A Systematic Review of Dry Needling Parameters for Improvements in Muscle Performance.

IF 2.4 4区医学 Q1 REHABILITATION

American Journal of Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation Pub Date : 2026-04-06 DOI:10.1097/PHM.0000000000002974

Yifan Liu, Yongni Zhang, Susan Falsone, RobRoy L Martin

{"title":"A Systematic Review of Dry Needling Parameters for Improvements in Muscle Performance.","authors":"Yifan Liu, Yongni Zhang, Susan Falsone, RobRoy L Martin","doi":"10.1097/PHM.0000000000002974","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Despite strong physiological evidence supporting dry needling (DN), clinical findings on muscle performance remain inconsistent, likely due to treatment parameter variability.Objective: To evaluate the evidence for the effect of DN on muscle performance and identify parameters associated with improvement.Methods: This systematic review followed PRISMA guidelines. PubMed, CINAHL, Embase, and SPORTDiscus were searched through April 2025. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of DN for musculoskeletal dysfunction were synthesized by subject characteristics, muscle performance measures, follow-up, and DN parameters. Methodological quality was assessed using the PEDro scale, and certainty of evidence via GRADE.Results: Eleven RCTs met the inclusion criteria (PEDro 5-8); nine reported improvements in local muscle performance. Heterogeneity in DN protocols and patient characteristics precluded meta-analysis. LTR elicitation in the targeted muscle was reported in eight of the nine studies demonstrating improvement. GRADE certainty was low for immediate outcomes and moderate for short- and mid-term outcomes.Conclusion: Evidence from the included trials suggests that DN intended to improve muscle performance may be effective when delivered as a localized, muscle‑specific intervention targeting MTrPs with the goal of eliciting an LTR. DN may serve as an effective adjunct to therapeutic exercise to enhance muscle performance in select musculoskeletal conditions.","PeriodicalId":7850,"journal":{"name":"American Journal of Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2026-04-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American Journal of Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/PHM.0000000000002974","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"REHABILITATION","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Despite strong physiological evidence supporting dry needling (DN), clinical findings on muscle performance remain inconsistent, likely due to treatment parameter variability.

Objective: To evaluate the evidence for the effect of DN on muscle performance and identify parameters associated with improvement.

Methods: This systematic review followed PRISMA guidelines. PubMed, CINAHL, Embase, and SPORTDiscus were searched through April 2025. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of DN for musculoskeletal dysfunction were synthesized by subject characteristics, muscle performance measures, follow-up, and DN parameters. Methodological quality was assessed using the PEDro scale, and certainty of evidence via GRADE.

Results: Eleven RCTs met the inclusion criteria (PEDro 5-8); nine reported improvements in local muscle performance. Heterogeneity in DN protocols and patient characteristics precluded meta-analysis. LTR elicitation in the targeted muscle was reported in eight of the nine studies demonstrating improvement. GRADE certainty was low for immediate outcomes and moderate for short- and mid-term outcomes.

Conclusion: Evidence from the included trials suggests that DN intended to improve muscle performance may be effective when delivered as a localized, muscle‑specific intervention targeting MTrPs with the goal of eliciting an LTR. DN may serve as an effective adjunct to therapeutic exercise to enhance muscle performance in select musculoskeletal conditions.

查看原文本刊更多论文

干针参数对肌肉性能改善的系统综述。

背景：尽管有强有力的生理证据支持干针（DN），但可能由于治疗参数的变化，肌肉表现的临床结果仍然不一致。目的：评价DN对肌肉性能影响的证据，并确定与改善相关的参数。方法：本系统综述遵循PRISMA指南。PubMed， CINAHL， Embase和SPORTDiscus的检索截止到2025年4月。DN治疗肌肉骨骼功能障碍的随机对照试验（RCTs）由受试者特征、肌肉表现测量、随访和DN参数综合而成。采用PEDro量表评估方法学质量，并通过GRADE评估证据的确定性。结果：11项rct符合纳入标准（PEDro 5-8）；9例报告局部肌肉表现有所改善。DN方案和患者特征的异质性妨碍了meta分析。9项研究中有8项报告了目标肌肉的LTR激发，显示出改善。GRADE的确定性在即时结果中较低，在短期和中期结果中中等。结论：纳入的试验证据表明，DN旨在改善肌肉表现，当作为针对MTrPs的局部肌肉特异性干预，以引发LTR时，DN可能是有效的。DN可能作为治疗性运动的有效辅助，以提高某些肌肉骨骼疾病的肌肉表现。

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

American Journal of Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation 医学-康复医学

CiteScore

4.60

自引率

6.70%

发文量

423

审稿时长

1 months

期刊介绍： American Journal of Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation focuses on the practice, research and educational aspects of physical medicine and rehabilitation. Monthly issues keep physiatrists up-to-date on the optimal functional restoration of patients with disabilities, physical treatment of neuromuscular impairments, the development of new rehabilitative technologies, and the use of electrodiagnostic studies. The Journal publishes cutting-edge basic and clinical research, clinical case reports and in-depth topical reviews of interest to rehabilitation professionals. Topics include prevention, diagnosis, treatment, and rehabilitation of musculoskeletal conditions, brain injury, spinal cord injury, cardiopulmonary disease, trauma, acute and chronic pain, amputation, prosthetics and orthotics, mobility, gait, and pediatrics as well as areas related to education and administration. Other important areas of interest include cancer rehabilitation, aging, and exercise. The Journal has recently published a series of articles on the topic of outcomes research. This well-established journal is the official scholarly publication of the Association of Academic Physiatrists (AAP).