Fatih Bağcıer, Ozan Volkan Yurdakul, Gamze Deniz, Ahmet Akbulut, Yusuf Çelik, Mustafa Hüseyin Temel
{"title":"Is Dry Needling Treatment an Extra Contribution to Conventional Treatment for Hemiplegic Shoulder Pain? A Prospective, Randomized Controlled Study.","authors":"Fatih Bağcıer, Ozan Volkan Yurdakul, Gamze Deniz, Ahmet Akbulut, Yusuf Çelik, Mustafa Hüseyin Temel","doi":"10.1089/acu.2023.0060","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>This research was conducted to evaluate the effect of adding dry needling (DN) treatment to conventional rehabilitation for pain, range of motion (ROM), and functionality in patients with hemiplegic shoulder pain (HSP).</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Patients with HSP (<i>n</i> = 38) were divided into 2 groups. A multimodal rehabilitation protocol, including physical therapy and exercise treatments, was given to both groups (5 sessions per week for 15 sessions). In addition to this rehabilitation, 3 sessions of DN therapy were given to one of the 2 groups. Measurements were a visual analogue scale; ROM; and 2 other scales (Quick Disability of the Arm, Shoulder, Hand; and the Fugl-Meyer Assessment Upper Extremity). Evaluations were made before, after, and at the third month after treatment.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>While a statistically significant improvement was seen in both groups in all parameters after their treatments, a statistical superiority was found in the conventional treatment+DN group (<i>P</i> < 0.05). However, the differences were not greater than the minimal clinically important difference values (MCID). At the 3rd month follow-up, there was no difference in pain and functionality parameters between the groups, while flexion and abduction measurements were higher in the conventional treatment+DN group (<i>P</i> < 0.05).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Adding DN treatment to conventional rehabilitation did not show any difference except in some joint ROM measurements in the subacute time. Although the changes found were statistically significant, they were not clinically significant as they did not reach MCID values.This study was registered prospectively at ClinicalTrials.gov (ref. no: NCT04790071).</p>","PeriodicalId":45511,"journal":{"name":"Medical Acupuncture","volume":"35 5","pages":"236-245"},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10606952/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Medical Acupuncture","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1089/acu.2023.0060","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/10/17 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"INTEGRATIVE & COMPLEMENTARY MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Objective: This research was conducted to evaluate the effect of adding dry needling (DN) treatment to conventional rehabilitation for pain, range of motion (ROM), and functionality in patients with hemiplegic shoulder pain (HSP).
Materials and methods: Patients with HSP (n = 38) were divided into 2 groups. A multimodal rehabilitation protocol, including physical therapy and exercise treatments, was given to both groups (5 sessions per week for 15 sessions). In addition to this rehabilitation, 3 sessions of DN therapy were given to one of the 2 groups. Measurements were a visual analogue scale; ROM; and 2 other scales (Quick Disability of the Arm, Shoulder, Hand; and the Fugl-Meyer Assessment Upper Extremity). Evaluations were made before, after, and at the third month after treatment.
Results: While a statistically significant improvement was seen in both groups in all parameters after their treatments, a statistical superiority was found in the conventional treatment+DN group (P < 0.05). However, the differences were not greater than the minimal clinically important difference values (MCID). At the 3rd month follow-up, there was no difference in pain and functionality parameters between the groups, while flexion and abduction measurements were higher in the conventional treatment+DN group (P < 0.05).
Conclusions: Adding DN treatment to conventional rehabilitation did not show any difference except in some joint ROM measurements in the subacute time. Although the changes found were statistically significant, they were not clinically significant as they did not reach MCID values.This study was registered prospectively at ClinicalTrials.gov (ref. no: NCT04790071).
目的:探讨在常规康复治疗基础上加用干针(DN)治疗偏瘫肩痛(HSP)患者的疼痛、活动范围(ROM)和功能的效果 = 38)分为2组。两组都接受了包括物理治疗和运动治疗在内的多模式康复方案(每周5次,共15次)。除此之外,两组中的一组接受了3次DN治疗。测量是视觉模拟量表;ROM;和2个其他量表(手臂、肩膀、手的快速残疾;以及Fugl-Meyer上肢评估)。在治疗前、治疗后和治疗后第三个月进行评估。结果:两组治疗后各项指标均有统计学意义的改善,但常规治疗+DN组有统计学意义(P P 结论:在常规康复基础上加用DN治疗,除亚急性期某些关节ROM测量值外,没有任何差异。尽管发现的变化具有统计学意义,但由于未达到MCID值,因此没有临床意义。本研究前瞻性地在ClinicalTrials.gov上注册(参考号:NCT04790071)。