Therapeutic Benefits of Balneotherapy on Quality of Life of Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is the most common inflammatory rheumatic disease. RA symptoms make the disease disabling and strongly impact the quality of life of patients. Among the available forms of treatment, balneotherapy seems to be one of the most common forms of nonpharmacological treatment for rheumatic disease. The aim was to explore the effectiveness of balneotherapy for improving the quality of life of patients with RA. METHODS: Pubmed, Scopus, Web of Science and The Cochrane library were searched for randomized or clinical controlled trials published in English or Spanish until May 2021. Risk of bias of included articles were assessed using the Cochrane tool. A total 535 records were retrieved, and seven met the inclusion criteria. All the included studies showed statistically significant improvements in the quality of life of patients who received balneotherapy treatment despite differences in treatment administration. Sessions should be approximately 20 min long and use natural mineral waters enriched with elements, or mud, at a water temperature between 35-38 °C. CONCLUSIONS: Balneotherapy benefits the quality of life of people with RA. The obtained results show positive effects for both mineral bathing and immersion in sand or mud on the quality of life of people who suffer from RA.

Effect of Myofascial Therapy on Pain and Functionality of the Upper Extremities in Breast Cancer Survivors: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

(1) Objective: The purpose was to analyze the effectiveness of myofascial therapy on musculoskeletal pain and functionality of the upper extremities in female breast cancer survivors, and to evaluate the changes in range of motion, quality of life, and mood state of these patients. (2) Methods: Systematic searches were performed on the MEDLINE/PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, and Physiotherapy Evidence Databases for articles published until October 2020, in order to identify randomized controlled trials which analyzed the effectiveness of myofascial therapy as compared to a control group, passive treatment, placebo, or another intervention, and allowed co-interventions on female breast cancer survivors. Two reviewers examined the sources individually, calculated the risk of bias and extracted the data (PROSPERO number CRD42020215823). (3) Results: A total of eight RCTs were included. The results suggested that myofascial therapy does not have a greater statistically significant immediate effect on pain intensity (SMD: -0.15; 95% CI -0.48, 0.19), functionality (SMD: -0.17; 95% CI -0.43, 0.09) and range of motion in flexion (SMD: 0.30; 95% CI -0.13, 0.74) than an inactive, passive treatment or another intervention. However, a statistically significant result was observed for the abduction shoulder in favor of the experimental group (SMD: 0.46; 95% CI 0.05, 0.87; p = 0.03). (4) Conclusion: In general, although we found greater overall effects in support of the intervention with myofascial therapy than other control groups/types of interventions, the subgroup analysis revealed inconsistent results supporting myofascial therapy applied to breast cancer survivors.

Effects of a Single Myofascial Induction Session on Neural Mechanosensitivity in Breast Cancer Survivors: A Secondary Analysis of a Crossover Study.

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to investigate the short-term effects of myofascial induction on mechanosensitivity of upper limb nerves. METHODS: In this secondary analysis of a randomized, single-blind, placebo-controlled crossover study, 21 breast cancer survivors with stage I-IIIA cancer were randomly allocated to an experimental group (30 minutes of myofascial induction session) or placebo control group (unplugged pulsed 30 minutes of shortwave therapy), with a 4-week washout period between sessions that occurred in a physical therapy laboratory in the Health Science Faculty (University of Granada, Spain). Range of motion (universal goniometry), structural differentiation, symptoms (yes/no), and pressure pain thresholds (electronic algometry) were assessed during neurodynamic tests and attitude toward massage scale as covariate. RESULTS: An analysis of covariance revealed significant time × group interactions for range of motion in affected upper limb nerves (median, P < .001; radial, P = .036; ulnar, P = .002), but not for nonaffected upper limb nerves (median, P = .083; radial, P = .072; ulnar, P = .796). A χ2 or Fisher exact test, as appropriate, also revealed a significant difference (P = .044) in sensitivity for the affected upper limb ulnar nerve in the experimental group, whereas the rest of the assessed nerves (affected and nonaffected upper limb nerves) showed no significant changes in either the experimental or control groups (P > .05). An analysis of covariance revealed no significant interactions on pressure pain thresholds over the nerves for affected (all P > .05) and nonaffected (all P > .05) upper limb nerves. CONCLUSION: A single myofascial induction session may partially improve mechanosensitivity of median, radial, and ulnar nerves and yield positive effects on symptom mechanosensitivity, especially regarding the ulnar nerve in breast cancer survivors.

Myofascial Induction Effects on Neck-Shoulder Pain in Breast Cancer Survivors: Randomized, Single-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Crossover Design.

OBJECTIVES: To (1) investigate the immediate effects of myofascial induction (MI), with placebo electrotherapy as a control, on perceived pain, cervical/shoulder range of motion (ROM), and mood state in breast cancer survivors (BCSs) with shoulder/arm morbidity; and (2) examine the relationships between pain modifications and cervical/shoulder ROM on the side affected by breast cancer. DESIGN: Randomized, single-blind, placebo-controlled crossover study. SETTING: Physical therapy laboratory. PARTICIPANTS: BCSs (N=21) who had a diagnosis of stage I-IIIA breast cancer and had completed adjuvant therapy (except hormonal treatment). INTERVENTION: During each session, the BCSs received either an MI (fascial unwinding) intervention focused on the upper limb area following the Pilat approach or placebo pulsed shortwave therapy (control group). Each session lasted 30 minutes, and an adequate washout period of 4 weeks between sessions was established. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The visual analog scale (VAS) for pain and anxiety, shoulder-cervical goniometry for ROM, the Profile of Mood States for psychological distress, and the Attitudes Towards Massage Scale were used. RESULTS: An analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) revealed significant time × group interactions for VAS affected arm (P=.031) but not for VAS cervical (P=.332), VAS nonaffected arm (P=.698), or VAS anxiety (P=.266). The ANCOVA also revealed significant interactions for affected shoulder flexion (P<.001), abduction (P<.001), external rotation (P=.004), and internal rotation (P=.001). Significant interactions for affected cervical rotation (P=.022) and affected cervical lateral flexion (P=.038) were also found. A significant negative correlation was found between changes in VAS affected arm and shoulder/arm internal rotation ROM (r=-.46; P=.03). CONCLUSIONS: A single MI session decreases pain intensity and improves neck-shoulder ROM to a greater degree than placebo electrotherapy for BCSs experiencing pain.