toggle visibility Search & Display Options

Select All    Deselect All
 |   | 
Details
   print

Deprecated: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is deprecated, use preg_replace_callback instead in /home/acutrialsocom/public_html/refbase-ocom/includes/include.inc.php on line 5275
  Records Links
Author Liu, L.; Huang, Q.-M.; Liu, Q.-G.; Thitham, N.; Li, L.-H.; Ma, Y.-T.; Zhao, J.-M. url  doi
openurl 
  Title Evidence for Dry Needling in the Management of Myofascial Trigger Points Associated With Low Back Pain: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Type of Study Journal Article
  Year 2018 Publication Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation Abbreviated Journal Arch Phys Med Rehabil  
  Volume 99 Issue 1 Pages 144-152.e2  
  Keywords Combined Modality Therapy; *Complementary Therapies; Humans; Low Back Pain/complications/*therapy; Myofascial Pain Syndromes/complications/*therapy; Needles; Pain Measurement; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; *Trigger Points; *Low back pain; *Meta-analysis [publication type]; *Needles; *Randomized controlled trial as topic; *Rehabilitation; *Trigger points  
  Abstract OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the current evidence of the effectiveness of dry needling of myofascial trigger points (MTrPs) associated with low back pain (LBP). DATA SOURCES: PubMed, Ovid, EBSCO, ScienceDirect, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, CINAHL, and China National Knowledge Infrastructure databases were searched until January 2017. STUDY SELECTION: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that used dry needling as the main treatment and included participants diagnosed with LBP with the presence of MTrPs were included. DATA EXTRACTION: Two reviewers independently screened articles, scored methodologic quality, and extracted data. The primary outcomes were pain intensity and functional disability at postintervention and follow-up. DATA SYNTHESIS: A total of 11 RCTs involving 802 patients were included in the meta-analysis. Results suggested that compared with other treatments, dry needling of MTrPs was more effective in alleviating the intensity of LBP (standardized mean difference [SMD], -1.06; 95% confidence interval [CI], -1.77 to -0.36; P=.003) and functional disability (SMD, -0.76; 95% CI, -1.46 to -0.06; P=.03); however, the significant effects of dry needling plus other treatments on pain intensity could be superior to dry needling alone for LBP at postintervention (SMD, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.55-1.11; P<.00001). CONCLUSIONS: Moderate evidence showed that dry needling of MTrPs, especially if associated with other therapies, could be recommended to relieve the intensity of LBP at postintervention; however, the clinical superiority of dry needling in improving functional disability and its follow-up effects still remains unclear.  
  Address Department of Sport Medicine and the Center of Rehabilitation, School of Sport Science, Shanghai University of Sport, Shanghai, China  
  Publisher
  Language English Number of Treatments  
  Treatment Follow-up Frequency Number of Participants  
  Time in Treatment Condition
  Disease Category OCSI Score  
  Notes PMID:28690077 Approved no  
  Call Number OCOM @ refbase @ Serial 2950  
Permanent link to this record
 

 
Author Liu, L.; Huang, Q.-M.; Liu, Q.-G.; Thitham, N.; Li, L.-H.; Ma, Y.-T.; Zhao, J.-M. url  doi
openurl 
  Title Evidence for Dry Needling in the Management of Myofascial Trigger Points Associated With Low Back Pain: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Type of Study Journal Article
  Year 2018 Publication Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation Abbreviated Journal Arch Phys Med Rehabil  
  Volume 99 Issue 1 Pages 144-152.e2  
  Keywords Combined Modality Therapy; *Complementary Therapies; Humans; Low Back Pain/complications/*therapy; Myofascial Pain Syndromes/complications/*therapy; Needles; Pain Measurement; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; *Trigger Points; *Low back pain; *Meta-analysis [publication type]; *Needles; *Randomized controlled trial as topic; *Rehabilitation; *Trigger points  
  Abstract OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the current evidence of the effectiveness of dry needling of myofascial trigger points (MTrPs) associated with low back pain (LBP). DATA SOURCES: PubMed, Ovid, EBSCO, ScienceDirect, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, CINAHL, and China National Knowledge Infrastructure databases were searched until January 2017. STUDY SELECTION: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that used dry needling as the main treatment and included participants diagnosed with LBP with the presence of MTrPs were included. DATA EXTRACTION: Two reviewers independently screened articles, scored methodologic quality, and extracted data. The primary outcomes were pain intensity and functional disability at postintervention and follow-up. DATA SYNTHESIS: A total of 11 RCTs involving 802 patients were included in the meta-analysis. Results suggested that compared with other treatments, dry needling of MTrPs was more effective in alleviating the intensity of LBP (standardized mean difference [SMD], -1.06; 95% confidence interval [CI], -1.77 to -0.36; P=.003) and functional disability (SMD, -0.76; 95% CI, -1.46 to -0.06; P=.03); however, the significant effects of dry needling plus other treatments on pain intensity could be superior to dry needling alone for LBP at postintervention (SMD, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.55-1.11; P<.00001). CONCLUSIONS: Moderate evidence showed that dry needling of MTrPs, especially if associated with other therapies, could be recommended to relieve the intensity of LBP at postintervention; however, the clinical superiority of dry needling in improving functional disability and its follow-up effects still remains unclear.  
  Address Department of Sport Medicine and the Center of Rehabilitation, School of Sport Science, Shanghai University of Sport, Shanghai, China  
  Publisher
  Language English Number of Treatments  
  Treatment Follow-up Frequency Number of Participants  
  Time in Treatment Condition
  Disease Category OCSI Score  
  Notes PMID:28690077 Approved no  
  Call Number OCOM @ refbase @ Serial 2909  
Permanent link to this record
 

 
Author Liu, L.; Huang, Q.-M.; Liu, Q.-G.; Thitham, N.; Li, L.-H.; Ma, Y.-T.; Zhao, J.-M. url  doi
openurl 
  Title Evidence for Dry Needling in the Management of Myofascial Trigger Points Associated With Low Back Pain: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Type of Study Journal Article
  Year 2018 Publication Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation Abbreviated Journal Arch Phys Med Rehabil  
  Volume 99 Issue 1 Pages 144-152.e2  
  Keywords Combined Modality Therapy; *Complementary Therapies; Humans; Low Back Pain/complications/*therapy; Myofascial Pain Syndromes/complications/*therapy; Needles; Pain Measurement; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; *Trigger Points; *Low back pain; *Meta-analysis [publication type]; *Needles; *Randomized controlled trial as topic; *Rehabilitation; *Trigger points  
  Abstract OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the current evidence of the effectiveness of dry needling of myofascial trigger points (MTrPs) associated with low back pain (LBP). DATA SOURCES: PubMed, Ovid, EBSCO, ScienceDirect, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, CINAHL, and China National Knowledge Infrastructure databases were searched until January 2017. STUDY SELECTION: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that used dry needling as the main treatment and included participants diagnosed with LBP with the presence of MTrPs were included. DATA EXTRACTION: Two reviewers independently screened articles, scored methodologic quality, and extracted data. The primary outcomes were pain intensity and functional disability at postintervention and follow-up. DATA SYNTHESIS: A total of 11 RCTs involving 802 patients were included in the meta-analysis. Results suggested that compared with other treatments, dry needling of MTrPs was more effective in alleviating the intensity of LBP (standardized mean difference [SMD], -1.06; 95% confidence interval [CI], -1.77 to -0.36; P=.003) and functional disability (SMD, -0.76; 95% CI, -1.46 to -0.06; P=.03); however, the significant effects of dry needling plus other treatments on pain intensity could be superior to dry needling alone for LBP at postintervention (SMD, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.55-1.11; P<.00001). CONCLUSIONS: Moderate evidence showed that dry needling of MTrPs, especially if associated with other therapies, could be recommended to relieve the intensity of LBP at postintervention; however, the clinical superiority of dry needling in improving functional disability and its follow-up effects still remains unclear.  
  Address Department of Sport Medicine and the Center of Rehabilitation, School of Sport Science, Shanghai University of Sport, Shanghai, China  
  Publisher
  Language English Number of Treatments  
  Treatment Follow-up Frequency Number of Participants  
  Time in Treatment Condition
  Disease Category OCSI Score  
  Notes PMID:28690077 Approved no  
  Call Number OCOM @ refbase @ Serial 2868  
Permanent link to this record
 

 
Author Liu, L.; Huang, Q.-M.; Liu, Q.-G.; Thitham, N.; Li, L.-H.; Ma, Y.-T.; Zhao, J.-M. url  doi
openurl 
  Title Evidence for Dry Needling in the Management of Myofascial Trigger Points Associated With Low Back Pain: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Type of Study Journal Article
  Year 2018 Publication Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation Abbreviated Journal Arch Phys Med Rehabil  
  Volume 99 Issue 1 Pages 144-152.e2  
  Keywords Combined Modality Therapy; *Complementary Therapies; Humans; Low Back Pain/complications/*therapy; Myofascial Pain Syndromes/complications/*therapy; Needles; Pain Measurement; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; *Trigger Points; *Low back pain; *Meta-analysis [publication type]; *Needles; *Randomized controlled trial as topic; *Rehabilitation; *Trigger points  
  Abstract OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the current evidence of the effectiveness of dry needling of myofascial trigger points (MTrPs) associated with low back pain (LBP). DATA SOURCES: PubMed, Ovid, EBSCO, ScienceDirect, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, CINAHL, and China National Knowledge Infrastructure databases were searched until January 2017. STUDY SELECTION: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that used dry needling as the main treatment and included participants diagnosed with LBP with the presence of MTrPs were included. DATA EXTRACTION: Two reviewers independently screened articles, scored methodologic quality, and extracted data. The primary outcomes were pain intensity and functional disability at postintervention and follow-up. DATA SYNTHESIS: A total of 11 RCTs involving 802 patients were included in the meta-analysis. Results suggested that compared with other treatments, dry needling of MTrPs was more effective in alleviating the intensity of LBP (standardized mean difference [SMD], -1.06; 95% confidence interval [CI], -1.77 to -0.36; P=.003) and functional disability (SMD, -0.76; 95% CI, -1.46 to -0.06; P=.03); however, the significant effects of dry needling plus other treatments on pain intensity could be superior to dry needling alone for LBP at postintervention (SMD, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.55-1.11; P<.00001). CONCLUSIONS: Moderate evidence showed that dry needling of MTrPs, especially if associated with other therapies, could be recommended to relieve the intensity of LBP at postintervention; however, the clinical superiority of dry needling in improving functional disability and its follow-up effects still remains unclear.  
  Address Department of Sport Medicine and the Center of Rehabilitation, School of Sport Science, Shanghai University of Sport, Shanghai, China  
  Publisher
  Language English Number of Treatments  
  Treatment Follow-up Frequency Number of Participants  
  Time in Treatment Condition
  Disease Category OCSI Score  
  Notes PMID:28690077 Approved no  
  Call Number OCOM @ refbase @ Serial 2827  
Permanent link to this record
 

 
Author Liu, L.; Huang, Q.-M.; Liu, Q.-G.; Thitham, N.; Li, L.-H.; Ma, Y.-T.; Zhao, J.-M. url  doi
openurl 
  Title Evidence for Dry Needling in the Management of Myofascial Trigger Points Associated With Low Back Pain: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Type of Study Journal Article
  Year 2018 Publication Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation Abbreviated Journal Arch Phys Med Rehabil  
  Volume 99 Issue 1 Pages 144-152.e2  
  Keywords Combined Modality Therapy; *Complementary Therapies; Humans; Low Back Pain/complications/*therapy; Myofascial Pain Syndromes/complications/*therapy; Needles; Pain Measurement; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; *Trigger Points; *Low back pain; *Meta-analysis [publication type]; *Needles; *Randomized controlled trial as topic; *Rehabilitation; *Trigger points  
  Abstract OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the current evidence of the effectiveness of dry needling of myofascial trigger points (MTrPs) associated with low back pain (LBP). DATA SOURCES: PubMed, Ovid, EBSCO, ScienceDirect, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, CINAHL, and China National Knowledge Infrastructure databases were searched until January 2017. STUDY SELECTION: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that used dry needling as the main treatment and included participants diagnosed with LBP with the presence of MTrPs were included. DATA EXTRACTION: Two reviewers independently screened articles, scored methodologic quality, and extracted data. The primary outcomes were pain intensity and functional disability at postintervention and follow-up. DATA SYNTHESIS: A total of 11 RCTs involving 802 patients were included in the meta-analysis. Results suggested that compared with other treatments, dry needling of MTrPs was more effective in alleviating the intensity of LBP (standardized mean difference [SMD], -1.06; 95% confidence interval [CI], -1.77 to -0.36; P=.003) and functional disability (SMD, -0.76; 95% CI, -1.46 to -0.06; P=.03); however, the significant effects of dry needling plus other treatments on pain intensity could be superior to dry needling alone for LBP at postintervention (SMD, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.55-1.11; P<.00001). CONCLUSIONS: Moderate evidence showed that dry needling of MTrPs, especially if associated with other therapies, could be recommended to relieve the intensity of LBP at postintervention; however, the clinical superiority of dry needling in improving functional disability and its follow-up effects still remains unclear.  
  Address Department of Sport Medicine and the Center of Rehabilitation, School of Sport Science, Shanghai University of Sport, Shanghai, China  
  Publisher
  Language English Number of Treatments  
  Treatment Follow-up Frequency Number of Participants  
  Time in Treatment Condition
  Disease Category OCSI Score  
  Notes PMID:28690077 Approved no  
  Call Number OCOM @ refbase @ Serial 2786  
Permanent link to this record
 

 
Author Liu, L.; Huang, Q.-M.; Liu, Q.-G.; Thitham, N.; Li, L.-H.; Ma, Y.-T.; Zhao, J.-M. url  doi
openurl 
  Title Evidence for Dry Needling in the Management of Myofascial Trigger Points Associated With Low Back Pain: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Type of Study Journal Article
  Year 2018 Publication Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation Abbreviated Journal Arch Phys Med Rehabil  
  Volume 99 Issue 1 Pages 144-152.e2  
  Keywords Combined Modality Therapy; *Complementary Therapies; Humans; Low Back Pain/complications/*therapy; Myofascial Pain Syndromes/complications/*therapy; Needles; Pain Measurement; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; *Trigger Points; *Low back pain; *Meta-analysis [publication type]; *Needles; *Randomized controlled trial as topic; *Rehabilitation; *Trigger points  
  Abstract OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the current evidence of the effectiveness of dry needling of myofascial trigger points (MTrPs) associated with low back pain (LBP). DATA SOURCES: PubMed, Ovid, EBSCO, ScienceDirect, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, CINAHL, and China National Knowledge Infrastructure databases were searched until January 2017. STUDY SELECTION: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that used dry needling as the main treatment and included participants diagnosed with LBP with the presence of MTrPs were included. DATA EXTRACTION: Two reviewers independently screened articles, scored methodologic quality, and extracted data. The primary outcomes were pain intensity and functional disability at postintervention and follow-up. DATA SYNTHESIS: A total of 11 RCTs involving 802 patients were included in the meta-analysis. Results suggested that compared with other treatments, dry needling of MTrPs was more effective in alleviating the intensity of LBP (standardized mean difference [SMD], -1.06; 95% confidence interval [CI], -1.77 to -0.36; P=.003) and functional disability (SMD, -0.76; 95% CI, -1.46 to -0.06; P=.03); however, the significant effects of dry needling plus other treatments on pain intensity could be superior to dry needling alone for LBP at postintervention (SMD, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.55-1.11; P<.00001). CONCLUSIONS: Moderate evidence showed that dry needling of MTrPs, especially if associated with other therapies, could be recommended to relieve the intensity of LBP at postintervention; however, the clinical superiority of dry needling in improving functional disability and its follow-up effects still remains unclear.  
  Address Department of Sport Medicine and the Center of Rehabilitation, School of Sport Science, Shanghai University of Sport, Shanghai, China  
  Publisher
  Language English Number of Treatments  
  Treatment Follow-up Frequency Number of Participants  
  Time in Treatment Condition
  Disease Category OCSI Score  
  Notes PMID:28690077 Approved no  
  Call Number OCOM @ refbase @ Serial 2745  
Permanent link to this record
 

 
Author Liu, L.; Huang, Q.-M.; Liu, Q.-G.; Thitham, N.; Li, L.-H.; Ma, Y.-T.; Zhao, J.-M. url  doi
openurl 
  Title Evidence for Dry Needling in the Management of Myofascial Trigger Points Associated With Low Back Pain: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Type of Study Journal Article
  Year 2018 Publication Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation Abbreviated Journal Arch Phys Med Rehabil  
  Volume 99 Issue 1 Pages 144-152.e2  
  Keywords Combined Modality Therapy; *Complementary Therapies; Humans; Low Back Pain/complications/*therapy; Myofascial Pain Syndromes/complications/*therapy; Needles; Pain Measurement; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; *Trigger Points; *Low back pain; *Meta-analysis [publication type]; *Needles; *Randomized controlled trial as topic; *Rehabilitation; *Trigger points  
  Abstract OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the current evidence of the effectiveness of dry needling of myofascial trigger points (MTrPs) associated with low back pain (LBP). DATA SOURCES: PubMed, Ovid, EBSCO, ScienceDirect, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, CINAHL, and China National Knowledge Infrastructure databases were searched until January 2017. STUDY SELECTION: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that used dry needling as the main treatment and included participants diagnosed with LBP with the presence of MTrPs were included. DATA EXTRACTION: Two reviewers independently screened articles, scored methodologic quality, and extracted data. The primary outcomes were pain intensity and functional disability at postintervention and follow-up. DATA SYNTHESIS: A total of 11 RCTs involving 802 patients were included in the meta-analysis. Results suggested that compared with other treatments, dry needling of MTrPs was more effective in alleviating the intensity of LBP (standardized mean difference [SMD], -1.06; 95% confidence interval [CI], -1.77 to -0.36; P=.003) and functional disability (SMD, -0.76; 95% CI, -1.46 to -0.06; P=.03); however, the significant effects of dry needling plus other treatments on pain intensity could be superior to dry needling alone for LBP at postintervention (SMD, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.55-1.11; P<.00001). CONCLUSIONS: Moderate evidence showed that dry needling of MTrPs, especially if associated with other therapies, could be recommended to relieve the intensity of LBP at postintervention; however, the clinical superiority of dry needling in improving functional disability and its follow-up effects still remains unclear.  
  Address Department of Sport Medicine and the Center of Rehabilitation, School of Sport Science, Shanghai University of Sport, Shanghai, China  
  Publisher
  Language English Number of Treatments  
  Treatment Follow-up Frequency Number of Participants  
  Time in Treatment Condition
  Disease Category OCSI Score  
  Notes PMID:28690077 Approved no  
  Call Number OCOM @ refbase @ Serial 2682  
Permanent link to this record
 

 
Author Liu, L.; Huang, Q.-M.; Liu, Q.-G.; Thitham, N.; Li, L.-H.; Ma, Y.-T.; Zhao, J.-M. url  doi
openurl 
  Title Evidence for Dry Needling in the Management of Myofascial Trigger Points Associated With Low Back Pain: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Type of Study Journal Article
  Year 2018 Publication Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation Abbreviated Journal Arch Phys Med Rehabil  
  Volume 99 Issue 1 Pages 144-152.e2  
  Keywords Combined Modality Therapy; *Complementary Therapies; Humans; Low Back Pain/complications/*therapy; Myofascial Pain Syndromes/complications/*therapy; Needles; Pain Measurement; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; *Trigger Points; *Low back pain; *Meta-analysis [publication type]; *Needles; *Randomized controlled trial as topic; *Rehabilitation; *Trigger points  
  Abstract OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the current evidence of the effectiveness of dry needling of myofascial trigger points (MTrPs) associated with low back pain (LBP). DATA SOURCES: PubMed, Ovid, EBSCO, ScienceDirect, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, CINAHL, and China National Knowledge Infrastructure databases were searched until January 2017. STUDY SELECTION: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that used dry needling as the main treatment and included participants diagnosed with LBP with the presence of MTrPs were included. DATA EXTRACTION: Two reviewers independently screened articles, scored methodologic quality, and extracted data. The primary outcomes were pain intensity and functional disability at postintervention and follow-up. DATA SYNTHESIS: A total of 11 RCTs involving 802 patients were included in the meta-analysis. Results suggested that compared with other treatments, dry needling of MTrPs was more effective in alleviating the intensity of LBP (standardized mean difference [SMD], -1.06; 95% confidence interval [CI], -1.77 to -0.36; P=.003) and functional disability (SMD, -0.76; 95% CI, -1.46 to -0.06; P=.03); however, the significant effects of dry needling plus other treatments on pain intensity could be superior to dry needling alone for LBP at postintervention (SMD, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.55-1.11; P<.00001). CONCLUSIONS: Moderate evidence showed that dry needling of MTrPs, especially if associated with other therapies, could be recommended to relieve the intensity of LBP at postintervention; however, the clinical superiority of dry needling in improving functional disability and its follow-up effects still remains unclear.  
  Address Department of Sport Medicine and the Center of Rehabilitation, School of Sport Science, Shanghai University of Sport, Shanghai, China  
  Publisher
  Language English Number of Treatments  
  Treatment Follow-up Frequency Number of Participants  
  Time in Treatment Condition
  Disease Category OCSI Score  
  Notes PMID:28690077 Approved no  
  Call Number OCOM @ refbase @ Serial 2641  
Permanent link to this record
 

 
Author Liu, L.; Huang, Q.-M.; Liu, Q.-G.; Thitham, N.; Li, L.-H.; Ma, Y.-T.; Zhao, J.-M. url  doi
openurl 
  Title Evidence for Dry Needling in the Management of Myofascial Trigger Points Associated With Low Back Pain: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Type of Study Journal Article
  Year 2018 Publication Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation Abbreviated Journal Arch Phys Med Rehabil  
  Volume 99 Issue 1 Pages 144-152.e2  
  Keywords Combined Modality Therapy; *Complementary Therapies; Humans; Low Back Pain/complications/*therapy; Myofascial Pain Syndromes/complications/*therapy; Needles; Pain Measurement; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; *Trigger Points; *Low back pain; *Meta-analysis [publication type]; *Needles; *Randomized controlled trial as topic; *Rehabilitation; *Trigger points  
  Abstract OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the current evidence of the effectiveness of dry needling of myofascial trigger points (MTrPs) associated with low back pain (LBP). DATA SOURCES: PubMed, Ovid, EBSCO, ScienceDirect, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, CINAHL, and China National Knowledge Infrastructure databases were searched until January 2017. STUDY SELECTION: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that used dry needling as the main treatment and included participants diagnosed with LBP with the presence of MTrPs were included. DATA EXTRACTION: Two reviewers independently screened articles, scored methodologic quality, and extracted data. The primary outcomes were pain intensity and functional disability at postintervention and follow-up. DATA SYNTHESIS: A total of 11 RCTs involving 802 patients were included in the meta-analysis. Results suggested that compared with other treatments, dry needling of MTrPs was more effective in alleviating the intensity of LBP (standardized mean difference [SMD], -1.06; 95% confidence interval [CI], -1.77 to -0.36; P=.003) and functional disability (SMD, -0.76; 95% CI, -1.46 to -0.06; P=.03); however, the significant effects of dry needling plus other treatments on pain intensity could be superior to dry needling alone for LBP at postintervention (SMD, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.55-1.11; P<.00001). CONCLUSIONS: Moderate evidence showed that dry needling of MTrPs, especially if associated with other therapies, could be recommended to relieve the intensity of LBP at postintervention; however, the clinical superiority of dry needling in improving functional disability and its follow-up effects still remains unclear.  
  Address Department of Sport Medicine and the Center of Rehabilitation, School of Sport Science, Shanghai University of Sport, Shanghai, China  
  Publisher
  Language English Number of Treatments  
  Treatment Follow-up Frequency Number of Participants  
  Time in Treatment Condition
  Disease Category OCSI Score  
  Notes PMID:28690077 Approved no  
  Call Number OCOM @ refbase @ Serial 2622  
Permanent link to this record
 

 
Author Liu, L.; Huang, Q.-M.; Liu, Q.-G.; Thitham, N.; Li, L.-H.; Ma, Y.-T.; Zhao, J.-M. url  doi
openurl 
  Title Evidence for Dry Needling in the Management of Myofascial Trigger Points Associated With Low Back Pain: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Type of Study Journal Article
  Year 2018 Publication Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation Abbreviated Journal Arch Phys Med Rehabil  
  Volume 99 Issue 1 Pages 144-152.e2  
  Keywords Combined Modality Therapy; *Complementary Therapies; Humans; Low Back Pain/complications/*therapy; Myofascial Pain Syndromes/complications/*therapy; Needles; Pain Measurement; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; *Trigger Points; *Low back pain; *Meta-analysis [publication type]; *Needles; *Randomized controlled trial as topic; *Rehabilitation; *Trigger points  
  Abstract OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the current evidence of the effectiveness of dry needling of myofascial trigger points (MTrPs) associated with low back pain (LBP). DATA SOURCES: PubMed, Ovid, EBSCO, ScienceDirect, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, CINAHL, and China National Knowledge Infrastructure databases were searched until January 2017. STUDY SELECTION: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that used dry needling as the main treatment and included participants diagnosed with LBP with the presence of MTrPs were included. DATA EXTRACTION: Two reviewers independently screened articles, scored methodologic quality, and extracted data. The primary outcomes were pain intensity and functional disability at postintervention and follow-up. DATA SYNTHESIS: A total of 11 RCTs involving 802 patients were included in the meta-analysis. Results suggested that compared with other treatments, dry needling of MTrPs was more effective in alleviating the intensity of LBP (standardized mean difference [SMD], -1.06; 95% confidence interval [CI], -1.77 to -0.36; P=.003) and functional disability (SMD, -0.76; 95% CI, -1.46 to -0.06; P=.03); however, the significant effects of dry needling plus other treatments on pain intensity could be superior to dry needling alone for LBP at postintervention (SMD, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.55-1.11; P<.00001). CONCLUSIONS: Moderate evidence showed that dry needling of MTrPs, especially if associated with other therapies, could be recommended to relieve the intensity of LBP at postintervention; however, the clinical superiority of dry needling in improving functional disability and its follow-up effects still remains unclear.  
  Address Department of Sport Medicine and the Center of Rehabilitation, School of Sport Science, Shanghai University of Sport, Shanghai, China  
  Publisher
  Language English Number of Treatments  
  Treatment Follow-up Frequency Number of Participants  
  Time in Treatment Condition
  Disease Category OCSI Score  
  Notes PMID:28690077 Approved no  
  Call Number OCOM @ refbase @ Serial 2581  
Permanent link to this record
 

 
Author Liu, L.; Huang, Q.-M.; Liu, Q.-G.; Thitham, N.; Li, L.-H.; Ma, Y.-T.; Zhao, J.-M. url  doi
openurl 
  Title Evidence for Dry Needling in the Management of Myofascial Trigger Points Associated With Low Back Pain: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Type of Study Journal Article
  Year 2018 Publication Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation Abbreviated Journal Arch Phys Med Rehabil  
  Volume 99 Issue 1 Pages 144-152.e2  
  Keywords Combined Modality Therapy; *Complementary Therapies; Humans; Low Back Pain/complications/*therapy; Myofascial Pain Syndromes/complications/*therapy; Needles; Pain Measurement; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; *Trigger Points; *Low back pain; *Meta-analysis [publication type]; *Needles; *Randomized controlled trial as topic; *Rehabilitation; *Trigger points  
  Abstract OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the current evidence of the effectiveness of dry needling of myofascial trigger points (MTrPs) associated with low back pain (LBP). DATA SOURCES: PubMed, Ovid, EBSCO, ScienceDirect, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, CINAHL, and China National Knowledge Infrastructure databases were searched until January 2017. STUDY SELECTION: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that used dry needling as the main treatment and included participants diagnosed with LBP with the presence of MTrPs were included. DATA EXTRACTION: Two reviewers independently screened articles, scored methodologic quality, and extracted data. The primary outcomes were pain intensity and functional disability at postintervention and follow-up. DATA SYNTHESIS: A total of 11 RCTs involving 802 patients were included in the meta-analysis. Results suggested that compared with other treatments, dry needling of MTrPs was more effective in alleviating the intensity of LBP (standardized mean difference [SMD], -1.06; 95% confidence interval [CI], -1.77 to -0.36; P=.003) and functional disability (SMD, -0.76; 95% CI, -1.46 to -0.06; P=.03); however, the significant effects of dry needling plus other treatments on pain intensity could be superior to dry needling alone for LBP at postintervention (SMD, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.55-1.11; P<.00001). CONCLUSIONS: Moderate evidence showed that dry needling of MTrPs, especially if associated with other therapies, could be recommended to relieve the intensity of LBP at postintervention; however, the clinical superiority of dry needling in improving functional disability and its follow-up effects still remains unclear.  
  Address Department of Sport Medicine and the Center of Rehabilitation, School of Sport Science, Shanghai University of Sport, Shanghai, China  
  Publisher
  Language English Number of Treatments  
  Treatment Follow-up Frequency Number of Participants  
  Time in Treatment Condition
  Disease Category OCSI Score  
  Notes PMID:28690077 Approved no  
  Call Number OCOM @ refbase @ Serial 2540  
Permanent link to this record
 

 
Author Liu, L.; Huang, Q.-M.; Liu, Q.-G.; Thitham, N.; Li, L.-H.; Ma, Y.-T.; Zhao, J.-M. url  doi
openurl 
  Title Evidence for Dry Needling in the Management of Myofascial Trigger Points Associated With Low Back Pain: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Type of Study Journal Article
  Year 2018 Publication Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation Abbreviated Journal Arch Phys Med Rehabil  
  Volume 99 Issue 1 Pages 144-152.e2  
  Keywords Combined Modality Therapy; *Complementary Therapies; Humans; Low Back Pain/complications/*therapy; Myofascial Pain Syndromes/complications/*therapy; Needles; Pain Measurement; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; *Trigger Points; *Low back pain; *Meta-analysis [publication type]; *Needles; *Randomized controlled trial as topic; *Rehabilitation; *Trigger points  
  Abstract OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the current evidence of the effectiveness of dry needling of myofascial trigger points (MTrPs) associated with low back pain (LBP). DATA SOURCES: PubMed, Ovid, EBSCO, ScienceDirect, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, CINAHL, and China National Knowledge Infrastructure databases were searched until January 2017. STUDY SELECTION: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that used dry needling as the main treatment and included participants diagnosed with LBP with the presence of MTrPs were included. DATA EXTRACTION: Two reviewers independently screened articles, scored methodologic quality, and extracted data. The primary outcomes were pain intensity and functional disability at postintervention and follow-up. DATA SYNTHESIS: A total of 11 RCTs involving 802 patients were included in the meta-analysis. Results suggested that compared with other treatments, dry needling of MTrPs was more effective in alleviating the intensity of LBP (standardized mean difference [SMD], -1.06; 95% confidence interval [CI], -1.77 to -0.36; P=.003) and functional disability (SMD, -0.76; 95% CI, -1.46 to -0.06; P=.03); however, the significant effects of dry needling plus other treatments on pain intensity could be superior to dry needling alone for LBP at postintervention (SMD, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.55-1.11; P<.00001). CONCLUSIONS: Moderate evidence showed that dry needling of MTrPs, especially if associated with other therapies, could be recommended to relieve the intensity of LBP at postintervention; however, the clinical superiority of dry needling in improving functional disability and its follow-up effects still remains unclear.  
  Address Department of Sport Medicine and the Center of Rehabilitation, School of Sport Science, Shanghai University of Sport, Shanghai, China  
  Publisher
  Language English Number of Treatments  
  Treatment Follow-up Frequency Number of Participants  
  Time in Treatment Condition
  Disease Category OCSI Score  
  Notes PMID:28690077 Approved no  
  Call Number OCOM @ refbase @ Serial 2499  
Permanent link to this record
 

 
Author Liu, L.; Huang, Q.-M.; Liu, Q.-G.; Thitham, N.; Li, L.-H.; Ma, Y.-T.; Zhao, J.-M. url  doi
openurl 
  Title Evidence for Dry Needling in the Management of Myofascial Trigger Points Associated With Low Back Pain: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Type of Study Journal Article
  Year 2018 Publication Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation Abbreviated Journal Arch Phys Med Rehabil  
  Volume 99 Issue 1 Pages 144-152.e2  
  Keywords Combined Modality Therapy; *Complementary Therapies; Humans; Low Back Pain/complications/*therapy; Myofascial Pain Syndromes/complications/*therapy; Needles; Pain Measurement; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; *Trigger Points; *Low back pain; *Meta-analysis [publication type]; *Needles; *Randomized controlled trial as topic; *Rehabilitation; *Trigger points  
  Abstract OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the current evidence of the effectiveness of dry needling of myofascial trigger points (MTrPs) associated with low back pain (LBP). DATA SOURCES: PubMed, Ovid, EBSCO, ScienceDirect, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, CINAHL, and China National Knowledge Infrastructure databases were searched until January 2017. STUDY SELECTION: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that used dry needling as the main treatment and included participants diagnosed with LBP with the presence of MTrPs were included. DATA EXTRACTION: Two reviewers independently screened articles, scored methodologic quality, and extracted data. The primary outcomes were pain intensity and functional disability at postintervention and follow-up. DATA SYNTHESIS: A total of 11 RCTs involving 802 patients were included in the meta-analysis. Results suggested that compared with other treatments, dry needling of MTrPs was more effective in alleviating the intensity of LBP (standardized mean difference [SMD], -1.06; 95% confidence interval [CI], -1.77 to -0.36; P=.003) and functional disability (SMD, -0.76; 95% CI, -1.46 to -0.06; P=.03); however, the significant effects of dry needling plus other treatments on pain intensity could be superior to dry needling alone for LBP at postintervention (SMD, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.55-1.11; P<.00001). CONCLUSIONS: Moderate evidence showed that dry needling of MTrPs, especially if associated with other therapies, could be recommended to relieve the intensity of LBP at postintervention; however, the clinical superiority of dry needling in improving functional disability and its follow-up effects still remains unclear.  
  Address Department of Sport Medicine and the Center of Rehabilitation, School of Sport Science, Shanghai University of Sport, Shanghai, China  
  Publisher
  Language English Number of Treatments  
  Treatment Follow-up Frequency Number of Participants  
  Time in Treatment Condition
  Disease Category OCSI Score  
  Notes PMID:28690077 Approved no  
  Call Number OCOM @ refbase @ Serial 2458  
Permanent link to this record
 

 
Author Liu, L.; Huang, Q.-M.; Liu, Q.-G.; Thitham, N.; Li, L.-H.; Ma, Y.-T.; Zhao, J.-M. url  doi
openurl 
  Title Evidence for Dry Needling in the Management of Myofascial Trigger Points Associated With Low Back Pain: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Type of Study Systematic Review
  Year 2017 Publication Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation Abbreviated Journal Arch Phys Med Rehabil  
  Volume Issue Pages 1-11  
  Keywords AcuTrials; Systematic Review; Back Pain; Low Back Pain; Musculoskeletal Diseases; Myofascial Trigger Point; Dry Needling, With Non-Acupuncture Needle  
  Abstract OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the current evidence of the effectiveness of dry needling of myofascial trigger points (MTrPs) associated with low back pain (LBP). DATA SOURCES: PubMed, Ovid, EBSCO, ScienceDirect, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, CINAHL, and China National Knowledge Infrastructure databases were searched until January 2017. STUDY SELECTION: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that used dry needling as the main treatment and included participants diagnosed with LBP with the presence of MTrPs were included. DATA EXTRACTION: Two reviewers independently screened articles, scored methodologic quality, and extracted data. The primary outcomes were pain intensity and functional disability at postintervention and follow-up. DATA SYNTHESIS: A total of 11 RCTs involving 802 patients were included in the meta-analysis. Results suggested that compared with other treatments, dry needling of MTrPs was more effective in alleviating the intensity of LBP (standardized mean difference [SMD], -1.06; 95% confidence interval [CI], -1.77 to -0.36; P=.003) and functional disability (SMD, -0.76; 95% CI, -1.46 to -0.06; P=.03); however, the significant effects of dry needling plus other treatments on pain intensity could be superior to dry needling alone for LBP at postintervention (SMD, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.55-1.11; P<.00001). CONCLUSIONS: Moderate evidence showed that dry needling of MTrPs, especially if associated with other therapies, could be recommended to relieve the intensity of LBP at postintervention; however, the clinical superiority of dry needling in improving functional disability and its follow-up effects still remains unclear.  
  Address Department of Sport Medicine and the Center of Rehabilitation, School of Sport Science, Shanghai University of Sport  
  Publisher
  Language English Number of Treatments  
  Treatment Follow-up Frequency Number of Participants  
  Time in Treatment Condition Low Back Pain
  Disease Category Back Pain OCSI Score  
  Notes PMID:28690077 Approved no  
  Call Number OCOM @ refbase @ Serial 2417  
Permanent link to this record
Select All    Deselect All
 |   | 
Details
   print

Save Citations:
Export Records: