Dataset Information

Intramuscular stimulation vs sham needling for the treatment of chronic midportion Achilles tendinopathy: A randomized controlled clinical trial.

ABSTRACT:

Background

The insertion of filiform needles intramuscularly (a.k.a. intramuscular stimulation/dry needling) has been suggested as a possible treatment for various painful musculoskeletal conditions. Our aim was to answer the question, is intramuscular stimulation more effective than sham intramuscular stimulation/dry needling for the treatment of Achilles tendinopathy?

Methods

52 participants with persistent midportion Achilles tendinopathy began and 46 completed one of three treatment protocols which were randomly assigned: (G3) a 12-week rehabilitation program of progressive tendon loading plus intramuscular stimulation (n = 25), (G2) the same rehabilitation program but with sham intramuscular stimulation (n = 19), or (G1) a reference group of rehabilitation program alone (as an additional control) (n = 8). The a priori primary outcome measure was change in VISA-A score at 12 weeks-VISA-A was also measured at 6 weeks, and at 6 and 12 months. Secondary outcome measures include the proportion of patients who rated themselves as much or very much improved (%), dorsiflexion range of motion (degrees), and tendon thickness (mm).

Results

The study retention was 94% at 12 weeks and 88% at 1 year. VISA-A score improved in all three groups over time (p<0.0001), with no significant difference among the three groups in VISA-A score at the start of the study (mean ± SD: G3 59 ± 13, G2 57 ± 17, G1 56 ± 22), at 12 weeks (G3 76 ± 14, G2 76 ± 15, G1 82 ± 11) or at any other timepoint. The percentage of patients who rated themselves as much or very much improved (i.e. treatment success) was not different after 12 weeks (G3 70%, G2 89%, G1 86% p = 0.94), or at 26 (p = 0.62) or 52 weeks (p = 0.71). No clinically significant effects of intervention group were observed in any of the secondary outcome measures.

Conclusion

The addition of intramuscular stimulation to standard rehabilitation for Achilles tendinopathy did not result in any improvement over the expected clinical benefit achieved with exercise-based rehabilitation alone.

SUBMITTER: Solomons L

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7478532 | biostudies-literature | 2020

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Intramuscular stimulation vs sham needling for the treatment of chronic midportion Achilles tendinopathy: A randomized controlled clinical trial.

Solomons Lyndal L Lee Jenny J Y JJY Bruce Margaret M White Lynita D LD Scott Alex A

PloS one 20200908 9

<h4>Background</h4>The insertion of filiform needles intramuscularly (a.k.a. intramuscular stimulation/dry needling) has been suggested as a possible treatment for various painful musculoskeletal conditions. Our aim was to answer the question, is intramuscular stimulation more effective than sham intramuscular stimulation/dry needling for the treatment of Achilles tendinopathy?<h4>Methods</h4>52 participants with persistent midportion Achilles tendinopathy began and 46 completed one of three tre ...[more]

PMID: 32898170

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportancePlatelet-rich plasma injections are used as a treatment for chronic midportion Achilles tendinopathy, but evidence for this treatment is limited.ObjectiveIn adults with midportion Achilles tendinopathy, to assess the effects of a single platelet-rich plasma injection, compared with sham injection, on the outcome of the Victorian Institute of Sport Assessment-Achilles (VISA-A) score (a single composite measure of Achilles tendinopathy severity).Design, setting, and participantsA participant-blinded, multicenter randomized clinical trial that included 240 people from 24 sites assigned to either a platelet-rich plasma injection or a sham injection between April 2016 and February 2020. Final follow-up was July 2020. Participants were older than 18 years with midportion Achilles tendon pain for more than 3 months as confirmed by ultrasound, magnetic resonance imaging, or both.InterventionsA single intratendinous platelet-rich plasma injection (n = 121) or a single sham injection (insertion of a subcutaneous dry needle not entering the tendon) (n = 119).Main outcomes and measuresThe primary outcome was the VISA-A score, measured 6 months after treatment allocation. The VISA-A score contains 8 questions that cover 3 domains of pain, function, and activity, analyzed as a composite score (range, 0 [worst symptoms] to 100 [no symptoms]; minimal clinically important difference in score, 12 points). The primary analysis was adjusted for laterality, age, sex, and baseline VISA-A score.ResultsAmong 240 patients assigned to a platelet-rich plasma or sham injection (mean age, 52 years; 138 [58%] women), 221 (92%) completed the trial. At 6-month follow-up, mean VISA-A score values in the plasma-rich plasma group vs the sham injection group were 54.4 vs 53.4 (adjusted mean difference, -2.7 [95% CI, -8.8 to 3.3]). The most common adverse events compared between patients in the platelet-rich plasma group vs the sham group were injection site discomfort (97 vs 73 patients), swelling (56 vs 52 patients) and bruising (48 vs 49 patients).Conclusions and relevanceAmong patients with chronic midportion Achilles tendinopathy, treatment with a single injection of intratendinous platelet-rich plasma, compared with insertion of a subcutaneous dry needle, did not reduce Achilles tendon dysfunction at 6 months. These findings do not support the use of this treatment for chronic midportion Achilles tendinopathy.Trial registrationisrctn.org Identifier: ISRCTN13254422.

Project description:BackgroundAchilles tendinopathy is a complex injury and the clinical presentation spans multiple different domains: physical and psychological symptoms, lower extremity function and tendon structure. A conceptual model of Achilles tendon health comprising these domains has been proposed in the literature. The aim of the study was to fit a model of Achilles tendinopathy using factor analysis and compare that to the conceptual model. An inclusive approach using a wide range of variables spanning multiple potential domains were included.MethodsParticipants (N = 99) with midportion Achilles tendinopathy were assessed with variables representing symptoms, physical function, tendon structure, metabolic syndrome, and psychologic symptoms. A Kaiser-Mayer-Olkin index was used to determine suitable variables for a subsequent exploratory factor analysis.ResultsA model emerged with an acceptable fit to the data (standardized root mean square of residuals = 0.078). Five uncorrelated factors emerged from the model and were labelled as biopsychosocial, lower extremity function, body size, load tolerance, and tendon structure. The total explained variance was 0.51 with the five factors explaining 0.14, 0.12, 0.10, 0.08, and 0.07 respectively. The results differed from the conceptual model as the factors of psychological variables and metabolic variables did not emerge from the analysis.ConclusionA data driven model of Achilles tendon health supports assessment of the clinical presentation over multiple domains. As the factors are uncorrelated, the results of assessment of, for example, tendon structure should not be expected to be associated with lower extremity function or biopsychosocial limitations. The results suggest that the Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System, counter-movement jump height, body mass index, pain with hopping, and the tendon cross-sectional area can evaluate the five factors, respectively.Trial registrationRegistered on clinicaltrials.gov (Medicine NL of.Clinicaltrialsgov [Internet], 2018), ID number NCT03523325.

Project description:BackgroundAchilles tendinopathy (AT) is a common problem among runners. There is only limited evidence for risk factors for AT, and most studies have not defined the AT subcategories. No study has compared the incidence and risk factors between insertional AT and midportion AT, though they are considered distinct. This study aimed to assess incidence and risk factors of AT based on data from a large prospective cohort. The secondary aim was to explore differences in risk factors between insertional and midportion AT.MethodsParticipants were recruited from among registered runners at registration for running events. Questionnaires were completed at baseline, 1 month before the event, 1 week before the event, and 1 month after the event. Information concerning demographics, training load, registered events, and running-related injuries were collected at baseline. The follow-up questionnaires collected information about new injuries. A pain map was used to diagnose midportion and insertional AT. The primary outcome was the incidence of AT. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was applied to identify risk factors for the onset.ResultsWe included 3379 participants with a mean follow-up of 20.4 weeks. The incidence of AT was 4.2%. The proportion of insertional AT was 27.7% and of midportion AT was 63.8%; the remaining proportion was a combined type of insertional and midportion AT. Men had a significantly higher incidence (5%, 95% confidence interval (95%CI): 4.1%-6.0%) than women (2.8%, 95%CI: 2.0%-3.8%). AT in the past 12 months was the most predominant risk factor for new-onset AT (odds ratio (OR) = 6.47, 95%CI: 4.27 -9.81). This was similar for both subcategories of AT (insertional: OR = 5.45, 95%CI: 2.51-11.81; midportion: OR = 6.96, 95%CI: 4.24-11.40). Participants registering for an event with a distance of 10/10.55 km were less likely to develop a new-onset AT (OR = 0.59, 95%CI: 0.36-0.97) or midportion AT (OR = 0.47, 95%CI: 0.23 -0.93). Higher age had a significant negative association with insertional AT (OR = 0.97, 95%CI: 0.94-1.00).ConclusionThe incidence of new-onset AT among recreational runners was 4.2%. The proportion of insertional and midportion AT was 27.7% and 63.8%, respectively. AT in the past 12 months was the predominant risk factor for the onset of AT. Risk factors varied between insertional and midportion AT, but we could not identify clinically relevant differences between the 2 subtypes.

Project description:BackgroundMidportion Achilles tendinopathy (AT) can cause long-term absence from sports participation, and shows high recurrence rates. It is important that the decision to return to sport (RTS) is made carefully, based on sharply delimited criteria. Lack of a well-defined definition and criteria hampers the decision to RTS among athletes with AT, and impedes comparison of RTS rates between different studies.ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to systematically review the literature for definitions of, and criteria for, RTS in AT research.Study designQualitative systematic review.MethodsThe PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane, CINAHL, PEDro, and Scopus electronic databases were searched for articles that reported on the effect of a physiotherapeutic intervention for midportion AT. Article selection was independently performed by two researchers. Qualitative content analysis was used to analyze the included studies and extract definitions of, and criteria for, RTS.ResultsThirty-five studies were included in the content analysis, showing large variety in both the definitions and criteria. Thirty-two studies reported a definition of RTS, but only 19 studies described the criteria for RTS. The content analysis revealed that 'reaching pre-injury activity/sports level, with the ability to perform training and matches without limitations', 'absence of pain', and 'recovery' were the main content categories used to define RTS. Regarding the criteria for RTS, eight different content categories were defined: (1) 'level of pain'; (2) 'level of functional recovery'; (3) 'recovery of muscle strength'; (4) 'recovery of range of motion'; (5) 'level of endurance of the involved limb'; (6) 'medical advice'; (7) 'psychosocial factors'; and (8) 'anatomical/physiological properties of the musculotendinous complex'. Many criteria were not clearly operationalized and lacked specific information.ConclusionsThis systematic review shows that RTS may be defined according to the pre-injury level of sports (including both training and matches), but also with terms related to the absence of pain and recovery. Multiple criteria for RTS were found, which were all related to level of pain, level of functional recovery, muscular strength, range of motion, endurance, medical advice, psychosocial factors, or anatomical/physiological properties of the Achilles tendon. For most of the criteria we identified, no clear operationalization was given, which limits their validity and practical usability. Further research on how RTS after midportion AT should be defined, and which criteria should be used, is warranted.Prospero registration numberCRD42017062518.

Dataset Information

Intramuscular stimulation vs sham needling for the treatment of chronic midportion Achilles tendinopathy: A randomized controlled clinical trial.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Publications

Intramuscular stimulation vs sham needling for the treatment of chronic midportion Achilles tendinopathy: A randomized controlled clinical trial.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets