electrical dry needling and conventional physiotherapy (ischaemic compression, analytic stretching and postural education training dossier). A total of 6 sessions will be administered once a week for 6 weeks. Pain intensity, disability, fear of movement, quality of life, quality of sleep, anxiety and depression, pressure pain threshold, abdominal strength and lumbar mobility will be recorded at 6 weeks (post-immediate) and 2 months after the end of treatment. DISCUSSION: We believe that an approach including electrical dry needling to chronic low back pain dysfunction will be more effective in these patients. The results of this study will inform clinicians on which type of treatment is more beneficial for patients with chronic low back pain. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04804228. Registered on 14 January 2021.

Comparing an e-Health program vs home rehabilitation program in patients with non-specific low back pain: A study protocol randomized feasibility trial.

BACKGROUND: There is little evidence on the reliability of the web application-based rehabilitation systems to treat chronic low back pain (CLBP). METHODS: This protocol describes a double-blind, randomized controlled feasibility trial of an e-Health intervention developed to support the self-management of people with CLBP in primary care physiotherapy. Three Hospitals with primary care for outpatients will be the units of randomisation, in each Hospital the participants will be randomized to one of two groups, a pragmatic control group receiving either the usual home program based on electrostimulation and McKenzie Therapy and e-Health intervention. Patients are followed up at 2 and 6 months. The primary outcomes are (1) acceptability and demand of the intervention by GPs, physiotherapists and patients and (2) feasibility and optimal study design/methods for a definitive trial. Secondary outcomes will include analysis in the clinical outcomes of pain, disability, fear of movement, quality of life, isometric resistance of the trunk flexors, lumbar anteflexion and lumbar segmental range of motion. DISCUSSION: The specific e-Health programs to home could increase adherence to treatment, prevent stages of greater pain and disability, and improve the painful symptomatology. CONCLUSIONS: The e-Health programs could be an effective healthcare tool that can reach a large number of people living in rural or remote areas.

Study protocol randomised controlled trial comparison of cost-utility and cost-effectiveness of a face-to-face rehabilitation programme versus a telemedicine programme in the treatment of patients with chronic low back pain.

INTRODUCTION: Chronic lower back pain is a highly prevalent medical condition in Western countries, which that incurs a considerable social and economic burden. Although prescription exercise at home for chronic pain has become a widely used alternative to reduce healthcare costs, the evidence regarding patient adherence and decreased in costs in European countries is scarce and inconclusive. The objective of this study is to examine the cost-utility and cost-effectiveness in patients with chronic lower back pain treated with the McKenzie Method and electroanalgesia via a telemedicine programme versus a face-to-face programme. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This study reports the protocol for a randomised, two-arm, multicentre, parallel controlled trial. A total of 540 patients with chronic lower back pain (onset time ≥3 months, Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire ≥4) will be recruited in three hospitals in Andalusia. Participants will be assigned to one of two groups (n=270, respectively) to receive electroanalgesia and Mckenzie method exercises through a telemedicine or a face-to-face programme. A total of 24 sessions will be administered three times a week for 8 weeks. Since the study design does not allow participant blinding, the outcome assessor and the statistician will be blinded. Use of helth care resources and costs due to work absenteeism will be captured and analysed. In addition, pain, intensity, fear of movement, quality of life and strength of the core muscle and anteflexion lumbar will be recorded at 2 and 6 months after the start of treatment. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Human Research and Local Ethics Committee of the 'Hospital Complex Torrecárdenas of Almeria, University Hospital of Granada and Virgen Macarena de Sevilla Hospital-Andalusian Health Service'. Study findings will be released to the research, clinical and health service through publication in international journals and conferences. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04266366.

Benefits of dry needling of myofascial trigger points on autonomic function and photoelectric plethysmography in patients with fibromyalgia syndrome.

BACKGROUND: Fibromyalgia syndrome (FMS) is a condition characterised by the presence of chronic, widespread musculoskeletal pain, low pain threshold and hyperalgesia. Myofascial trigger points (MTrPs) may worsen symptoms in patients with FMS. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this randomised controlled trial was to compare the effects of dry needling and transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) on pain intensity, heart rate variability, galvanic response and oxygen saturation (SpO2). METHODS: 74 subjects with FMS were recruited and randomly assigned to either the dry needling group or the TENS group. Outcomes measures (pain intensity, heart rate variability, galvanic skin response, SpO2 and photoplethysmography) were evaluated at baseline and after 6 weeks of treatment. 2×2 mixed-model analyses of variance (ANOVAs) were performed. RESULTS: The mixed-model ANOVAs showed significant differences between groups for the sensory dimension of pain, affective dimension of pain, total dimension of pain, visual analogue scale (VAS) and present pain intensity (PPI) (P=0.001). ANOVAs also showed that significant differences between groups were achieved for very low frequency power of heart rate variability (P=0.008) and low frequency power (P=0.033). There were no significant differences in dry needling versus TENS groups on the spectral analysis of the photoplethysmography and SpO2. CONCLUSIONS: This trial showed that application of dry needling therapy and TENS reduced pain attributable to MTrPs in patients with FMS, with greater improvements reported in the dry needling group across all dimensions of pain. Additionally, there were between-intervention differences for several parameters of heart rate variability and galvanic skin responses. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02393352.

Improvement in clinical outcomes after dry needling versus myofascial release on pain pressure thresholds, quality of life, fatigue, pain intensity, quality of sleep, anxiety, and depression in patients with fibromyalgia syndrome.

Purpose: To compare the effectiveness of dry needling versus myofascial release on myofascial trigger points pain in cervical muscles, quality of life, impact of symptoms pain, quality of sleep, anxiety, depression, and fatigue in patients with fibromyalgia syndrome. Method: A single-blind randomized controlled trial was conducted. Sixty-four subjects with fibromyalgia were randomly assigned to a dry needling group or a myofascial release group. Pain pressure thresholds of myofascial trigger points were evaluated in the cervical muscles. In addition, quality of life, impact of fibromyalgia symptoms, quality of sleep, intensity of pain, anxiety and depression symptoms, impact of fatigue at baseline and post treatment after four weeks of intervention were evaluated. Results: Significant improvement was found in most pain pressure thresholds of the myofascial trigger points in cervical muscles in the dry needling group compared to myofascial release (p < 0.05). Similarly, these differences between groups were found for the components of quality of life of physical function (F = 12.74, p = 0.001), physical role (F = 11.24, p = 0.001), body pain (F =30.26, p < 0.001), general health (F = 15.83, p < 0.001), vitality (F = 13.51, p = 0.001), social function (F = 4.73, p = 0.034), emotional role (F = 8.01, p = 0.006), and mental health (F = 4.95, p = 0.030). Similar results were achieved for total impact of FMS symptoms (F = 42.91, p < 0.001), quality of sleep (F = 11.96, p = 0.001), state anxiety (F = 7.40, p = 0.009), and trait anxiety (F = -14.63, p < 0.001), hospital anxiety and depression (F = 20.60, p < 0.001), general pain intensity (F = 29.59, p < 0.001), and fatigue (F = -25.73, p < 0.001). Conclusion: The dry needling therapy showed higher improvements in comparison with myofascial release therapy for pain pressure thresholds, the components of quality of life of physical role, body pain, vitality and social function, as well as the total impact of FMS symptoms, quality of sleep, state and trait anxiety, hospital anxiety-depression, general pain intensity and fatigue. Implications for rehabilitation Dry needling therapy reduces myofascial trigger point pain in the short term in patients with fibromyalgia syndrome. This therapeutic approach improves anxiety, depression, fatigue symptoms, quality of life, and sleep after treatment. Dry needling and myofascial release therapies decrease intensity of pain, and the impact of fibromyalgia symptoms in this population. These intervention approaches should be considered in an independent manner as complementary therapies within a multidisciplinary setting.

Effects of Dry Needling on Spinal Mobility and Trigger Points in Patients with Fibromyalgia Syndrome.

BACKGROUND: The etiology of fibromyalgia syndrome (FMS) is inconclusive, but central mechanisms are well accepted for this pain condition. Myofascial pain syndrome (MPS) is one of the most common musculoskeletal pain diseases and is characterized by myofascial trigger points (MTrPs). It has been suggest that MTrPs have an important factor in the genesis of FMS. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of the current randomized clinical trial was to compare the effectiveness of dry needling versus cross tape on spinal mobility and MTrPs in spinal muscles in patients with FMS. STUDY DESIGN: A single-blind randomized controlled trial was conducted on patients with FMS. SETTING: Clinical setting. METHODS: Sixty-four patients with FMS were randomly assigned to an experimental group receiving dry needling therapy or to a control group for cross tape therapy in the MTrPs in the latissimus dorsi, iliocostalis, multifidus, and quadratus lumbourum muscles. Spinal mobility measures and MTrPs algometry were recorded at baseline and after 5 weeks of treatment. RESULTS: The repeated measures analysis of variance (ANOVA) demonstrated that significant differences between groups were achieved for the MTrPs in latissimus dorsi muscle (right axillary portion: F = 9.80, P = 0.003); multifidus muscle (right L2 level: F = 11.80, P = 0.001); quadratus lumborum (right lateral superficial upper: F = 6.67, P = 0.012; and right lateral superficial lower: F = 5.38, P = 0.024). In addition, the ANOVA repeated measures test showed significant differences between groups for the segmental amplitude thoracic spine in the standing erect position (F = 7.33, P = 0.009), and segmental amplitude of lumbar spine (F = 11.60, P = 0.001) in the sitting erect position. LIMITATIONS: The outcomes were not collected from a long-term follow-up period. Dry needling therapy or cross tape were used alone when in reality physical therapists usually treat patients with FMS using a multi-modal approach. A non-treatment control group was not included. CONCLUSIONS: This study has demonstrated that dry needling therapy reduces myofacial trigger points algometry on thoracic and lumbar muscles. Dry needling and cross tape approaches reported a similar effect size for spinal mobility measures in patients with FMS.Key words: Fibromyalgia, trigger points, physical therapy modalities, musculoskeletalequilibrium, myofascial pain syndromes.