Rate and maintenance of improvement of myofascial pain with dry needling alone vs. dry needling with intramuscular electrical stimulation: a randomized controlled trial

STUDY DESIGN

Prospective, randomized.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the difference in rate and maintenance of improvement of pain and disability for Dry Needling (DN) compared to Dry Needling with Intramuscular Electrical Stimulation (DN/IMES), in Myofascial Pain Syndrome (MPS).

BACKGROUND

DN and neuromuscular electrical stimulation (NMES) have been shown to be efficacious in treating MPS. DN/IMES for MPS treatment has not been studied extensively, but initial results are promising.

METHODS

Forty-five subjects were randomly assigned to the DN (n = 25) or DN/IMES (n = 20) group. Both groups received six consecutive weekly treatments and completed NDI and NPRS questionnaires (week 0, 3, 6, and 12).

RESULTS

Both DN and DN/IMES groups showed significant improvement between weeks 0-6 on NDI (p = 0.008 and 0.00002, respectively) and NPRS scores (0 = 0.017 and p = 0.018, respectively). DN/IMES group showed significant within group changes on the NPRS between weeks 0-3 (p = 0.029). No changes were noted in the DN or DN/IMES groups between week 6-12 on NDI (p = 0.497 and p = 0.714, respectively) or NPRS (p = 0.801 and p = 0.164, respectively).

CONCLUSION

DN and DN/IMES demonstrated improvement and maintenance in disability and pain for 6 weeks. No differences in improvement of disability or pain existed between the groups at week 6 or 12.

Trigger point dry needling, manual therapy and exercise versus manual therapy and exercise for the management of Achilles tendinopathy: a feasibility study

OBJECTIVES

The effects of trigger point dry needling (TDN) on myofascial trigger points (MTP) in Achilles tendinopathy (AT) are unknown. We conducted a study to test the feasibility of a large randomized controlled trial (RCT) to compare the effects of TDN to MT and exercise in a patient population with AT.

METHODS

Twenty-two subjects were randomly assigned to a control (MT+Ex) or experimental group (TDN+MT+Ex) and completed eight treatment sessions over 4 weeks with follow up at 3 months. TDN was performed to MTPs in the gastrocnemius, soleus or tibialis posterior each session. The same MT and exercise program was conducted in both groups.

RESULTS

Two of three criteria for feasibility were met. The attrition rate at 4-week and 3-month follow-up was 18.1% and 68%, respectively. Significant differences (p < .05) reported for within group analysis for FAAM, NPRS, pain pressure threshold and strength in both groups at 4 weeks and 3 months. The GROC was significant for MT + Ex at 3 months. No between group differences were found.  The MCID for the FAAM, GROC was surpassed in both groups at 4 weeks and 3 months and NPRS for the MT + Ex group at 4 weeks.

DISCUSSION

A large RCT to investigate the effects of TDN on MTP in AT is not feasible without modifications due to low recruitment and high attrition rate. Modifications to study design should give consideration for closed or national health-care system for access to large patient populations and reduced financial burden to subjects.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03261504F.

Effectiveness of trigger point dry needling for multiple body regions: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Trigger point dry needling (TDN) is commonly used to treat musculoskeletal pain related to myofascial trigger points (MTrPs). To date, no systematic review of high-quality randomised controlled trials (RCTs) investigating TDN to multiple body regions exists.

PURPOSE

The aim of this review is to determine the effectiveness of TDN based on high-quality RCTs for all body regions.

METHODS

To ensure thorough reporting, Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were followed as the methodological basis for this systematic review. PubMed, Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro), Cinahl, Cochrane and reference lists were searched for the years 2000-2014 and the terms 'TDN', 'dry needling NOT trigger point', 'functional dry needling' and 'intramuscular manual therapy'.

INCLUSION CRITERIA

RCTs with PEDro scores 6-10 investigating TDN.

EXCLUSION CRITERIA

duplicates, non-human participants, non-English language, exclusive focus on acupuncture or medicinal injections. Three investigators searched databases, applied criteria, read and assigned PEDro scores to every RCT. Nineteen studies met the criteria. As compared to either baseline or control groups, significant differences were found for pain (14 studies), range of motion (ROM) (five studies) and at least one item on function and quality of life measures (six studies).

LIMITATIONS

This review was limited by inclusion criteria, timeframe, language and databases searched.

CONCLUSION

The majority of high-quality studies included in this review show measured benefit from TDN for MTrPs in multiple body areas, suggesting broad applicability of TDN treatment for multiple muscle groups. Further high-quality research is warranted to standardise TDN methods to determine clinical applicability.

DRY NEEDLING FOR MYOFASCIAL TRIGGER POINT PAIN: A CLINICAL COMMENTARY

Sports and orthopaedic physical therapists have long used a multitude of techniques in order to address pain and dysfunction associated with myofascial trigger points. One technique in particular has recently received overwhelming attention: trigger point dry needling (DN). Despite its efficacy and low risk, questions remain as to its effectiveness, safety, and whether the technique is within the scope of practice of physical therapists. Therefore, the purpose of this clinical commentary is to summarize the current literature related to the associated mechanisms of action of DN, the safety of DN, as well as to discuss relevant scope of practice concerns.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

5.