Complementary therapies in clinical practice · 2025
Needling trigger points for treating myofascial pain syndrome: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
СтатьяСистематический обзорМетаанализПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Zhao Yuwei, Yang Yun, Kong Xiehe, Liu Jie, Hong Jue, Yang Yanting, Zhao Yue, Huang Xinyun, Ma Xiaopeng
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Myofascial pain syndrome (MPS) is a widespread musculoskeletal disorder characterized by myofascial trigger points. Needling trigger points is one of the most common therapeutic interventions to treat MPS. However, it is unclear whether needling trigger points is superior to other non-pharmacological interventions.
METHODS: Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) which compared the effectiveness of needling trigger points and other non-pharmacological therapies for treating MPS, were searched in the databases of PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, Cochrane Library, CNKI, WanFang, VPCS, and Sinomed, from their inception to August 25th, 2024. Two independent reviewers extracted relevant data on study characteristics and assessed the risk of bias using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool.
RESULTS: Of the 1968 articles initially screened, 13 RCTs were included. Needling trigger points treatment were more efficacious than non-pharmacological therapies in reducing Visual Analog Scale (VAS) scores (MD = -1.32; 95 % CI = -1.84 to -0.81; P < 0.0001) and the Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ) scores (MD = -2.77; 95 % CI = -3.58 to -1.97; P < 0.0001).
CONCLUSION: This systematic review has shown that needling trigger points could be a more effective option than other non-pharmacological therapies to improve the symptoms of MPS. Clinical trials of robust quality are required to promote further the evidence-based application of needling trigger points for MPS.
METHODS: Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) which compared the effectiveness of needling trigger points and other non-pharmacological therapies for treating MPS, were searched in the databases of PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, Cochrane Library, CNKI, WanFang, VPCS, and Sinomed, from their inception to August 25th, 2024. Two independent reviewers extracted relevant data on study characteristics and assessed the risk of bias using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool.
RESULTS: Of the 1968 articles initially screened, 13 RCTs were included. Needling trigger points treatment were more efficacious than non-pharmacological therapies in reducing Visual Analog Scale (VAS) scores (MD = -1.32; 95 % CI = -1.84 to -0.81; P < 0.0001) and the Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ) scores (MD = -2.77; 95 % CI = -3.58 to -1.97; P < 0.0001).
CONCLUSION: This systematic review has shown that needling trigger points could be a more effective option than other non-pharmacological therapies to improve the symptoms of MPS. Clinical trials of robust quality are required to promote further the evidence-based application of needling trigger points for MPS.