A psychophysical study comparing massage to conditioned pain modulation: A single blind randomized controlled trial in healthy participants

Association between myofascial trigger point therapy and conditioned pain modulation

INTRODUCTION

Myofascial trigger point therapy (MTrP) is a widely used therapeutic approach, although the underlying mechanisms remain unclear. Mechanisms discussed include peripheral involvement of muscles as well as central pain modulating processes such as the conditioned pain modulation (CPM). The aim of this study was to investigate whether the analgesic response of MTrP and the analgesic response of CPM correlate in asymptomatic participants in order to identify shared underlying mechanisms of MTrP and CPM.

METHOD

Both, CPM and MTrP protocols consisted of heat-based test stimuli (heat pain thresholds before and after the intervention) and pressure-based (conditioning) stimuli. Asymptomatic participants (n = 94) were randomly assigned to receive either mild, intense or no pressure stimuli (between-group design) to both the fingernail and the MTrP of the infraspinatus muscle (within-group design). Pressure stimuli at both locations (fingernail, MTrP) were applied with a pressure algometer for 120 s and continuously adjusted to maintain a constant pain intensity of mild or intense pain. All thermal stimuli were applied on the lower leg with a thermal stimulator.

RESULTS

A significant correlation was shown between the analgesic effect of CPM and MTrP therapy for mild (r = 0.53, p = 0.002) and intensive stimuli (r = 0.73, p < 0.001). 17.3% of the variance of the MTrP effect were explained by CPM after mild stimulation, and 47.1% after intense stimulation. Pain-related characteristics did not explain the variance within the analgesic response using a regression analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

Between the analgesic responses following MTrP and CPM paradigms, a moderate to strong correlation was observed, suggesting shared underlying mechanisms.

Under the Gun: Percussive Massage Therapy and Physical and Perceptual Recovery in Active Adults

CONTEXT

Handheld percussive massage devices (ie, massage guns) are a relatively new and under-researched recovery tool. These tools are intended to increase range of motion and reduce muscle soreness by delivering targeted vibration to soft tissues. Empirical knowledge about the potential influence of these devices on perceptual recovery and the recovery of performance characteristics after exercise is scarce.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the effect of a 5-minute massage gun application, using a commercially available device, on physical and perceptual recovery after a strenuous bout of lower body exercise.

DESIGN

Controlled laboratory study.

SETTING

Physiology laboratory.

PATIENTS OR OTHER PARTICIPANTS

A total of 65 active young adults (age = 21.3 ± 1.4 years; age range = 18-30 years; 34 women: height = 165.8 ± 6.1 cm, mass = 66.0 ± 7.4 kg; 31 men: height = 181.1 ± 6.0 cm, mass = 81.5 ± 11.8 kg).

INTERVENTION(S)

Participants applied a massage gun on the calf muscles of 1 leg after strenuous exercise (massage gun recovery group) for 5 minutes and used no recovery intervention on the other leg (control group).

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S)

Ankle range of motion, calf circumference, isometric strength, calf endurance, and perceived muscle soreness measures were collected at baseline and at various points after lower body exercise.

RESULTS

No significant group × time interactions were recorded for any of the performance or perceptual measures (P values > .05). Effect sizes were mostly unclear, except for a small increase in perceived muscle soreness in the massage gun recovery group compared with the control group immediately (d = -0.35) and 4 hours (d = -0.48) postrecovery.

CONCLUSIONS

Massage guns appeared to have little effect on physical measures when applied for 5 minutes immediately after strenuous calf exercise. Given the small increase in muscle soreness up to 4 hours after their use, caution is recommended when using massage guns immediately after strenuous lower body exercise.

Manual Therapy Effects on Nonspecific Neck Pain Are Not Mediated by Mechanisms Related to Conditioned Pain Modulation: A Randomized Clinical Trial

BACKGROUND

Manual therapy (MT) is a treatment recommended by clinical practice guidelines in the management of patients with neck pain. However, the mechanisms through which MT works remain unknown. The aim of the present study is to investigate if MT is mediated by mechanisms related to conditioned pain modulation (CPM), comparing the effects of painful with a pain-free MT treatment.

METHODS

A two-arm, parallel, randomized controlled clinical trial with concealed allocation and blinding of the outcome assessor was conducted in university students with chronic or recurrent nonspecific neck pain (NSNP). Participants received either a painful or pain-free MT session. Psychophysical variables including pressure pain thresholds, CPM, temporal summation of pain and cold pain intensity were assessed before and immediately after treatment. In addition, changes in neck pain intensity over the following 7 days and self-perceived improvement immediately and 7 days after treatment were assessed.

RESULTS

No significant differences were found between groups in any of the psychophysical variables or in patients' self-perceived improvement. Only a significantly greater decrease in neck pain intensity immediately after treatment was found in the pain-free MT group compared to the painful MT group.

CONCLUSION

The results suggest that the immediate and short-term effects of MT on NSNP are not mediated by CPM-related mechanisms.

Expectations affect pain sensitivity changes during massage

BACKGROUND

Pain-inducing massage produces comparable changes in pain sensitivity as a cold pressor task, suggesting shared neurophysiological mechanisms of conditioned pain modulation. Manual therapy and conditioned pain modulation are influenced by positive and negative expectations. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to examine the effects of positive and negative expectations on pain-free and pain-inducing massage.

METHODS

56 healthy participants were randomly assigned to receive a positive or negative expectation instructional set followed by a pain-inducing or a pain-free massage. Pressure pain threshold (PPT) was measured followed by each interval of massage. A repeated measures ANCOVA controlling for post-randomization differences in sex tested for massage x expectation set x PPT interaction effects, as well as two-way interaction effects.

RESULTS

A significant three-way interaction effect (p = 0.04) and time x expectation interaction effect was observed for individuals receiving pain inducing massage (p = 0.02). Individuals who received the positive expectation instructional set demonstrated significantly higher PPT at minutes 3 and 4 of massage compared to individuals who received the negative expectation instructional set.

CONCLUSIONS

Expectations impact pain sensitivity changes produced during massage. Clinicians planning to provide pain-inducing massage should consider the role of expectations in modulating pain sensitivity changes.

Skin Displacement as fascia tissue manipulation at the lower back affects instantaneously the flexion-and extension spine, pelvis, and hip range of motion

Low back pain (LBP), associated with spine, pelvis, and hip mobility impairments can be caused by tight muscle contractions, to protect sensitized lumbar fasciae. Fascia tissue manipulations are used to treat lumbar fascia in LBP. The effect of fascia tissue manipulations through lumbodorsal skin displacement (SKD) on mobility is inconclusive likely depending on the location and displacement direction of the manipulation. This study aimed to assess whether lumbodorsal SKD affects the flexion -and extension range of motion (ROM), in healthy subjects. Furthermore, we aimed to test the effect of SKD at different locations and directions. Finally, to assess intertester and intratester reliability of SKD. Effects of SKD were tested in a motion capture, single-blinded, longitudinal, experimental study. Sixty-three subjects were randomly assigned to SKD- or sham group. SKD group was subjected to either mediolateral directed SKD during flexion or extension movement, versus a sham. The thoracic, lumbar, and hip angles and finger floor distance were measured to assess the change in ROM. Statistics indicated that the effect size in instantaneously change of flexion -and extension ROM by SKD was large (Effect size: flexion η² _p = 0.12-0.90; extension η² _p = 0.29-0.42). No significant effect was present in the sham condition. Flexion ROM decreased whereas the extension ROM increased, depending on SKD location- and displacement direction (p < 0.05). The ICC indicates a good intertester and intratester reliability (resp. ICC_3,k = 0.81-0.93; ICC_3,1 = 0.70-0.84). Lumbodorsal SKD affects the flexion- and extension spine, pelvis, and hip range of motion. The effects of SKD are direction- and location dependent as well as movement (flexion/extension) specific. Lumbodorsal SKD during flexion and extension may be useful to determine whether or not a patient would benefit from fascia tissue manipulations. Further research is required to obtain insight into the mechanisms via which the SKD affects ROM and muscle activation, in healthy, asymptomatic-LBP, and LBP subjects.