Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 6 de 6
Filter
1.
Front Neurosci ; 18: 1345128, 2024.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38419662

ABSTRACT

Introduction: Although rare, central post-stroke pain remains one of the most refractory forms of neuropathic pain. It has been reported that repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) may be effective in these cases of pain. Aim: The aim of this study was to investigate the efficacy of rTMS in patients with central post-stroke pain (CPSP). Methods: We included randomized controlled trials or Controlled Trials published until October 3rd, 2022, which studied the effect of rTMS compared to placebo in CPSP. We included studies of adult patients (>18 years) with a clinical diagnosis of stroke, in which the intervention consisted of the application of rTMS to treat CSP. Results: Nine studies were included in the qualitative analysis; 6 studies (4 RCT and 2 non-RCT), with 180 participants, were included in the quantitative analysis. A significant reduction in CPSP was found in favor of rTMS compared with sham, with a large effect size (SMD: -1.45; 95% CI: -1.87; -1.03; p < 0.001; I2: 58%). Conclusion: The findings of the present systematic review with meta-analysis suggest that there is low quality evidence for the effectiveness of rTMS in reducing CPSP. Systematic review registration: Identifier (CRD42022365655).

2.
JMIR Public Health Surveill ; 10: e46019, 2024 Jan 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38194261

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Physical exercise is one of the main nonpharmacological treatments for most pathologies. In addition, physical exercise is beneficial in the prevention of various diseases. The impact of physical exercise has been widely studied; however, existing meta-analyses have included diverse and heterogeneous samples. Therefore, to our knowledge, this is the first meta-analysis to evaluate the impact of different physical exercise modalities on telomere length in healthy populations. OBJECTIVE: In this review, we aimed to determine the effect of physical exercise on telomere length in a healthy population through a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. METHODS: A systematic review with meta-analysis and meta-regression of the published literature on the impact of physical exercise on telomere length in a healthy population was performed. PubMed, Cochrane Library, SCOPUS, Web of Science, and Embase databases were searched for eligible studies. Methodological quality was evaluated using the Risk Of Bias In Nonrandomized Studies of Interventions and the risk-of-bias tool for randomized trials. Finally, the certainty of our findings (closeness of the estimated effect to the true effect) was evaluated using Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations (GRADE). RESULTS: We included 9 trials that met the inclusion criteria with fair methodological quality. Random-effects model analysis was used to quantify the difference in telomere length between the exercise and sham groups. Meta-analysis showed that exercise did not significantly increase telomere length compared with the control intervention (mean difference=0.0058, 95% CI -0.05 to 0.06; P=.83). Subgroup analysis suggested that high-intensity interventional exercise significantly increased telomere length compared with the control intervention in healthy individuals (mean difference=0.15, 95% CI 0.03-0.26; P=.01). Furthermore, 56% of the studies had a high risk of bias. Certainty was graded from low to very low for most of the outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: The findings of this systematic review and meta-analysis suggest that high-intensity interval training seems to have a positive effect on telomere length compared with other types of exercise such as resistance training or aerobic exercise in a healthy population. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42022364518; http://tinyurl.com/4fwb85ff.


Subject(s)
Exercise , Health Status , Telomere Homeostasis , Telomere , Adult , Humans , Databases, Factual
3.
Musculoskelet Sci Pract ; 68: 102872, 2023 Nov.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37847947

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: This randomized clinical trial investigated if the application of percutaneous electrolysis (PE) enhances endogenous pain mechanisms (EPM) when compared with a simple needle application (acting as sham). METHODS: Forty-six asymptomatic subjects, aged 18-40 years, were randomized into three groups receiving a single ultrasound-guided PE intervention consisting of a needle insertion on the lateral epicondyle: sham (without electrical current), low-intensity (0.3 mA, 90s), or high-intensity (three pulses of 3 mA, 3s) PE. Widespread pressure pain thresholds (PPT), conditioned pain modulation (CPM), and temporal summation (TS) were bilaterally assessed in the lateral epicondyle, bicipital groove, transverse process of C5 and tibialis anterior muscle. Outcomes were obtained by an assessor blinded to the treatment allocation of the subjects. RESULTS: No significant changes in CPM were observed in either group (omnibus ANOVA all, P > .05). A significant bilateral increase in PPT in the lateral epicondyle in the high intensity group as compared with the sham group was observed (P < .01). A significant decrease of TS in both low (P = .002) and high (P = .049) intensity groups on the right, but not on the left, tibialis anterior was also observed when compared with the sham group. CONCLUSIONS: One session of PE is able to slightly stimulate modulatory pathways related to nociceptive gain, particularly pressure pain sensitivity and temporal summation but not conditioning pain modulation, when compared with a sham needle intervention, with changes even contralaterally. No significant differences were found between low- and high-intensity doses of percutaneous electrolysis.


Subject(s)
Manipulation, Spinal , Pain , Humans , Manipulation, Spinal/methods , Pain Measurement , Pain Threshold/physiology , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , Shoulder , Adolescent , Young Adult , Adult
4.
Front Med (Lausanne) ; 10: 1101447, 2023.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36817790

ABSTRACT

Objective: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) was conducted to determine the effect of ultrasound-guided percutaneous electrolysis (PE) alone or as an adjunct to other interventions on pain intensity generated by musculoskeletal disorders, depending on the intensity of the technique. Data sources: PUBMED, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, SCOPUS, Health Medical Collection, and CINALH from inception to September 2022 were searched to identify documents. Study selection: Publications investigating the effect of ultrasound-guided PE in musculoskeletal pain. Data extraction: Data were extracted into predesigned data extraction and tables. Risk of bias was evaluated with the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool (Rob 2.0). Thirteen articles met inclusion criteria. Data analysis: Random-effects meta-analysis models were used to quantify the difference in pain between the PE and control groups. Data synthesis: A significant reduction in pain was found in favor of low- (-1.89; 95% CI: -2.69; -1.10; p < 0.001) and high-intensity PE (-0.74; 95% CI: -1.36; -0.11; p: 0.02) compared to control group. Low-intensity PE showed significant reduction in pain in the short (-1.73; 95% CI: -3.13; -0.34; p < 0.02) and long term (-2.10; 95% CI: -2.93; -1.28; p = 0.005), with large effect sizes compared to control group. High-intensity PE only showed significant lower pain than control group in the long term (-0.92; 95% CI: -1.78; -0.07; p < 0.03), with a small effect size, but not in the short term. Conclusion: We found small evidence suggesting that low-intensity PE could be more effective for musculoskeletal pain reduction than high-intensity PE. Nevertheless, scientific evidence on this subject is still scarce and studies comparing the two modalities are warranted. Systematic review registration: www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero, identifier CRD42022366935.

5.
J Clin Med ; 11(10)2022 May 20.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35629015

ABSTRACT

The purpose of this double-blinded randomized controlled trial was to investigate whether percutaneous electrolysis (PE) is able to activate endogenous pain modulation and whether its effects are dependent on the dosage of the galvanic current. A total of 54 asymptomatic subjects aged 18-40 years were randomized into three groups, receiving a single ultrasound-guided PE intervention that consisted of a needle insertion on the lateral epicondyle tendon: sham (without electrical current), low-intensity (0.3 mA, 90 s), and high-intensity (three pulses of 3 mA, 3 s). Widespread pressure pain thresholds (PPT), conditioned pain modulation (CPM), and temporal summation (TS) were assessed in the elbow, shoulder, and leg before and immediately after the intervention. Both high and low intensity PE protocols produced an increase in PPT in the shoulder compared to sham (p = 0.031 and p = 0.027). The sham group presented a significant decrease in the CPM (p = 0.006), and this finding was prevented in PE groups (p = 0.043 and p = 0.025). In addition, high-intensity PE decreased TS respect to sham in the elbow (p = 0.047) and both PE groups reduced TS in the leg (p = 0.036 and p = 0.020) without significant differences compared to sham (p = 0.512). Consequently, a single PE intervention modulated pain processing in local and widespread areas, implying an endogenous pain modulation. The pain processing effect was independent of the dosage administrated.

6.
Brain Sci ; 11(6)2021 Jun 17.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34204415

ABSTRACT

Percutaneous electrolysis consists of the application of a galvanic electrical current throughout an acupuncture needle. It has been previously hypothesized that needling procedures' neurophysiological effects may be related to endogenous pain modulation (EPM). This protocol study describes the design of a double-blind (participant, assessor) randomized controlled trial with the aim to investigate whether percutaneous electrolysis is able to enhance EPM and whether the effect is different between two applications depending on the dosage of the galvanic electrical current. Seventy-two asymptomatic subjects not reporting the presence of pain symptoms the previous 6 months before the study, aged 18-40 years, are randomized into one of four groups: a control group who does not receive any intervention, a needling group who receives a needling intervention without electrical current, a low-intensity percutaneous electrolysis group (0.3 mA × 90 s), and a high-intensity percutaneous electrolysis group (three bouts of 3 mA × 3 s). Needling intervention consists of ultrasound-guided insertion of the needle on the common extensor tendon of the lateral epicondyle. The primary outcome is conditioned pain modulation (CPM), and secondary outcomes include widespread pressure pain sensitivity (pressure pain thresholds (PPT) over the lateral epicondyle, the cervical spine, and the tibialis anterior muscle) and temporal summation (TS). We expected that percutaneous electrolysis would have a greater influence on CPM than an isolated needling procedure and no intervention. In addition, we also postulated that there might be differences in outcome measures depending on the intensity of the electrical current during the percutaneous electrolysis application. This study makes a new contribution to the field of neurophysiological effects of percutaneous electrolysis and needling interventions.

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL