{"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}
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.
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.