Dataset Information

Effects of Trigger Point Dry Needling for the Management of Knee Pain Syndromes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:To evaluate the effect of trigger point dry needling alone or as an adjunct with other interventions on pain and related disability in people with knee pain. METHODS:Several electronic databases were searched for randomized controlled trials where at least one group received dry needling for knee pain. Studies had to include human subjects and collect outcomes on pain and pain-related disability in musculoskeletal knee pain. Data were extracted by two reviewers. The risk of bias was assessed by the Cochrane Guidelines, methodological quality was assessed with the Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro) score, and the quality of evidence by using the GRADE approach. Standardized mean differences (SMD) were calculated. RESULTS:Ten studies (six patellofemoral pain, two knee osteoarthritis, two post-surgery knee pain) were included. The meta-analysis found moderate effect sizes of dry needling for reducing pain (SMD -0.53, 95% CI -0.87 to -0.19) and improving related disability (SMD -0.58, 95% CI -1.08 to -0.09) as compared to a comparison group at short-term. The main effect was observed for patellofemoral pain (SMD -0.64, 95% CI -1.17 to -0.11). No significant effects were observed at mid- or long-term follow-ups. The risk of bias was generally low, but the heterogenicity and the imprecision of the results downgraded the level of evidence. CONCLUSION:Low to moderate evidence suggests a positive effect of trigger point dry needling on pain and related disability in patellofemoral pain, but not knee osteoarthritis or post-surgery knee pain, at short-term. More high-quality trials investigating long-term effects are clearly needed.

SUBMITTER: Rahou-El-Bachiri Y

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7409136 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Jun

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Effects of Trigger Point Dry Needling for the Management of Knee Pain Syndromes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Rahou-El-Bachiri Youssef Y Navarro-Santana Marcos J MJ Gómez-Chiguano Guido F GF Cleland Joshua A JA López-de-Uralde-Villanueva Ibai I Fernández-de-Las-Peñas César C Ortega-Santiago Ricardo R Plaza-Manzano Gustavo G

Journal of clinical medicine 20200629 7

<h4>Background</h4>To evaluate the effect of trigger point dry needling alone or as an adjunct with other interventions on pain and related disability in people with knee pain.<h4>Methods</h4>Several electronic databases were searched for randomized controlled trials where at least one group received dry needling for knee pain. Studies had to include human subjects and collect outcomes on pain and pain-related disability in musculoskeletal knee pain. Data were extracted by two reviewers. The ris ...[more]

PMID: 32610659

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundPlantar heel pain (plantar fasciitis) is a common and disabling condition, which has a detrimental impact on health-related quality of life. Despite the high prevalence of plantar heel pain, the optimal treatment for this disorder remains unclear. Consequently, an alternative therapy such as dry needling is increasingly being used as an adjunctive treatment by health practitioners. Only two trials have investigated the effectiveness of dry needling for plantar heel pain, however both trials were of a low methodological quality. This manuscript describes the design of a randomised controlled trial to evaluate the effectiveness of dry needling for plantar heel pain.MethodsEighty community-dwelling men and woman aged over 18 years with plantar heel pain (who satisfy the inclusion and exclusion criteria) will be recruited. Eligible participants with plantar heel pain will be randomised to receive either one of two interventions, (i) real dry needling or (ii) sham dry needling. The protocol (including needling details and treatment regimen) was formulated by general consensus (using the Delphi research method) using 30 experts worldwide that commonly use dry needling for plantar heel pain. Primary outcome measures will be the pain subscale of the Foot Health Status Questionnaire and "first step" pain as measured on a visual analogue scale. The secondary outcome measures will be health related quality of life (assessed using the Short Form-36 questionnaire - Version Two) and depression, anxiety and stress (assessed using the Depression, Anxiety and Stress Scale - short version). Primary outcome measures will be performed at baseline, 2, 4, 6 and 12 weeks and secondary outcome measures will be performed at baseline, 6 and 12 weeks. Data will be analysed using the intention to treat principle.ConclusionThis study is the first randomised controlled trial to evaluate the effectiveness of dry needling for plantar heel pain. The trial will be reported in accordance with the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials and the Standards for Reporting Interventions in Clinical Trials of Acupuncture guidelines. The findings from this trial will provide evidence for the effectiveness of trigger point dry needling for plantar heel pain.Trial registrationAustralian New Zealand 'Clinical Trials Registry'. ACTRN12610000611022.

Project description:Our aim was to evaluate the effect of dry needling alone as compared to sham needling, no intervention, or other physical interventions applied over trigger points (TrPs) related with neck pain symptoms. Randomized controlled trials including one group receiving dry needling for TrPs associated with neck pain were identified in electronic databases. Outcomes included pain intensity, pain-related disability, pressure pain thresholds, and cervical range of motion. The Cochrane risk of bias tool and the Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro) score were used to assessed risk of bias (RoB) and methodological quality of the trials. The quality of evidence was assessed by using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. Between-groups mean differences (MD) and standardized mean differences (SMD) were calculated (3) Twenty-eight trials were finally included. Dry needling reduced pain immediately after (MD -1.53, 95% CI -2.29 to -0.76) and at short-term (MD -2.31, 95% CI -3.64 to -0.99) when compared with sham/placebo/waiting list/other form of dry needling and, also, at short-term (MD -0.51, 95% CI -0.95 to -0.06) compared with manual therapy. No differences in comparison with other physical therapy interventions were observed. An effect on pain-related disability at the short-term was found when comparing dry needing with sham/placebo/waiting list/other form of dry needling (SMD -0.87, 95% CI -1.60 to -0.14) but not with manual therapy or other interventions. Dry needling was effective for improving pressure pain thresholds immediately after the intervention (MD 55.48 kPa, 95% CI 27.03 to 83.93). No effect on cervical range of motion of dry needling against either comparative group was found. No between-treatment effect was observed in any outcome at mid-term. Low to moderate evidence suggests that dry needling can be effective for improving pain intensity and pain-related disability in individuals with neck pain symptoms associated with TrPs at the short-term. No significant effects on pressure pain sensitivity or cervical range of motion were observed. Registration number: OSF Registry-https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/P2UWD.

Project description:BACKGROUND: Plantar heel pain (plantar fasciitis) is one of the most common musculoskeletal pathologies of the foot. Plantar heel pain can be managed with dry needling and/or injection of myofascial trigger points (MTrPs) however the evidence for its effectiveness is uncertain. Therefore, we aimed to systematically review the current evidence for the effectiveness of dry needling and/or injections of MTrPs associated with plantar heel pain. METHODS: We searched specific electronic databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, AMED, CINAHL, SPORTDiscus and AMI) in April 2010 to identify randomised and non-randomised trials. We included trials where participants diagnosed with plantar heel pain were treated with dry needling and/or injections (local anaesthetics, steroids, Botulinum toxin A and saline) alone or in combination with acupuncture. Outcome measures that focussed on pain and function were extracted from the data. Trials were assessed for quality using the Quality Index tool. RESULTS: Three quasi-experimental trials matched the inclusion criteria: two trials found a reduction in pain for the use of trigger point dry needling when combined with acupuncture and the third found a reduction in pain using 1% lidocaine injections when combined with physical therapy. However, the methodological quality of the three trials was poor, with Quality Index scores ranging form 7 to 12 out of a possible score of 27. A meta-analysis was not conducted because substantial heterogeneity was present between trials. CONCLUSIONS: There is limited evidence for the effectiveness of dry needling and/or injections of MTrPs associated with plantar heel pain. However, the poor quality and heterogeneous nature of the included studies precludes definitive conclusions being made. Importantly, this review highlights the need for future trials to use rigorous randomised controlled methodology with measures such as blinding to reduce bias. We also recommend that such trials adhere to the Standards for Reporting Interventions in Controlled Trials of Acupuncture (STRICTA) to ensure transparency.

Project description:BackgroundTo evaluate the efficacy and safety of dry needling (DN) for treating low back pain (LBP).MethodsNine databases were searched from inception to October 2017. Eligible randomized controlled trials (RCTs) involving DN for treating LBP were retrieved. Two reviewers independently screened the articles, extracted data, and evaluated the risk of bias among the included studies using the risk of bias assessment tool by Cochrane Collaboration.ResultsSixteen RCTs were included and the risk of bias assessment of them was "high" or "unclear" for most domains. Meta-analysis results suggested that DN was more effective than acupuncture in alleviating pain intensity and functional disability at postintervention, while its efficacy on pain and disability at follow-up was only equal to acupuncture. Besides, DN was superior to sham needling for alleviating pain intensity at postintervention/follow-up and functional disability at postintervention. Additionally, qualitative review revealed that DN combined with acupuncture had more significant effect on alleviating pain intensity at postintervention and achieved higher response rate than DN alone. However, compared with other treatments (laser, physical therapy, other combined treatments, etc.), it remained uncertain whether the efficacy of DN was superior or equal because the results of included studies were mixed.ConclusionsCompared with acupuncture and sham needling, DN is more effective for alleviating pain and disability at postintervention in LBP, while its effectiveness on pain and disability at follow-up was equal to acupuncture. Besides, it remains uncertain whether the efficacy of DN is superior to other treatments. Nevertheless, considering the overall "high" or "unclear" risk of bias of studies, all current evidence is not robust to draw a firm conclusion regarding the efficacy and safety of DN for LBP. Future RCTs with rigorous methodologies are required to confirm our findings.Details of ethics approvalNo ethical approval was required for this systematic review and meta-analysis.

Dataset Information

Effects of Trigger Point Dry Needling for the Management of Knee Pain Syndromes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Publications

Effects of Trigger Point Dry Needling for the Management of Knee Pain Syndromes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets