Comparison of the Effectiveness of Transcutaneous Electrical Nerve Stimulation and Interferential Therapy on the Upper Trapezius in Myofascial Pain Syndrome

Dissanayaka, Thusharika; Pallegama, Ranjith Wasantha; Suraweera, Hilari Justus; Johnson, Mark I.; Kariyawasam, A

doi:10.1097/phm.0000000000000461

Cited by 33 publications

(31 citation statements)

References 38 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Furthermore, there is a growing number of studies demonstrating that TENS yields pain relief in patients with MPS. [47][48][49] In our study, we found a statistically significant improvement in pain, SF-36, PSQI, FACIT, BDI, and NDI in the HP, TENS, and US group after treatment. These findings suggest that combined traditional physical therapy modalities are more effective in the treatment of MPS compared to individual applications.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 57%

High-Energy Flux Density Extracorporeal Shock Wave Therapy Versus Traditional Physical Therapy Modalities in Myofascial Pain Syndrome: A Randomized-controlled, Single-Blind Trial

Gezgınaslan

2020

Arch Rheumatol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives: This study aims to investigate the effects of extracorporeal shock wave therapy (ESWT) on pain, sleep, fatigue, disability, depression, and quality of life (QoL) in patients with myofascial pain syndrome (MPS). Patients and methods: Between March 2018 and September 2018, a total of 94 patients (16 males, 78 females; mean age 44.2±11.94 years; range, 19 to 74 years) with the diagnosis of MPS were included in the study. The patients were divided into two groups. The treatment group consisted of 49 patients and a total of seven sessions of high-energy flux density ESWT (H-ESWT) (0.26 mJ/mm 2) were given with three days interval. The control group consisted of 45 patients and the treatment of hot pack, transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation, and ultrasound was given for five days for two weeks. At baseline and one month after treatment, the visual analog scale (VAS), Short Form-36 (SF-36), Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI), Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy (FACIT)-Fatigue Scale, Neck Disability Index (NDI), and Beck Depression Inventory (BDI) scores were compared between the groups. Results: There were no statistically significant differences in the age, sex, demographic characteristics, and baseline VAS, SF-36, NDI, BDI, FACIT, and PSQI scores between the groups (p>0.05). In the ESWT group, there was a statistically significant decrease in the VAS, SF-36, NDI, BDI, FACIT, and PSQI scores after treatment compared to the baseline scores, while only the SF-36 subscale scores were statistically significantly higher (p<0.05). There was a statistically significant correlation between the VAS and SF-36 scores and the BDI, NDI, FACIT and PSQI scores after the treatment. Conclusion: Our study results suggest that H-ESWT is more effective than traditional physical therapy methods on pain, QoL, sleep, fatigue, depression, and disability in patients with MPS.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 57%

High-Energy Flux Density Extracorporeal Shock Wave Therapy Versus Traditional Physical Therapy Modalities in Myofascial Pain Syndrome: A Randomized-controlled, Single-Blind Trial

Gezgınaslan

2020

Arch Rheumatol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Both are validated and well-established in the literature 10,13,15 . Despite the reports that the electrical stimulation positively affects the treatment of individuals with neck pain, such as TENS 12,16,17 and the Interferential 11 , in this study, the variables related to pain and disability did not present differences in relation to the baseline values or intergroup. Corrêa et al 18 observed in individuals with chronic low back pain that the interferential current, of 1 and 4kHz (AMF of 100Hz, for 30 minutes, 3 days a week for 4 weeks), produced significant reduction in pain intensity.…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 96%

“…The increased use medium frequency currents in rehab follows the theory that they are more comfortable and more effective than of low-frequency currents since the first has a lower impedance on the skin, being able to stimulate deeper tissues, although reports point out varied antinociceptive effects between currents [11][12][13] . There is a need for new research with electrostimulation in the treatment of spinal pain 14 .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 95%

“…Regarding the goniometry, the present study did not evidence an amplitude increase in any of the tested cervical movements, despite all of them be restricted. Dissanayaka et al 12 observed improvements in the neck ROM in individuals who received the low-frequency current, these results were not found in those who received the medium frequency (interferential). Moberg et al 23 , evaluating healthcare professionals, noticed an association between VO 2max , prehension strength and musculoskeletal pain.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 96%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Corrente Aussie em estudantes com cervicalgia crônica: um ensaio clínico randomizado

Silva¹,

Coracini²,

Branco³

et al. 2018

Brazilian Journal of Pain

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Neck pain is a painful acute or chronic syndrome that affects the region of the cervical spine. Electrostimulation is one type of treatment, which provides local analgesia bringing more comfort and functionality to the patient. However, there are still there are other current forms not fully explored. Therefore, the objective of the study was to evaluate the analgesic and functional effects of the Aussie current on students with chronic neck pain. METHODS: Twenty-four individuals were separated in a control group (n=11) and an electrostimulation group (n=13) with current intensity at the sensory level. There were 3 interventions per week for 4 weeks, totaling 12 interventions per individual. The assessment was performed applying the Neck Disability Index, the visual analog scale of pain, the handgrip dynamometer, and the cervical spine goniometry before the intervention, shortly after the treatment period, and after a month of follow-up. RESULTS: In relation to all the assessed items, there was no significant difference between the three evaluations in the control group and in the treated group. CONCLUSION: The Aussie current at the sensory level did not provide significant analgesic and functional effects in students with chronic neck pain.

show abstract

“…A recent randomised controlled study found better pain relief if transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) or interferential current therapy (IFT) were added to a "standard care" of hot pack treatment, active range of motion exercises and myofascial release. In that study TENS was more effective than IFT [9]. Postisometric relaxation therapy (PIR) was first described by Karel Lewit [10] and is believed to be effective for trigger point treatment [1,11].…”

Section: Purpose ▼mentioning

confidence: 99%

Treatment of Myofascial Triggerpoints: A Comparison of “Spray and Stretch” and “Postisometric Relaxation”

Loosberg¹,

Brand²,

Smolenski

2016

Phys Med Rehab Kuror

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: Referred pain from myofascial trigger points (MTrP) frequently can be found as the underlying condition in patients presenting with back pain, joint pain, or headache. The purpose of this trial was to compare the pain reduction of postisometric relaxation therapy (PIR) and spray and stretch therapy (SAS). Materials and Methods: Outpatients (24 female and 3 male) with at least one active MTrP were randomised to either SAS or PIR therapy. In both groups, every participant received 3 treatment sessions. The pressure pain threshold (PPT) was measured. Additionally, the pain level was rated by the patient using a visual analogue scale (VAS). The primary outcome was the difference in PPT at follow up after 3?4 weeks (t4) and time of randomisation (t0). As an exploratory data analysis PPT values and VAS ratings before and after each treatment session and VAS ratings at t0 and t4 have been evaluated. Results: The mean change in PPT was +22.1?kPa (SD 70.3?kPa) in the SAS group and ?25.6?kPa (SD 80.5?kPa) in the PIR group. There was no significant difference between these mean values (p=0.1146). Hence no difference between these treatment options could be found. Also, the exploratory data analysis of PPT and VAS values did not suggest a difference between SAS and PIR treatments. In both groups, some patients worsened and some improved. In some cases PPT measurements and VAS ratings were inconsistent. Discussion: No difference was found between SAS and PIR, but the number of patients evaluated may have been too small to show an existing difference between the 2 treatment options. We included patients with acute myofascial pain as well as patients with chronic myofascial pain. They may react differently to treatment and should probably be evaluated separately. There may be a bias due to the change of the examiner in our trial. We can not explain the majority of women presenting with myofascial pain but this is consistent with former studies. Conclusions: Further research is necessary to reveal if either PIR or SAS therapy is more appropriate in terms of pain reduction. Patients with chronic pain and those with acute pain should be evaluated separately.

show abstract

Comparison of the Effectiveness of Transcutaneous Electrical Nerve Stimulation and Interferential Therapy on the Upper Trapezius in Myofascial Pain Syndrome

Cited by 33 publications

References 38 publications

High-Energy Flux Density Extracorporeal Shock Wave Therapy Versus Traditional Physical Therapy Modalities in Myofascial Pain Syndrome: A Randomized-controlled, Single-Blind Trial

High-Energy Flux Density Extracorporeal Shock Wave Therapy Versus Traditional Physical Therapy Modalities in Myofascial Pain Syndrome: A Randomized-controlled, Single-Blind Trial

Corrente Aussie em estudantes com cervicalgia crônica: um ensaio clínico randomizado

Treatment of Myofascial Triggerpoints: A Comparison of “Spray and Stretch” and “Postisometric Relaxation”

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About