The effects of fascial manipulation on pain: a systematic review with meta-analysis.

IF 1.6 Q2 REHABILITATION
Robert Trybulski, Gracjan Olaniszyn, Małgorzata Smoter, Filipe Manuel Clemente, Andriy Vovkanych, Adrian Kużdzał
{"title":"The effects of fascial manipulation on pain: a systematic review with meta-analysis.","authors":"Robert Trybulski, Gracjan Olaniszyn, Małgorzata Smoter, Filipe Manuel Clemente, Andriy Vovkanych, Adrian Kużdzał","doi":"10.1080/10669817.2025.2486110","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to summarize the effects of fascial manipulation (FM) on pain alleviation in adults, providing valuable insights for future research and practitioners by addressing a significant gap in the existing literature.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Systematic review with meta-analysis. Key databases, including PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science, were searched for relevant studies. The eligibility criteria required randomized clinical trials involving adults (>18 years) with musculoskeletal pain, who participated in FM, and included either true control or active control groups as comparators. To assess the risk of bias, the PEDro scale was used, while the certainty of the evidence was evaluated using the GRADE scale. Out of the initial pool of 138 studies, 15 were determined to be eligible for inclusion in this systematic review.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Results showed significant favoring effect for the FM compared to the active-control group in pain-related outcomes (ES = -0.80, 95% CI -1.30 to -0.29, <i>p</i> = 0.002, I<sup>2</sup>  = 85%). The certainty of evidence, as determined by the GRADE assessment, was rated as very low.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Although the included studies provide evidence of very low certainty - given the small sample sizes, lack of blinding, and significant limitations in the intervention - the meta-analysis suggests that FM may potentially be beneficial in reducing pain associated with various musculoskeletal conditions. However, more robust research is needed to strengthen these findings, with a focus on increasing the number of blinded studies, reducing methodological heterogeneity, and further exploring the underlying mechanisms that may explain the observed trends in the evidence.</p>","PeriodicalId":47319,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Manual & Manipulative Therapy","volume":" ","pages":"1-12"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Manual & Manipulative Therapy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10669817.2025.2486110","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"REHABILITATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to summarize the effects of fascial manipulation (FM) on pain alleviation in adults, providing valuable insights for future research and practitioners by addressing a significant gap in the existing literature.

Methods: Systematic review with meta-analysis. Key databases, including PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science, were searched for relevant studies. The eligibility criteria required randomized clinical trials involving adults (>18 years) with musculoskeletal pain, who participated in FM, and included either true control or active control groups as comparators. To assess the risk of bias, the PEDro scale was used, while the certainty of the evidence was evaluated using the GRADE scale. Out of the initial pool of 138 studies, 15 were determined to be eligible for inclusion in this systematic review.

Results: Results showed significant favoring effect for the FM compared to the active-control group in pain-related outcomes (ES = -0.80, 95% CI -1.30 to -0.29, p = 0.002, I2  = 85%). The certainty of evidence, as determined by the GRADE assessment, was rated as very low.

Conclusions: Although the included studies provide evidence of very low certainty - given the small sample sizes, lack of blinding, and significant limitations in the intervention - the meta-analysis suggests that FM may potentially be beneficial in reducing pain associated with various musculoskeletal conditions. However, more robust research is needed to strengthen these findings, with a focus on increasing the number of blinded studies, reducing methodological heterogeneity, and further exploring the underlying mechanisms that may explain the observed trends in the evidence.

筋膜操作对疼痛的影响:系统回顾与荟萃分析。
目的:本系统回顾和荟萃分析旨在总结筋膜操作(FM)对成人疼痛缓解的影响,通过解决现有文献中的重大空白,为未来的研究和从业者提供有价值的见解。方法:采用meta分析进行系统评价。检索了PubMed、Scopus和Web of Science等关键数据库的相关研究。资格标准要求随机临床试验,涉及参加FM的患有肌肉骨骼疼痛的成年人(bb0 - 18岁),并包括真正的对照组或积极的对照组作为比较。为了评估偏倚风险,使用PEDro量表,而证据的确定性使用GRADE量表进行评估。在最初的138项研究中,有15项被确定为有资格纳入本系统评价。结果:结果显示FM组在疼痛相关结果上明显优于主动对照组(ES = -0.80, 95% CI -1.30 ~ -0.29, p = 0.002, I2 = 85%)。根据GRADE评估,证据的确定性被评为非常低。结论:尽管纳入的研究提供了非常低的确定性证据-考虑到样本量小,缺乏盲法和干预的显着局限性-荟萃分析表明FM可能有助于减轻与各种肌肉骨骼疾病相关的疼痛。然而,需要更有力的研究来加强这些发现,重点是增加盲法研究的数量,减少方法学的异质性,并进一步探索可能解释证据中观察到的趋势的潜在机制。
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
CiteScore
2.50
自引率
20.00%
发文量
55
期刊介绍: The Journal of Manual & Manipulative Therapy is an international peer-reviewed journal dedicated to the publication of original research, case reports, and reviews of the literature that contribute to the advancement of knowledge in the field of manual therapy, clinical research, therapeutic practice, and academic training. In addition, each issue features an editorial written by the editor or a guest editor, media reviews, thesis reviews, and abstracts of current literature. Areas of interest include: •Thrust and non-thrust manipulation •Neurodynamic assessment and treatment •Diagnostic accuracy and classification •Manual therapy-related interventions •Clinical decision-making processes •Understanding clinimetrics for the clinician
×
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