Patient-Perceived Benefits and Adverse Events of Dry Needling.

IF 2.1 Q3 SPORT SCIENCES
International Journal of Sports Physical Therapy Pub Date : 2025-09-01 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.26603/001c.143187
Melissa Tolbert, K Suzanne Leach, Matthew P Condo, Anthony Mancini, Rachel Tinius
{"title":"Patient-Perceived Benefits and Adverse Events of Dry Needling.","authors":"Melissa Tolbert, K Suzanne Leach, Matthew P Condo, Anthony Mancini, Rachel Tinius","doi":"10.26603/001c.143187","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Dry needling (DN) has emerged as a safe and effective physical therapy technique to address neuromusculoskeletal pain and dysfunctions; however, a gap in the literature exists regarding the experience from the patient's perspective, with most studies focusing on clinician-reported outcomes.</p><p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The purpose of this study was to investigate patients' perspectives of self-reported adverse events and clinical outcomes from DN within the first 24 hours following the technique.</p><p><strong>Study design: </strong>Cross-sectional retrospective study.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>From April to May 2022, 123 participants were recruited through word of mouth, university-wide emails, and social media to complete an electronic survey. Inclusion criteria included those >18 years of age and who had received DN in the prior three months by a licensed physical therapist. The survey consisted of three sections: knowledge and experience with DN, location and perceived effects of DN, and participant demographics. Perceived effects focused on localized (e.g., pain, soreness, bruising) and generalized adverse events (e.g., shortness of breath, fatigue, fever), as well as outcomes (pain, gait, strength, mobility). Descriptive statistics were used for participant demographics and item responses.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>One hundred twenty-three participants completed the electronic survey (77.2% aged 18-50 years; 53.7% female). Soreness (52.0%) and pain (33.0%) were the most reported localized adverse events. Fatigue (21.7%) and headache (15.4%) were the most reported generalized adverse events. Following DN, patient-reported improvements in pain occurred in 73.8% of the selected body regions, while improved mobility occurred in 70.6%, improved strength in 38.5%, and improved gait in 46.2%.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Practitioners who utilize DN have a responsibility to communicate the possible benefits and adverse events post-DN. At least one localized event was reported in over 80% of the cases and one generalized adverse event in 40%, while positive improvements in pain or physical impairment occurred 38.5-73.8% of the time. Taken together, patients' self-reported benefits and adverse events in response to DN should both be carefully considered and discussed by practitioners when making clinical decisions about its use as a therapeutic intervention.</p><p><strong>Level of evidence: </strong>3.</p>","PeriodicalId":47892,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Sports Physical Therapy","volume":"20 9","pages":"1355-1363"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12404588/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Sports Physical Therapy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.26603/001c.143187","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"SPORT SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Dry needling (DN) has emerged as a safe and effective physical therapy technique to address neuromusculoskeletal pain and dysfunctions; however, a gap in the literature exists regarding the experience from the patient's perspective, with most studies focusing on clinician-reported outcomes.

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to investigate patients' perspectives of self-reported adverse events and clinical outcomes from DN within the first 24 hours following the technique.

Study design: Cross-sectional retrospective study.

Methods: From April to May 2022, 123 participants were recruited through word of mouth, university-wide emails, and social media to complete an electronic survey. Inclusion criteria included those >18 years of age and who had received DN in the prior three months by a licensed physical therapist. The survey consisted of three sections: knowledge and experience with DN, location and perceived effects of DN, and participant demographics. Perceived effects focused on localized (e.g., pain, soreness, bruising) and generalized adverse events (e.g., shortness of breath, fatigue, fever), as well as outcomes (pain, gait, strength, mobility). Descriptive statistics were used for participant demographics and item responses.

Results: One hundred twenty-three participants completed the electronic survey (77.2% aged 18-50 years; 53.7% female). Soreness (52.0%) and pain (33.0%) were the most reported localized adverse events. Fatigue (21.7%) and headache (15.4%) were the most reported generalized adverse events. Following DN, patient-reported improvements in pain occurred in 73.8% of the selected body regions, while improved mobility occurred in 70.6%, improved strength in 38.5%, and improved gait in 46.2%.

Conclusion: Practitioners who utilize DN have a responsibility to communicate the possible benefits and adverse events post-DN. At least one localized event was reported in over 80% of the cases and one generalized adverse event in 40%, while positive improvements in pain or physical impairment occurred 38.5-73.8% of the time. Taken together, patients' self-reported benefits and adverse events in response to DN should both be carefully considered and discussed by practitioners when making clinical decisions about its use as a therapeutic intervention.

Level of evidence: 3.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

患者认为干针的益处和不良事件。
背景:干针(DN)已成为一种安全有效的物理治疗技术,以解决神经肌肉骨骼疼痛和功能障碍;然而,从患者的角度来看,文献中存在空白,大多数研究都集中在临床报告的结果上。目的:本研究的目的是调查采用该技术后24小时内DN患者自我报告的不良事件和临床结果的观点。研究设计:横断面回顾性研究。方法:从2022年4月到5月,通过口口相传、全校范围的电子邮件和社交媒体招募了123名参与者,完成了一项电子调查。纳入标准包括年龄在18岁至18岁之间,并且在前三个月内由有执照的物理治疗师接受过DN的患者。调查包括三个部分:DN的知识和经验,DN的位置和感知效应,以及参与者的人口统计。可感知的影响主要集中在局部(如疼痛、酸痛、瘀伤)和全身性不良事件(如呼吸短促、疲劳、发烧)以及结果(疼痛、步态、力量、活动能力)。描述性统计用于参与者的人口统计和项目回答。结果:共123人完成了电子调查,其中77.2%的人年龄在18-50岁之间,53.7%的人是女性。疼痛(52.0%)和疼痛(33.0%)是报告最多的局部不良事件。疲劳(21.7%)和头痛(15.4%)是报告最多的广义不良事件。DN后,患者报告的疼痛改善发生在73.8%的选定身体区域,而活动能力改善发生在70.6%,力量改善发生在38.5%,步态改善发生在46.2%。结论:使用DN的从业者有责任沟通DN后可能的益处和不良事件。超过80%的病例报告了至少一个局部事件,40%的病例报告了一个全身性不良事件,而38.5-73.8%的病例报告了疼痛或身体损伤的积极改善。综上所述,在临床决定是否将DN作为一种治疗干预措施时,从业人员应仔细考虑和讨论患者对DN的自我报告的获益和不良事件。证据等级:3。
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
5.90%
发文量
124
审稿时长
16 weeks
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信