重复性外周磁刺激(rPMS)缓解上斜方肌筋膜疼痛综合征患者针刺后疼痛的有效性:一项双盲随机临床试验。

IF 2.5 3区 医学 Q2 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
Journal of Pain Research Pub Date : 2025-05-20 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.2147/JPR.S519318
Anja Vearasilp, Chomkajee Sukareechai
{"title":"重复性外周磁刺激(rPMS)缓解上斜方肌筋膜疼痛综合征患者针刺后疼痛的有效性:一项双盲随机临床试验。","authors":"Anja Vearasilp, Chomkajee Sukareechai","doi":"10.2147/JPR.S519318","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To study the effectiveness of relieving post-needling soreness with repetitive peripheral magnetic stimulation (rPMS) compared with sham.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This double-blind, randomized clinical trial evaluated the effects of repetitive peripheral magnetic stimulation (rPMS) on post-needling soreness following dry-needling treatment. Participants who had active myofascial pain trigger points (MTrPs), in the upper trapezius muscle and received dry needling at the upper trapezius muscle were randomly assigned to either an rPMS group, which received targeted magnetic stimulation at the site of post-needling soreness, or a sham group, which receiving a placebo intervention simulating the rPMS procedure. The rPMS parameters were set to standard mode with normal current direction and a biphasic waveform. Specific settings included an inter-pulse interval of 10, burst pulse of 2, pulse B/A ratio of 1.0, a repetitive rate of 20 pulses per second, and a total of 20 pulse trains over a 10-minute session. Results were assessed using a standardized pain scale to quantify soreness levels at various intervals post-treatment, ultimately aiming to determine if rPMS significantly enhances recovery compared to sham stimulation of magnetic stimulation sessions at the sore area or a sham group undergoing a placebo intervention mimicking the rPMS procedure. The primary outcome was the pressure pain threshold (PPT) change, measured immediately after dry needling and post-intervention. Secondary outcomes included changes in pain intensity, assessed using the Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) immediately post-dry needling, post-intervention, and at 24- and 48-hours post-intervention, as well as neck range of motion, measured at the same intervals. This methodology provided a robust framework to compare the therapeutic effects of rPMS with a placebo intervention in managing post-needling soreness.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The rPMS group demonstrated a significant increase in PPT compared to the sham group (P=0.002). The Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) also significantly improved in the rPMS group compared to the sham group (P < 0.05). No serious adverse events were reported.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Repetitive peripheral magnetic stimulation (rPMS) is an effective method for relieving post-needling soreness compared to sham treatment. This non-invasive modality may benefit clinical practice by enhancing patient comfort and recovery after needling interventions.</p>","PeriodicalId":16661,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Pain Research","volume":"18 ","pages":"2541-2548"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12103201/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Effectiveness of Repetitive Peripheral Magnetic Stimulation (rPMS) in Relieving Post-Needling Soreness in Patient with Upper Trapezius Myofascial Pain Syndrome: A Double-Blind, Randomized Clinical Trial.\",\"authors\":\"Anja Vearasilp, Chomkajee Sukareechai\",\"doi\":\"10.2147/JPR.S519318\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To study the effectiveness of relieving post-needling soreness with repetitive peripheral magnetic stimulation (rPMS) compared with sham.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This double-blind, randomized clinical trial evaluated the effects of repetitive peripheral magnetic stimulation (rPMS) on post-needling soreness following dry-needling treatment. Participants who had active myofascial pain trigger points (MTrPs), in the upper trapezius muscle and received dry needling at the upper trapezius muscle were randomly assigned to either an rPMS group, which received targeted magnetic stimulation at the site of post-needling soreness, or a sham group, which receiving a placebo intervention simulating the rPMS procedure. The rPMS parameters were set to standard mode with normal current direction and a biphasic waveform. Specific settings included an inter-pulse interval of 10, burst pulse of 2, pulse B/A ratio of 1.0, a repetitive rate of 20 pulses per second, and a total of 20 pulse trains over a 10-minute session. Results were assessed using a standardized pain scale to quantify soreness levels at various intervals post-treatment, ultimately aiming to determine if rPMS significantly enhances recovery compared to sham stimulation of magnetic stimulation sessions at the sore area or a sham group undergoing a placebo intervention mimicking the rPMS procedure. The primary outcome was the pressure pain threshold (PPT) change, measured immediately after dry needling and post-intervention. Secondary outcomes included changes in pain intensity, assessed using the Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) immediately post-dry needling, post-intervention, and at 24- and 48-hours post-intervention, as well as neck range of motion, measured at the same intervals. This methodology provided a robust framework to compare the therapeutic effects of rPMS with a placebo intervention in managing post-needling soreness.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The rPMS group demonstrated a significant increase in PPT compared to the sham group (P=0.002). The Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) also significantly improved in the rPMS group compared to the sham group (P < 0.05). No serious adverse events were reported.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Repetitive peripheral magnetic stimulation (rPMS) is an effective method for relieving post-needling soreness compared to sham treatment. This non-invasive modality may benefit clinical practice by enhancing patient comfort and recovery after needling interventions.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":16661,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Pain Research\",\"volume\":\"18 \",\"pages\":\"2541-2548\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-05-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12103201/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Pain Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2147/JPR.S519318\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Pain Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2147/JPR.S519318","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:研究重复性外周磁刺激(rPMS)与假手术治疗针刺后疼痛的疗效。方法:本双盲随机临床试验评估重复性外周磁刺激(rPMS)对干针治疗后针刺后疼痛的影响。在斜方肌上部有活跃的肌筋膜疼痛触发点(MTrPs)并在斜方肌上部接受干针刺的参与者被随机分配到rPMS组,在针刺后疼痛部位接受有针对性的磁刺激,或假组,接受模拟rPMS过程的安慰剂干预。将rPMS参数设置为标准模式,电流方向为正常,波形为双相。具体设置包括脉冲间隔为10次,脉冲爆发为2次,脉冲B/A比为1.0,每秒20次脉冲的重复速率,在10分钟的时间内总共有20次脉冲。使用标准化疼痛量表对结果进行评估,以量化治疗后不同时间间隔的疼痛水平,最终目的是确定与在疼痛区域进行磁刺激的假刺激或接受模仿rPMS程序的安慰剂干预的假组相比,rPMS是否显着提高了恢复。主要观察指标是干针刺后和干预后立即测量的压痛阈值(PPT)变化。次要结果包括疼痛强度的变化,使用数字评定量表(NRS)在干针后立即评估,干预后,以及干预后24和48小时,以及颈部活动范围,以相同的间隔测量。该方法提供了一个强有力的框架来比较rPMS和安慰剂干预治疗针刺后疼痛的效果。结果:与假手术组相比,rPMS组PPT明显升高(P=0.002)。与假手术组相比,rPMS组的数值评定量表(NRS)也有显著改善(P < 0.05)。无严重不良事件报告。结论:重复性外周磁刺激(rPMS)是缓解针刺后疼痛的有效方法。这种非侵入性的方式可能有利于临床实践,通过提高患者的舒适度和恢复后的针刺干预。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Effectiveness of Repetitive Peripheral Magnetic Stimulation (rPMS) in Relieving Post-Needling Soreness in Patient with Upper Trapezius Myofascial Pain Syndrome: A Double-Blind, Randomized Clinical Trial.

Objective: To study the effectiveness of relieving post-needling soreness with repetitive peripheral magnetic stimulation (rPMS) compared with sham.

Methods: This double-blind, randomized clinical trial evaluated the effects of repetitive peripheral magnetic stimulation (rPMS) on post-needling soreness following dry-needling treatment. Participants who had active myofascial pain trigger points (MTrPs), in the upper trapezius muscle and received dry needling at the upper trapezius muscle were randomly assigned to either an rPMS group, which received targeted magnetic stimulation at the site of post-needling soreness, or a sham group, which receiving a placebo intervention simulating the rPMS procedure. The rPMS parameters were set to standard mode with normal current direction and a biphasic waveform. Specific settings included an inter-pulse interval of 10, burst pulse of 2, pulse B/A ratio of 1.0, a repetitive rate of 20 pulses per second, and a total of 20 pulse trains over a 10-minute session. Results were assessed using a standardized pain scale to quantify soreness levels at various intervals post-treatment, ultimately aiming to determine if rPMS significantly enhances recovery compared to sham stimulation of magnetic stimulation sessions at the sore area or a sham group undergoing a placebo intervention mimicking the rPMS procedure. The primary outcome was the pressure pain threshold (PPT) change, measured immediately after dry needling and post-intervention. Secondary outcomes included changes in pain intensity, assessed using the Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) immediately post-dry needling, post-intervention, and at 24- and 48-hours post-intervention, as well as neck range of motion, measured at the same intervals. This methodology provided a robust framework to compare the therapeutic effects of rPMS with a placebo intervention in managing post-needling soreness.

Results: The rPMS group demonstrated a significant increase in PPT compared to the sham group (P=0.002). The Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) also significantly improved in the rPMS group compared to the sham group (P < 0.05). No serious adverse events were reported.

Conclusion: Repetitive peripheral magnetic stimulation (rPMS) is an effective method for relieving post-needling soreness compared to sham treatment. This non-invasive modality may benefit clinical practice by enhancing patient comfort and recovery after needling interventions.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Pain Research
Journal of Pain Research CLINICAL NEUROLOGY-
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
3.70%
发文量
411
审稿时长
16 weeks
期刊介绍: Journal of Pain Research is an international, peer-reviewed, open access journal that welcomes laboratory and clinical findings in the fields of pain research and the prevention and management of pain. Original research, reviews, symposium reports, hypothesis formation and commentaries are all considered for publication. Additionally, the journal now welcomes the submission of pain-policy-related editorials and commentaries, particularly in regard to ethical, regulatory, forensic, and other legal issues in pain medicine, and to the education of pain practitioners and researchers.
×
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