Cargando…

Efficacy of Dry Needling Versus Transcutaneous Electrical Nerve Stimulation in Patients With Neck Pain Due to Myofascial Trigger Points: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Introduction Myofascial pain is defined as pain arising primarily in muscles and associated with multiple trigger points. Among the non-pharmacological methods, trigger point injection and electrotherapy are effective methods to treat myofascial pain syndrome. This study compares the effectiveness o...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: G, Anjana, Gupta, Anil K, Kumar, Dileep, Mishra, Sudhir, Yadav, Ganesh, Singha Roy, Madhumita, Prajapti, Laxmi
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Cureus 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10117592/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37090321
http://dx.doi.org/10.7759/cureus.36473
_version_ 1785028631797432320
author G, Anjana
Gupta, Anil K
Kumar, Dileep
Mishra, Sudhir
Yadav, Ganesh
Singha Roy, Madhumita
Prajapti, Laxmi
author_facet G, Anjana
Gupta, Anil K
Kumar, Dileep
Mishra, Sudhir
Yadav, Ganesh
Singha Roy, Madhumita
Prajapti, Laxmi
author_sort G, Anjana
collection PubMed
description Introduction Myofascial pain is defined as pain arising primarily in muscles and associated with multiple trigger points. Among the non-pharmacological methods, trigger point injection and electrotherapy are effective methods to treat myofascial pain syndrome. This study compares the effectiveness of dry needling (DN) and transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) in reducing cervical pain intensity and improving cervical range of motion in patients with neck pain due to myofascial trigger points. Methods Fifty patients were enrolled and randomized into two groups. Patients in group A received dry needling, and those in group B received TENS. Patients were evaluated using the Visual Analog Scale (VAS), Neck Disability Index (NDI), and Cervical Range of Motion (CROM) before the treatment and on days 14 and 28 after the treatment. The unpaired t-test was used to evaluate quantitative data, except for VAS, where the Mann-Whitney U test was used. All quantitative variables had a normal distribution with a standard deviation except for pain intensity (VAS), which deviated from the normal distribution. The significance level was set at a P-value=0.05. Results Both DN and TENS groups showed significant improvement in VAS, NDI, and CROM between days 0 and 28 (p=<0.001). The DN group showed greater improvements in pain intensity from day 0 to day 28 (p =<0.001). Between days 0 and 28, there was no discernible difference in NDI changes between the groups (p = 0.157 and p = 0.799, respectively). Mixed results were obtained for CROM, with significant improvement of cervical flexion in the dry needling group (p=<0.008) and significant improvement of cervical rotation to the painful side in the TENS group (<0.001). Conclusion Both dry needling and TENS are effective in reducing pain and improving NDI and CROM in patients with neck pain due to myofascial trigger points. However, as dry needling is more effective in pain reduction, a single session of dry needling is more beneficial and cost-effective as compared to multiple sessions of TENS.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10117592
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher Cureus
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-101175922023-04-21 Efficacy of Dry Needling Versus Transcutaneous Electrical Nerve Stimulation in Patients With Neck Pain Due to Myofascial Trigger Points: A Randomized Controlled Trial G, Anjana Gupta, Anil K Kumar, Dileep Mishra, Sudhir Yadav, Ganesh Singha Roy, Madhumita Prajapti, Laxmi Cureus Pain Management Introduction Myofascial pain is defined as pain arising primarily in muscles and associated with multiple trigger points. Among the non-pharmacological methods, trigger point injection and electrotherapy are effective methods to treat myofascial pain syndrome. This study compares the effectiveness of dry needling (DN) and transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) in reducing cervical pain intensity and improving cervical range of motion in patients with neck pain due to myofascial trigger points. Methods Fifty patients were enrolled and randomized into two groups. Patients in group A received dry needling, and those in group B received TENS. Patients were evaluated using the Visual Analog Scale (VAS), Neck Disability Index (NDI), and Cervical Range of Motion (CROM) before the treatment and on days 14 and 28 after the treatment. The unpaired t-test was used to evaluate quantitative data, except for VAS, where the Mann-Whitney U test was used. All quantitative variables had a normal distribution with a standard deviation except for pain intensity (VAS), which deviated from the normal distribution. The significance level was set at a P-value=0.05. Results Both DN and TENS groups showed significant improvement in VAS, NDI, and CROM between days 0 and 28 (p=<0.001). The DN group showed greater improvements in pain intensity from day 0 to day 28 (p =<0.001). Between days 0 and 28, there was no discernible difference in NDI changes between the groups (p = 0.157 and p = 0.799, respectively). Mixed results were obtained for CROM, with significant improvement of cervical flexion in the dry needling group (p=<0.008) and significant improvement of cervical rotation to the painful side in the TENS group (<0.001). Conclusion Both dry needling and TENS are effective in reducing pain and improving NDI and CROM in patients with neck pain due to myofascial trigger points. However, as dry needling is more effective in pain reduction, a single session of dry needling is more beneficial and cost-effective as compared to multiple sessions of TENS. Cureus 2023-03-21 /pmc/articles/PMC10117592/ /pubmed/37090321 http://dx.doi.org/10.7759/cureus.36473 Text en Copyright © 2023, G et al. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
spellingShingle Pain Management
G, Anjana
Gupta, Anil K
Kumar, Dileep
Mishra, Sudhir
Yadav, Ganesh
Singha Roy, Madhumita
Prajapti, Laxmi
Efficacy of Dry Needling Versus Transcutaneous Electrical Nerve Stimulation in Patients With Neck Pain Due to Myofascial Trigger Points: A Randomized Controlled Trial
title Efficacy of Dry Needling Versus Transcutaneous Electrical Nerve Stimulation in Patients With Neck Pain Due to Myofascial Trigger Points: A Randomized Controlled Trial
title_full Efficacy of Dry Needling Versus Transcutaneous Electrical Nerve Stimulation in Patients With Neck Pain Due to Myofascial Trigger Points: A Randomized Controlled Trial
title_fullStr Efficacy of Dry Needling Versus Transcutaneous Electrical Nerve Stimulation in Patients With Neck Pain Due to Myofascial Trigger Points: A Randomized Controlled Trial
title_full_unstemmed Efficacy of Dry Needling Versus Transcutaneous Electrical Nerve Stimulation in Patients With Neck Pain Due to Myofascial Trigger Points: A Randomized Controlled Trial
title_short Efficacy of Dry Needling Versus Transcutaneous Electrical Nerve Stimulation in Patients With Neck Pain Due to Myofascial Trigger Points: A Randomized Controlled Trial
title_sort efficacy of dry needling versus transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation in patients with neck pain due to myofascial trigger points: a randomized controlled trial
topic Pain Management
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10117592/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37090321
http://dx.doi.org/10.7759/cureus.36473
work_keys_str_mv AT ganjana efficacyofdryneedlingversustranscutaneouselectricalnervestimulationinpatientswithneckpainduetomyofascialtriggerpointsarandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT guptaanilk efficacyofdryneedlingversustranscutaneouselectricalnervestimulationinpatientswithneckpainduetomyofascialtriggerpointsarandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT kumardileep efficacyofdryneedlingversustranscutaneouselectricalnervestimulationinpatientswithneckpainduetomyofascialtriggerpointsarandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT mishrasudhir efficacyofdryneedlingversustranscutaneouselectricalnervestimulationinpatientswithneckpainduetomyofascialtriggerpointsarandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT yadavganesh efficacyofdryneedlingversustranscutaneouselectricalnervestimulationinpatientswithneckpainduetomyofascialtriggerpointsarandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT singharoymadhumita efficacyofdryneedlingversustranscutaneouselectricalnervestimulationinpatientswithneckpainduetomyofascialtriggerpointsarandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT prajaptilaxmi efficacyofdryneedlingversustranscutaneouselectricalnervestimulationinpatientswithneckpainduetomyofascialtriggerpointsarandomizedcontrolledtrial