How have the views on myofascial pain and its treatment evolved in the past 20 years? From spray and stretch and injections to pain science, dry needling and fascial treatments

Design and testing the validity of an inexpensive and accessible sham dry needling protocol

OBJECTIVE

To use a simple method of needle blunting to produce a placebo dry needling protocol which is indistinguishable from the sensations felt during therapeutic dry needling.

METHODS

A randomised cross-over design was used to compare the perception of needle skin penetration, pain experienced and types of sensations experienced following a single placebo dry needling and a single therapeutic dry needling application.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences in the proportions of patients reported ability to perceive needle penetration (p = 0.646), description of needling sensations (p = 0.3) or pain rating (p = 0.405) when comparing placebo needling to therapeutic dry needling.

CONCLUSION

Needle tip bending creates a simple, cost-effective and effective placebo needle for use in comparisons with therapeutic dry needling. This offers researchers a viable alternative to expensive and inappropriate acupuncture sham devices when conducting dry needling trials.

Preliminary evidence of safety and effectiveness of Loxoprofen Sodium Cataplasm combined with physiotherapy for myofascial pain syndrome treatment: A randomized controlled pilot clinical trial

BACKGROUND

Myofascial pain syndrome (MPS) is one of the most common causes of chronic skeletal muscle pain, which is closely related to skeletal muscle myofascial trigger point (MTRP). Since there is no first-line treatment for MPS, we investigated Loxoprofen Sodium Cataplasm combined with physiotherapy as a non-invasive therapy in patients at different levels to a protocol with superior efficacy that is safe and easy to promote. Moreover, this treatment could represent an alternative therapeutic strategy for low-income patients to a safer, more convenient, and more economical treatment scheme.

METHODS

A randomized clinical study was aimed at evaluating the safety and efficacy of Loxoprofen Sodium Cataplasm combined with physiotherapy in patients diagnosed with MPS in the pain clinic. We screened 100 patients with MPS, and using a computer-generated random allocation sequence, we stratified patients in a ratio of 2:1:1:1 (A: B: C: D) to one of the four treatment groups. Group A received Loxoprofen Sodium Cataplasm combined with extracorporeal shock wave therapy (ESWT) and transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS). Group B received Loxoprofen Sodium Cataplasm alone. Group C received physiotherapy alone. Group D received Flurbiprofen Cataplasm combined with physiotherapy. After 2 weeks of treatment, the overall efficiency and secondary assessment indicators, including visual analog scale (VAS) scores, chronic soft tissue injury (CSTI) scores, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores, or Northwick Park Neck Pain Questionnaire (NPQ) scores, were evaluated before and after treatment to analyze the difference in efficacy of each group.

RESULTS

All groups were well tolerated with no reported adverse events. Significant treatment differences in the change from baseline in overall efficiency (primary efficacy endpoint) (P = 0.0078) were observed in subjects of groups A and C.

CONCLUSION

Showing valuable data of efficacy in primary and secondary endpoints, Loxoprofen Sodium Cataplasm combined with physiotherapy is superior in the treatment of MPS.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

https://www.chictr.org.cn/ (ChiCTR2100054756).

Molecular Mechanisms Underlying the Pain-Relieving Effects of Extracorporeal Shock Wave Therapy: A Focus on Fascia Nociceptors

In recent years, extracorporeal shock wave therapy (ESWT) has received increasing attention for its potential beneficial effects on various bone and soft-tissue pathologies, yielding promising outcomes for pain relief and functional recovery. In fact, ESWT has emerged as an alternative, non-invasive, and safe treatment for the management of numerous musculoskeletal disorders, including myofascial pain syndrome (MPS). In particular, MPS is a common chronic painful condition, accounting for the largest proportion of patients affected by musculoskeletal problems. Remarkably, sensory innervation and nociceptors of the fascial system are emerging to play a pivotal role as pain generators in MPS. At the same time, increasing evidence demonstrates that application of ESWT results in selective loss of sensory unmyelinated nerve fibers, thereby inducing long-lasting analgesia. The findings discussed in the present review are supposed to add novel viewpoints that may further enrich our knowledge on the complex interactions occurring between disorders of the deep fascia including changes in innervation, sensitization of fascial nociceptors, the pathophysiology of chronic musculoskeletal pain of MPS, and EWST-induced analgesia. Moreover, gaining mechanistic insights into the molecular mechanisms of pain-alleviating effects of ESWT may broaden the fields of shock waves clinical practice far beyond the musculoskeletal system or its original application for lithotripsy.

Dry Needling for the Treatment of Tension-Type, Cervicogenic, or Migraine Headaches: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

OBJECTIVE

Dry needling is a treatment technique used by clinicians to relieve symptoms in patients with tension-type headache (TTH), cervicogenic headache (CGH), or migraine. This systematic review's main objective was to assess the effectiveness of dry needling on headache pain intensity and related disability in patients with TTH, CGH, or migraine.

METHODS

Medline/PubMed, Scopus, Embase, PEDro, Web of Science, Ovid, Allied and Complementary Medicine Database/EBSCO, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Clinical Trials, Google Scholar, and trial registries were searched until April 1, 2020, along with reference lists of eligible studies and related reviews. Randomized clinical trials or observational studies that compared the effectiveness of dry needling with any other interventions were eligible for inclusion. Three reviewers independently selected studies, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias. Random-effects meta-analyses were performed to produce pooled-effect estimates (Morris dppc2) and their respective CIs.

RESULTS

Of 2715 identified studies, 11 randomized clinical trials were eligible for qualitative synthesis and 9 for meta-analysis. Only 4 trials were of high quality. Very low-quality evidence suggested that dry needling is not statistically better than other interventions for improving headache pain intensity in the short term in patients with TTH (SMD -1.27, 95% CI = -3.56 to 1.03, n = 230), CGH (SMD -0.41, 95% CI = -4.69 to 3.87, n = 104), or mixed headache (TTH and migraine; SMD 0.03; 95% CI = -0.42 to 0.48, n = 90). Dry needling provided significantly greater improvement in related disability in the short term in patients with TTH (SMD -2.28, 95% CI = -2.66 to -1.91, n = 160) and CGH (SMD -0.72, 95% CI = -1.09 to -0.34, n = 144). The synthesis of results showed that dry needling could significantly improve headache frequency, health-related quality of life, trigger point tenderness, and cervical range of motion in TTH and CGH.

CONCLUSIONS

Dry needling produces similar effects to other interventions for short-term headache pain relief, whereas dry needling seems to be better than other therapies for improvement in related disability in the short term.

IMPACT

Although further high-methodological quality studies are warranted to provide a more robust conclusion, our systematic review suggested that for every 1 or 2 patients with TTH treated by dry needling, 1 patient will likely show decreased headache intensity (number needed to treat [NNT] = 2; large effect) and improved related disability (NNT = 1; very large effect). In CGH, for every 3 or 4 patients treated by dry needling, 1 patient will likely exhibit decreased headache intensity (NNT = 4; small effect) and improved related disability (NNT = 3; medium effect).

Welcome to the 11th Volume of Pain Management

I would like to welcome our readers to volume 11 of Pain Management. Since the launch of the journal in 2011, the title has gone from strength to strength, and we are delighted to bring you a new year of content. We are starting off this issue with a look back on some of our article highlights from 2020, alongside some of this month's key content.