Dry needling for mechanical neck pain: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Surgical neurology international Pub Date : 2025-02-14 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.25259/SNI_797_2024
Abdulsalam M Aleid, Abdulmajeed Abdulaziz Aljabr, Saud Nayef Aldanyowi, Hasan Ali AlAidarous, Zainab Mohammed Aleid, Abdulaziz S Alharthi, Mutlaq Naheitan Alsubaie, Lama Ibrahim AlOraini, Abdulrahman Rashed Almoslem, Abbas Al Mutair
{"title":"Dry needling for mechanical neck pain: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.","authors":"Abdulsalam M Aleid, Abdulmajeed Abdulaziz Aljabr, Saud Nayef Aldanyowi, Hasan Ali AlAidarous, Zainab Mohammed Aleid, Abdulaziz S Alharthi, Mutlaq Naheitan Alsubaie, Lama Ibrahim AlOraini, Abdulrahman Rashed Almoslem, Abbas Al Mutair","doi":"10.25259/SNI_797_2024","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Dry needling (DN) has emerged as a potential treatment for mechanical neck pain, but the evidence remains inconclusive. This study aimed to assess the efficacy of DN in improving pain and functionality in patients with chronic mechanical neck pain.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were conducted following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Databases, including PubMed, Cochrane Library, Scopus, and Google Scholar, were searched from December 2013 to January 2024. Studies involving adult participants with chronic mechanical neck pain treated with DN were included in the study. The primary outcomes were pain pressure threshold (PPT), Neck Disability Index (NDI), and cervical range of motion. Statistical analysis used a random-effect model.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Nine RCTs with a total of 540 participants were included in the study. DN significantly improved the PPT with an MD of 0.52 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.39-0.65; <i>P</i> < 0.001). NDI also showed a significant improvement, with an MD of -0.68 (95% CI, -1.32--0.05; <i>P</i> = 0.04). In terms of cervical range of motion, DN improved flexion (MD 4.07, 95% CI, 0.39-7.75; <i>P</i> = 0.03) and right rotation (MD 8.20, 95% CI, 3.05-13.35; <i>P</i> = 0.002), but no significant differences were observed in extension, left rotation, or lateral flexions (<i>P</i> > 0.05).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>DN appears effective in short-term pain relief and functional outcomes for patients with mechanical neck pain but shows limited impact on the cervical range of motion.</p>","PeriodicalId":94217,"journal":{"name":"Surgical neurology international","volume":"16 ","pages":"44"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11878734/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Surgical neurology international","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.25259/SNI_797_2024","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Dry needling (DN) has emerged as a potential treatment for mechanical neck pain, but the evidence remains inconclusive. This study aimed to assess the efficacy of DN in improving pain and functionality in patients with chronic mechanical neck pain.

Methods: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were conducted following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Databases, including PubMed, Cochrane Library, Scopus, and Google Scholar, were searched from December 2013 to January 2024. Studies involving adult participants with chronic mechanical neck pain treated with DN were included in the study. The primary outcomes were pain pressure threshold (PPT), Neck Disability Index (NDI), and cervical range of motion. Statistical analysis used a random-effect model.

Results: Nine RCTs with a total of 540 participants were included in the study. DN significantly improved the PPT with an MD of 0.52 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.39-0.65; P < 0.001). NDI also showed a significant improvement, with an MD of -0.68 (95% CI, -1.32--0.05; P = 0.04). In terms of cervical range of motion, DN improved flexion (MD 4.07, 95% CI, 0.39-7.75; P = 0.03) and right rotation (MD 8.20, 95% CI, 3.05-13.35; P = 0.002), but no significant differences were observed in extension, left rotation, or lateral flexions (P > 0.05).

Conclusion: DN appears effective in short-term pain relief and functional outcomes for patients with mechanical neck pain but shows limited impact on the cervical range of motion.

干针治疗机械性颈痛:随机对照试验的系统回顾和荟萃分析。
背景:干针(DN)已成为机械性颈部疼痛的潜在治疗方法,但证据仍不确定。本研究旨在评估DN在改善慢性机械性颈痛患者疼痛和功能方面的疗效。方法:根据系统评价和荟萃分析指南的首选报告项目,对随机对照试验(rct)进行系统评价和荟萃分析。数据库包括PubMed、Cochrane Library、Scopus和谷歌Scholar,检索时间为2013年12月至2024年1月。该研究包括了用DN治疗慢性机械性颈部疼痛的成人受试者。主要结局是痛压阈值(PPT)、颈部残疾指数(NDI)和颈椎活动度。统计分析采用随机效应模型。结果:本研究纳入9项随机对照试验,共540名受试者。DN显著改善PPT, MD为0.52(95%可信区间[CI], 0.39-0.65;P < 0.001)。NDI也有显著改善,MD为-0.68 (95% CI, -1.32—0.05;P = 0.04)。在颈椎活动范围方面,DN改善了屈曲(MD 4.07, 95% CI, 0.39-7.75;P = 0.03)和右旋(MD 8.20, 95% CI, 3.05-13.35;P = 0.002),但在伸展、左旋或侧屈方面没有观察到显著差异(P < 0.05)。结论:DN对机械性颈痛患者的短期疼痛缓解和功能结局有效,但对颈椎活动范围的影响有限。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信