Injection in the cervical facet joint for shoulder pain with myofascial trigger points in the upper trapezius muscle

Periosteal Needling to the Cervical Articular Pillars as an Adjunct Intervention for Treatment of Chronic Neck Pain and Headache: A Case Report

(1) Background: Periosteal dry needling (PDN) involves clinicians using a solid filiform needle to stimulate bone for analgesic purposes. This case report presents the use of PDN to the cervical articular pillars (CAPs) in an 85-year-old female with chronic neck pain and headache. (2) Case description: PDN was applied to the right C2–C3 articular pillars, following trigger point dry needling (TrPDN) and manual therapy, in order to provide a direct sensory stimulus to the corresponding sclerotomes. PDN added over two treatments led to improved cervical range of motion and eliminated the patient’s neck pain and headache at 1 week follow-up. (3) Outcomes: At discharge, clinically relevant improvements were demonstrated on the numeric pain rating scale (NPRS), which improved from an 8/10 on intake to a 0/10 at rest and with all movements. In addition, the patient exceeded the risk adjusted predicted four-point score improvement and the minimal clinically important improvement (MCII) value of four points on the Focus on Therapeutic Outcomes (FOTO) Neck Functional Status (Neck FS). At one month post-discharge, the patient remained symptom-free. (4) Discussion: In the context of an evidence-informed approach for neck pain and headache, PDN led to marked improvements in pain and function. Patient outcomes exceeded predictive analytic expectations for functional gains and efficient utilization of visits and time in days. Combined with other interventions, PDN to the CAPs could be a viable technique to treat chronic neck pain with headache.

Comparing Trigger Point Dry Needling and Manual Pressure Technique for the Management of Myofascial Neck/Shoulder Pain: A Randomized Clinical Trial

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to investigate short-term and long-term treatment effects of dry needling (DN) and manual pressure (MP) technique with the primary goal of determining if DN has better effects on disability, pain, and muscle characteristics in treating myofascial neck/shoulder pain in women.

METHODS

In this randomized clinical trial, 42 female office workers with myofascial neck/shoulder pain were randomly allocated to either a DN or MP group and received 4 treatments. They were evaluated with the Neck Disability Index, general numeric rating scale, pressure pain threshold, and muscle characteristics before and after treatment. For each outcome parameter, a linear mixed-model analysis was applied to reveal group-by-time interaction effects or main effects for the factor "time."

RESULTS

No significant differences were found between DN and MP. In both groups, significant improvement in the Neck Disability Index was observed after 4 treatments and 3 months (P < .001); the general numerical rating scale also significantly decreased after 3 months. After the 4-week treatment program, there was a significant improvement in pain pressure threshold, muscle elasticity, and stiffness.

CONCLUSION

Both treatment techniques lead to short-term and long-term treatment effects. Dry needling was found to be no more effective than MP in the treatment of myofascial neck/shoulder pain.

The local twitch response during trigger point dry needling: Is it necessary for successful outcomes?

BACKGROUND

Myofascial trigger point (MTrP) injection and trigger point dry needling (TrPDN) are widely accepted therapies for myofascial pain syndrome (MPS). Empirical evidence suggests eliciting a local twitch response (LTR) during needling is essential.

OBJECTIVE

This is the first review exploring the available literature, regardless of study design, on the neurophysiological effects and clinical significance of the LTR as it relates to reductions in pain and disability secondary to MTrP needling.

METHODS

PubMed, MEDLINE, Science Direct and Google Scholar were searched up until October 2016 using terms related to trigger point needling and the LTR.

RESULTS

and Discussion: Several studies show that eliciting a LTR does not correlate with changes in pain and disability, and multiple systematic reviews have failed to conclude whether the LTR is relevant to the outcome of TrPDN. Post needling soreness is consistently reported in studies using repeated in and out needling to elicit LTRs and increases in proportion to the number of needle insertions. In contrast, needle winding without LTRs to MTrPs and connective tissue is well supported in the literature, as it is linked to anti-nociception and factors related to tissue repair and remodeling. Additionally, the positive biochemical changes in the MTrP after needling may simply be a wash out effect related to local vasodilation. While the LTR during TrPDN appears unnecessary for managing myofascial pain and unrelated to many of the positive effects of TrPDN, further investigation is required.

Comparison of Dry Needling versus Orthopedic Manual Therapy in Patients with Myofascial Chronic Neck Pain: A Single-Blind, Randomized Pilot Study

Objective. The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy of three interventions for the treatment of myofascial chronic neck pain. Methods. Thirty-six patients were randomly assigned to one of three intervention groups: orthopedic manual therapy (OMT), dry needling and stretching (DN-S), and soft tissue techniques (STT). All groups received two treatment sessions with a 48 h time interval. Outcome measures included neck pain intensity measured using a visual analogue scale, cervical range of motion (ROM), pressure pain threshold for measuring mechanical hyperalgesia, and two self-reported questionnaires (neck disability index and pain catastrophizing scale). Results. The ANOVA revealed significant differences for the group × time interaction for neck disability, neck pain intensity, and pain catastrophizing. The DN-S and OMT groups reduced neck disability. Only the OMT group showed decreases in mechanical hyperalgesia and pain catastrophizing. The cervical ROM increased in OMT (i.e., flexion, side-bending, and rotation) and DN-S (i.e., side-bending and rotation) groups. Conclusions. The three interventions are all effective in reducing pain intensity. Reduction in mechanical hyperalgesia and pain catastrophizing was only observed in the OMT group. Cervical ROM improved in the DN-S and OMT groups and also neck disability being only clinically relevant for OMT group.

WITHDRAWN: Medicinal and injection therapies for mechanical neck disorders

Withdrawn due to non‐compliance with The Cochrane Collaboration’s Commercial Sponsorship Policy

The editorial group responsible for this previously published document have withdrawn it from publication.

Effectiveness of intra-articular steroid injection for atlanto-occipital joint pain

OBJECTIVES

The aims of this study were to evaluate the role of intra-articular joint injection for atlanto-occipital (AO) joint pain and to determine pain referral sites from that joint.

DESIGN

Prospective observational study.

METHOD

We evaluated 29 patients with chronic refractory neck pain and/or headache, and limited range of lateral bending with rotation at the AO joint on physical examination. Of the 24 patients who consented to undergo diagnostic injections, 20 patients had at least 50% relief from pain and underwent two AO intra-articular injections of mixture of local anesthetic and steroid approximately 1 week apart. Patients completed pain drawings, visual analog scales (VASs) for pain, and neck disability index (NDI) for level of function. Patients were evaluated for 2 months after the first injection.

RESULT

There was headache in 14/20 (70%), posterior neck pain (PNP) in 20, and referred pain in 17 (85%). The average VAS values for headache, PNP, and other referred pains were reduced significantly from 5.64, 5.70, and 5.41, respectively, before treatments to 0.64, 2.30, and 1.71, respectively, two months after injection (P < 0.01). The average NDI value was reduced significantly from 39.95% at pretreatment to 20.40% at 2 months after treatment (P < 0.01).

CONCLUSION

AO intra-articular steroid injection appears effective for the short-term control of chronic refractory pain arising from the AO joint.

Lumbar facet injection for the treatment of chronic piriformis myofascial pain syndrome: 52 case studies

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

The aim of this study was to demonstrate the effectiveness of lumbar facet joint injection for piriformis myofascial pain syndrome.

METHODS

Fifty-two patients with chronic myofascial pain in the piriformis muscle each received a lumbar facet injection into the ipsilateral L5-S1 facet joint region, using the multiple insertion technique. Subjective pain intensity, trunk extension range, and lumbar facet signs were measured before, immediately after, and 2 weeks after injection. Thirty-six patients received follow-up for 6 months.

RESULTS

Immediately after the injection, 27 patients (51.9%) had complete pain subsidence, 19 patients (36.5%) had pain reduction to a tolerable level, and only 6 patients (11.5%) had no pain relief to a tolerable level. Mean pain intensity was reduced from 7.4±0.9 to 1.6±2.1 after injection (P<0.01). This effectiveness lasted for 2 weeks in 49 patients (94.2%), and lasted for approximately 6 months in 35 (97.2%) of 36 patients. The mean range of motion increased from 13.4±6.8 degrees to 22.1±6.0 degrees immediately after injection, and further increased 2 weeks and 6 months later. Immediately after injection, 45 patients (86.5%) had no facet sign. In addition, 90.4% and 94.4% of patients had no facet sign after 2 weeks and after 6 months, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

It is important to identify the possible cause of piriformis myofascial pain syndrome. If this pain is related to lumbar facet lesions, lumbar facet joint injection can immediately suppress piriformis myofascial pain symptoms. This effectiveness may last for at least 6 months in most patients. This study further supports the importance of eliminating the underlying etiological lesion for complete and effective relief of myofascial pain syndrome.

Physician-delivered injection therapies for mechanical neck disorders: a systematic review update (non-oral, non-intravenous pharmacological interventions for neck pain)

Background:

Controversy persists regarding medicinal injections for mechanical neck disorders (MNDs).

Objectives:

To determine the effectiveness of physician-delivered injections on pain, function/disability, quality of life, global perceived effect and patient satisfaction for adults with MNDs.

Search Methods:

We updated our previous searches of CENTRAL, MEDLINE and EMBASE from December 2006 through to March 2012.

Selection Criteria:

We included randomized controlled trials of adults with neck disorders treated by physician-delivered injection therapies.

Data Collection and Analysis:

Two authors independently selected articles, abstracted data and assessed methodological quality. When clinical heterogeneity was absent, we combined studies using random-effects models.

Results:

We included 12 trials (667 participants). No high or moderate quality studies were found with evidence of benefit over control. Moderate quality evidence suggests little or no difference in pain or function/disability between nerve block injection of steroid and bupivacaine vs bupivacaine alone at short, intermediate and long-term for chronic neck pain. We found limited very low quality evidence of an effect on pain with intramuscular lidocaine vs control for chronic myofascial neck pain. Two low quality studies showed an effect on pain with anaesthetic nerve block vs saline immediately post treatment and in the short-term. All other studies were of low or very low quality with no evidence of benefit over controls.

Authors' Conclusions:

Current evidence does not confirm the effectiveness of IM-lidocaine injection for chronic mechanical neck pain nor anaesthetic nerve block for cervicogenic headache. There is moderate evidence of no benefit for steroid blocks vs controls for mechanical neck pain.

Percutaneous soft tissue release for treating chronic recurrent myofascial pain associated with lateral epicondylitis: 6 case studies

Objective. The purpose of this pilot study is to investigate the effectiveness of the percutaneous soft tissue release for the treatment of recurrent myofascial pain in the forearm due to recurrent lateral epicondylitis. Methods. Six patients with chronic recurrent pain in the forearm with myofascial trigger points (MTrPs) due to chronic lateral epicondylitis were treated with percutaneous soft tissue release of Lin's technique. Pain intensity (measured with a numerical pain rating scale), pressure pain threshold (measured with a pressure algometer), and grasping strength (measured with a hand dynamometer) were assessed before, immediately after, and 3 months and 12 months after the treatment. Results. For every individual case, the pain intensity was significantly reduced (P < 0.01) and the pressure pain threshold and the grasping strength were significantly increased (P < 0.01) immediately after the treatment. This significant effectiveness lasts for at least one year. Conclusions. It is suggested that percutaneous soft tissue release can be used for treating chronic recurrent lateral epicondylitis to avoid recurrence, if other treatment, such as oral anti-inflammatory medicine, physical therapy, or local steroid injection, cannot control the recurrent pain.

New trends in the treatment and management of myofascial pain syndrome

Myofascial pain syndrome presents a significant physical and financial burden to society. In view of the aging demographics, myofascial pain promises to be an even greater challenge to health care in the future. Myofascial trigger points have been identified as important anatomic and physiologic phenomena in the pathophysiology of myofascial pain. While their pathophysiologic mechanisms are still unclear, emerging research suggests that trigger points may be initiated by neurogenic mechanisms secondary to central sensitization, and not necessarily by local injury. A variety of treatments are employed in the management of trigger points, including manual therapy, electrotherapy, exercise, and needle therapy. Therapeutic ultrasound demonstrates significant potential as a safe, cost-effective, and relatively noninvasive therapeutic alternative in the treatment and management of this modern day medical enigma.