Dry needling for spine related disorders: a scoping review.
Back pain
Myofascial pain syndrome
Neck pain
Outcome assessment
Pain
Spine
Trigger point
Journal
Chiropractic & manual therapies
ISSN: 2045-709X
Titre abrégé: Chiropr Man Therap
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101551481
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
11 05 2020
11 05 2020
Historique:
received:
22
09
2019
accepted:
15
04
2020
entrez:
13
5
2020
pubmed:
13
5
2020
medline:
13
1
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
The depth and breadth of research on dry needling (DN) has not been evaluated specifically for symptomatic spine related disorders (SRD) from myofascial trigger points (TrP), disc, nerve and articular structures not due to serious pathologies. Current literature appears to support DN for treatment of TrP. Goals of this review include identifying research published on DN treatment for SRD, sites of treatment and outcomes studied. A scoping review was conducted following Levac et al.'s five part methodological framework to determine the current state of the literature regarding DN for patients with SRD. Initial and secondary search strategies yielded 55 studies in the cervical (C) region (71.43%) and 22 in the thoracolumbar-pelvic (TLP) region (28.57%). Most were randomized controlled trials (60% in C, 45.45% in TLP) and clinical trials (18.18% in C, 22.78% in TLP). The most commonly treated condition was TrP for both the C and TLP regions. In the C region, DN was provided to 23 different muscles, with the trapezius as treatment site in 41.88% of studies. DN was applied to 31 different structures in the TLP region. In the C region, there was one treatment session in 23 studies (41.82%) and 2-6 treatments in 25 (45.45%%). For the TLP region, one DN treatment was provided in 8 of the 22 total studies (36.36%) and 2-6 in 9 (40.9%). The majority of experimental designs had DN as the sole intervention. For both C and TLP regions, visual analogue scale, pressure pain threshold and range of motion were the most common outcomes. For SRD, DN was primarily applied to myofascial structures for pain or TrP diagnoses. Many outcomes were improved regardless of diagnosis or treatment parameters. Most studies applied just one treatment which may not reflect common clinical practice. Further research is warranted to determine optimal treatment duration and frequency. Most studies looked at DN as the sole intervention. It is unclear whether DN alone or in addition to other treatment procedures would provide superior outcomes. Functional outcome tools best suited to tracking the outcomes of DN for SRD should be explored.
Sections du résumé
INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND
The depth and breadth of research on dry needling (DN) has not been evaluated specifically for symptomatic spine related disorders (SRD) from myofascial trigger points (TrP), disc, nerve and articular structures not due to serious pathologies. Current literature appears to support DN for treatment of TrP. Goals of this review include identifying research published on DN treatment for SRD, sites of treatment and outcomes studied.
METHODS
A scoping review was conducted following Levac et al.'s five part methodological framework to determine the current state of the literature regarding DN for patients with SRD.
RESULTS
Initial and secondary search strategies yielded 55 studies in the cervical (C) region (71.43%) and 22 in the thoracolumbar-pelvic (TLP) region (28.57%). Most were randomized controlled trials (60% in C, 45.45% in TLP) and clinical trials (18.18% in C, 22.78% in TLP). The most commonly treated condition was TrP for both the C and TLP regions. In the C region, DN was provided to 23 different muscles, with the trapezius as treatment site in 41.88% of studies. DN was applied to 31 different structures in the TLP region. In the C region, there was one treatment session in 23 studies (41.82%) and 2-6 treatments in 25 (45.45%%). For the TLP region, one DN treatment was provided in 8 of the 22 total studies (36.36%) and 2-6 in 9 (40.9%). The majority of experimental designs had DN as the sole intervention. For both C and TLP regions, visual analogue scale, pressure pain threshold and range of motion were the most common outcomes.
CONCLUSION
For SRD, DN was primarily applied to myofascial structures for pain or TrP diagnoses. Many outcomes were improved regardless of diagnosis or treatment parameters. Most studies applied just one treatment which may not reflect common clinical practice. Further research is warranted to determine optimal treatment duration and frequency. Most studies looked at DN as the sole intervention. It is unclear whether DN alone or in addition to other treatment procedures would provide superior outcomes. Functional outcome tools best suited to tracking the outcomes of DN for SRD should be explored.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32393383
doi: 10.1186/s12998-020-00310-z
pii: 10.1186/s12998-020-00310-z
pmc: PMC7212610
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Review
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
23Références
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1980 May-Jun;5(3):279-91
pubmed: 6446774
J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2015 Aug;45(8):604-12
pubmed: 26110549
J Acupunct Meridian Stud. 2014 Aug;7(4):190-3
pubmed: 25151452
Pain. 2002 Sep;99(1-2):83-9
pubmed: 12237186
Int J Sports Phys Ther. 2014 Oct;9(5):699-711
pubmed: 25328832
J Bodyw Mov Ther. 2018 Apr;22(2):333-336
pubmed: 29861228
J Clin Diagn Res. 2017 Jun;11(6):YM01-YM03
pubmed: 28764281
Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1989 May;70(5):382-6
pubmed: 2524183
Chiropr Man Therap. 2012 Nov 25;20(1):36
pubmed: 23176709
Am J Phys Med Rehabil. 2017 Oct;96(10):726-733
pubmed: 28291046
Cephalalgia. 2001 Oct;21(8):813-7
pubmed: 11737006
J Clin Med Res. 2016 Jul;8(7):513-8
pubmed: 27298659
Mil Med. 2018 Nov 1;183(11-12):e762-e764
pubmed: 29635441
Medicine (Baltimore). 2018 Jun;97(26):e11225
pubmed: 29952980
BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2010 Aug 11;11:180
pubmed: 20698999
Clin Rheumatol. 2010 Jan;29(1):19-23
pubmed: 19838864
PLoS Med. 2009 Jul 21;6(7):e1000097
pubmed: 19621072
J Rehabil Med. 2010 May;42(5):463-8
pubmed: 20544158
J Bodyw Mov Ther. 2014 Apr;18(2):298-305
pubmed: 24725800
Ann Rheum Dis. 2014 Jun;73(6):968-74
pubmed: 24665116
Pain Med. 2019 Jan 1;20(1):153-160
pubmed: 29718418
Phys Ther Rev. 2014 Aug;19(4):252-265
pubmed: 25143704
J Phys Ther Sci. 2017 Sep;29(9):1502-1509
pubmed: 28931976
J Phys Ther Sci. 2016 Apr;28(4):1392-7
pubmed: 27190490
Clin J Pain. 2014 Mar;30(3):214-23
pubmed: 23629597
Pain. 2015 Apr;156(4):635-43
pubmed: 25790454
Pain Physician. 2017 Feb;20(2):37-52
pubmed: 28158152
Evid Based Complement Alternat Med. 2014;2014:235817
pubmed: 25386218
Int J Evid Based Healthc. 2015 Sep;13(3):141-6
pubmed: 26134548
Acupunct Med. 2016 Jun;34(3):171-7
pubmed: 26746173
Pain Res Treat. 2015;2015:327307
pubmed: 26640708
Pain. 1979 Feb;6(1):83-90
pubmed: 424236
J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2014 Apr;44(4):252-60
pubmed: 24568260
J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2014 Nov;44(11):852-61
pubmed: 25269764
Clin J Pain. 2007 Jun;23(5):440-8
pubmed: 17515743
Cranio. 2009 Jan;27(1):46-53
pubmed: 19241799
J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 2017 Jul - Aug;40(6):397-403
pubmed: 28739020
J Man Manip Ther. 2019 Jul;27(3):125-127
pubmed: 31230588
Acupunct Med. 2007 Dec;25(4):130-6
pubmed: 18160923
Eur Spine J. 2006 Jun;15(6):834-48
pubmed: 15999284
Int J Sports Phys Ther. 2015 Feb;10(1):104-13
pubmed: 25709869
Pain. 2016 Sep;157(9):1905-17
pubmed: 27537209
Am J Phys Med Rehabil. 2016 Jul;95(7):483-94
pubmed: 27333534
Complement Ther Med. 2017 Aug;33:46-57
pubmed: 28735825
PM R. 2015 Jul;7(7):711-718
pubmed: 25661462
Man Ther. 2015 Dec;20(6):769-76
pubmed: 25801100
J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2017 Mar;47(3):133-149
pubmed: 28158962
Implement Sci. 2010 Sep 20;5:69
pubmed: 20854677
Clin Rheumatol. 2013 Mar;32(3):309-15
pubmed: 23138883
J Res Med Sci. 2016 Oct 18;21:86
pubmed: 28163732
Pain Ther. 2013 Jun;2(1):21-36
pubmed: 25135034
Br J Sports Med. 2005 Feb;39(2):84-90
pubmed: 15665203
J Spec Oper Med. 2016 Spring;16(1):1-5
pubmed: 27045487
J Chiropr Med. 2016 Dec;15(4):252-258
pubmed: 27857633
Clin Rheumatol. 2014 Jun;33(6):859-64
pubmed: 24352752
J Bodyw Mov Ther. 2017 Oct;21(4):810-814
pubmed: 29037632
Evid Based Complement Alternat Med. 2014;2014:638268
pubmed: 25383083
J Altern Complement Med. 2007 Jul-Aug;13(6):617-24
pubmed: 17718644
Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2018 Jan;99(1):144-152.e2
pubmed: 28690077
Braz J Phys Ther. 2016 Jul 11;20(5):422-431
pubmed: 27410163
Am J Phys Med Rehabil. 2016 Oct;95(10):e149-58
pubmed: 27552352
Agri. 2017 Jan;29(1):9-16
pubmed: 28467572
J Man Manip Ther. 2016 Sep;24(4):223-32
pubmed: 27582622
J Man Manip Ther. 2011 Nov;19(4):223-7
pubmed: 23115475
PM R. 2017 Feb;9(2):105-112
pubmed: 27297448
J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 2017 Jan;40(1):11-20
pubmed: 28017188
Electromyogr Clin Neurophysiol. 1997 Aug;37(5):259-72
pubmed: 9298338
Am J Phys Med Rehabil. 1994 Jul-Aug;73(4):256-63
pubmed: 8043247
Int J Sports Phys Ther. 2013 Apr;8(2):145-61
pubmed: 23593553
J Orthop Sci. 2008 Mar;13(2):101-6
pubmed: 18392913
J Pain Res. 2018 Jun 29;11:1273-1279
pubmed: 29988746
J Can Chiropr Assoc. 2015 Jun;59(2):101-10
pubmed: 26136602
J Bodyw Mov Ther. 2014 Jul;18(3):390-8
pubmed: 25042309
Cranio. 2008 Apr;26(2):96-103
pubmed: 18468269
J Bodyw Mov Ther. 2015 Jul;19(3):464-72
pubmed: 26118519
Man Ther. 2016 Feb;21:204-9
pubmed: 26304789
Rheumatol Int. 2005 Oct;25(8):604-11
pubmed: 15372199
Photomed Laser Surg. 2004 Aug;22(4):306-11
pubmed: 15345173
Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2015 May;96(5):944-55
pubmed: 25576642
Physiotherapy. 2017 Jun;103(2):131-137
pubmed: 27623385
Acupunct Med. 2017 Apr;35(2):85-92
pubmed: 27697768
Cranio. 1989 Jul;7(3):243-4
pubmed: 2638215
Neurol Clin. 2007 May;25(2):353-71
pubmed: 17445733
Physiother Theory Pract. 2017 May;33(5):420-428
pubmed: 28481688
Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2015 May;96(5):775-81
pubmed: 25582412