PDF(Pubmed)
Abstract：
UNASSIGNED: To compare the effectiveness of instrument-assisted soft tissue mobilization (IASTM) and extracorporeal shock wave therapy (ESWT) used in myofascial pain syndrome (MPS) and to determine whether they are superior to conservative treatment (CT).
UNASSIGNED: A total of 42 female patients (aged 18-60 years) diagnosed with MPS were enrolled and randomly assigned to either the CT (n = 14), CT+IASTM (n = 14), or CT+ESWT group (n = 14). All of the groups received treatment for 3 weeks (CT: 5 sessions per week, 15 sessions in total, ESWT and IASTM: 2 sessions per week, 6 sessions in total). Neck stretching exercises were given to all of the patients as a home program. The pain intensity of the patients was determined using the visual analog scale (VAS). The pressure pain threshold (PPT) was measured with an algometer. Cervical joint range of motion (ROM) was measured with a cervical ROM (CROM) device. Pain, cervical disability, quality of life, and sleep disturbances were evaluated with the Neck Outcome Score (NOOS). Depression and anxiety parameters were evaluated with the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS). Evaluations were made before treatment and 3 days after the last treatment session.
UNASSIGNED: The CT+IASTM group was more successful than the other groups in terms of pain intensity, PPT, and improvements in the ROM parameters (p < 0.05). No significant difference was found between the NOOS and HADS scores of the groups when the posttreatment changes were compared to pretreatment (p > 0.05).
UNASSIGNED: All 3 of these treatments can be used to alleviate the negative effects of MPS. IASTM treatment can be preferred primarily in the creation of combined treatment programs for patients with ROM limitations and low PPTs.
UNASSIGNED: A total of 42 female patients (aged 18-60 years) diagnosed with MPS were enrolled and randomly assigned to either the CT (n = 14), CT+IASTM (n = 14), or CT+ESWT group (n = 14). All of the groups received treatment for 3 weeks (CT: 5 sessions per week, 15 sessions in total, ESWT and IASTM: 2 sessions per week, 6 sessions in total). Neck stretching exercises were given to all of the patients as a home program. The pain intensity of the patients was determined using the visual analog scale (VAS). The pressure pain threshold (PPT) was measured with an algometer. Cervical joint range of motion (ROM) was measured with a cervical ROM (CROM) device. Pain, cervical disability, quality of life, and sleep disturbances were evaluated with the Neck Outcome Score (NOOS). Depression and anxiety parameters were evaluated with the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS). Evaluations were made before treatment and 3 days after the last treatment session.
UNASSIGNED: The CT+IASTM group was more successful than the other groups in terms of pain intensity, PPT, and improvements in the ROM parameters (p < 0.05). No significant difference was found between the NOOS and HADS scores of the groups when the posttreatment changes were compared to pretreatment (p > 0.05).
UNASSIGNED: All 3 of these treatments can be used to alleviate the negative effects of MPS. IASTM treatment can be preferred primarily in the creation of combined treatment programs for patients with ROM limitations and low PPTs.
摘要：
■比较器械辅助软组织动员（IASTM）和体外冲击波治疗（ESWT）在肌筋膜疼痛综合征（MPS）中的有效性，并确定它们是否优于保守治疗（CT）。
■共纳入42名诊断为MPS的女性患者（年龄18-60岁），并随机分配至CT（n=14），CT+IASTM（n=14），或CT+ESWT组(n=14)。所有组接受治疗3周（CT：每周5次，共15个会议，ESWT和ISTM：每周2次，共6个会议）。颈部伸展运动作为家庭项目给予所有患者。使用视觉模拟量表（VAS）确定患者的疼痛强度。压力疼痛阈值（PPT）用algometer测量。使用宫颈ROM（CROM）设备测量宫颈关节活动范围（ROM）。疼痛,颈椎残疾,生活质量,使用颈部结果评分（NOOS）评估睡眠障碍。采用医院焦虑抑郁量表(HADS)评价抑郁和焦虑参数。在治疗前和最后一次治疗后3天进行评估。
■在疼痛强度方面，CT+IASTM组比其他组更成功，PPT,以及ROM参数的改善(p<0.05)。当治疗后的变化与治疗前相比，两组的NOOS和HADS评分之间没有显着差异（p>0.05）。
■所有3种治疗方法均可用于缓解MPS的负面影响。IISTM治疗可主要在针对ROM受限和低PPTs的患者创建联合治疗方案时是优选的。
■共纳入42名诊断为MPS的女性患者（年龄18-60岁），并随机分配至CT（n=14），CT+IASTM（n=14），或CT+ESWT组(n=14)。所有组接受治疗3周（CT：每周5次，共15个会议，ESWT和ISTM：每周2次，共6个会议）。颈部伸展运动作为家庭项目给予所有患者。使用视觉模拟量表（VAS）确定患者的疼痛强度。压力疼痛阈值（PPT）用algometer测量。使用宫颈ROM（CROM）设备测量宫颈关节活动范围（ROM）。疼痛,颈椎残疾,生活质量,使用颈部结果评分（NOOS）评估睡眠障碍。采用医院焦虑抑郁量表(HADS)评价抑郁和焦虑参数。在治疗前和最后一次治疗后3天进行评估。
■在疼痛强度方面，CT+IASTM组比其他组更成功，PPT,以及ROM参数的改善(p<0.05)。当治疗后的变化与治疗前相比，两组的NOOS和HADS评分之间没有显着差异（p>0.05）。
■所有3种治疗方法均可用于缓解MPS的负面影响。IISTM治疗可主要在针对ROM受限和低PPTs的患者创建联合治疗方案时是优选的。
