These meta-analyses support the existence of differences in widespread pressure pain sensitivity in patients with TMD when compared with asymptomatic subjects. Spinal and central hyperexcitability can be found in TMD patients as shown by an increase in mechanical TS.

Limited evidence has been found to show that GA significantly reduces disability in the short and long term when compared with the CG in CNSLBP. There is moderate evidence that GEXP more effectively decreases catastrophizing than GA in the short term. No difference was found between GA and other exercise for any variable.

This systematic review revealed strong-moderate evidence for intermediate-term effectiveness of therapeutic patient education for migraine. Further high-quality RCTs are required for conclusive determination of its effectiveness.

TMD + CNP participants had more areas of pain and also showed widespread pain hyperalgesia. Both groups of participants had psychological factors positively associated with STAI and WP; further, PCS and the PPT at the extratrigeminal region were negatively associated with each other in both groups, except for the left tibialis in the TMD + CNP group.

ObjectivesCompare the immediate effects of a Neurodynamic Mobilization (NM) treatment or foam roller (FR) treatment after DOMS.DesignDouble blind randomised clinical trial.SettingThe participants performed 100 drop jumps (5 sets of 20 repetitions, separated by 2 min rests) from a 0.5-m high box in a University biomechanics laboratory to induce muscle soreness. The participants were randomly assigned in a counter-balanced fashion to either a FR or NM treatment group.ParticipantsThirty-two healthy subjects (21 males and 11 females, mean age 22.6 ± 2.2 years) were randomly assigned into the NM group (n = 16) or the FR group (n = 16).Main Outcome MeasuresThe numeric pain rating scale (NPRS; 0–10), isometric leg strength with dynamometry, surface electromyography at maximum voluntary isometric contraction (MVIC) and muscle peak activation (MPA) upon landing after a test jump were measured at baseline, 48 h after baseline before treatment, and immediately after treatment.ResultsBoth groups showed significant reduction in NPRS scores after treatment (NM: 59%, p < .01; FR: 45%, p < .01), but no difference was found between them (p > .05). The percentage change improvement in the MVIC for the rectus femoris was the only significant difference between the groups (p < 0.05) at post-treatment. After treatment, only the FR group had a statistically significant improvement (p < 0.01) in strength compared to pre-treatment.ConclusionOur results illustrate that both treatments are effective in reducing pain perception after DOMS whereas only FR application showed differences for the MVIC in the rectus femoris and strength.