Musculoskeletal disorders, especially chronic muscle pain, have a significant impact on public health, affecting millions worldwide. This review examines recent advancements in the diagnosis and management of myofascial pain, with a focus on the refined application of trigger point theory. This theory now incorporates an intricate model that blends biomechanical and neurophysiological mechanisms, essential for understanding the initiation and persistence of pain, and necessitating targeted therapeutic interventions. Utilizing a methodical approach, this paper categorizes muscle pain into three types: Muscle Belly Pain, Origin-Insertion Pain, and Referred Pain, as delineated in the most recent edition of \"Myofascial Pain and Dysfunction-The Trigger Point Manual.\" Such classification enhances diagnostic precision and therapeutic effectiveness by establishing a specific treatment protocol for each type of pain. The paper discusses the implications of various treatments, such as dry needling and manual therapy, which are informed by empirically derived trigger point charts. These charts are instrumental in pinpointing the exact locations of pain sources and customizing treatment plans. Moreover, this review critically assesses the evolving nature of trigger point charts and champions a holistic approach to pain management. It underscores the necessity of integrating biomechanics, kinesiology, and compensatory mechanisms to provide a comprehensive understanding that allows practitioners to address not only symptomatic pain but also the root causes of musculoskeletal disorders, thereby enhancing long-term patient care outcomes in clinical environments.

The treatment of myofascial pain in athletes requires a set of rehabilitation techniques that aim to be effective quickly. In this context, dry needling (DNY) has shown interesting results due to its ability to reduce pain in the short term. Thus, the aim of this study was to investigate the role of DNY in managing myofascial shoulder pain in overhead athletes. PubMed, Scopus and Web of Science were screened up to March 2024, to identify studies that met the following inclusion criteria: overhead athletes with shoulder pain with a DNY approach for myofascial trigger points (MTrPs), RCT, case-control study, feasibility study as the study design. Exclusion criteria were studies that did not include athletes, studies that did not focus on the treatment of MTrPs with DNY, other reviews, no full-text availability and papers written in a language other than English. Out of 399 articles, 165 were excluded as duplicates. Of the 234 articles screened, only 6 articles met the inclusion criteria. A total of 6 studies were included in the systematic review. Initial results showed that DNY improved pain rapidly and in the short term; however, there is still no consensus on the minimum number and the interval between treatments. Major findings reported a rapid potential decrease in perceived pain, shoulder disability and an increase in muscle strength; in this scenario, DNY might be a valid solution in a sports rehabilitation setting.

BACKGROUND: Notalgia paresthetica (NP) is a rare condition characterized by localized pain and pruritus of the upper back, associated with a distinct area of hyperpigmentation. Given the lack of standardized treatment and the uncertain efficacy of available options, applying procedural methods is of growing interest in treating NP.
OBJECTIVE: We sought to comprehensively evaluate the role of procedural treatments for NP.
METHODS: We systematically searched PubMed/Medline, Ovid Embase, and Web of Science until November 14th, 2023. We also performed a citation search to detect all relevant studies. Original clinical studies published in the English language were included.
RESULTS: Out of 243 articles, sixteen studies have reported various procedural modalities, with or without pharmacological components, in treating NP. Pharmacological procedures, including injections of botulinum toxin, lidocaine, and corticosteroids, led to a level of improvement in case reports and case series. However, botulinum toxin did not show acceptable results in a clinical trial. Moreover, non-pharmacological procedures were as follows: physical therapy, exercise therapy, kinesiotherapy, acupuncture and dry needling, electrical muscle stimulation, surgical decompression, and phototherapy. These treatments result in significant symptom control in refractory cases. Physical therapy can be considered a first-line choice or an alternative in refractory cases.
CONCLUSIONS: Procedural modalities are critical in the multidisciplinary approach to NP, especially for patients who are refractory to topical and oral treatments. Procedural modalities include a spectrum of options that can be applied based on the disease\'s symptoms and severity.

BACKGROUND: Spasticity is a common problem in stroke patients. Treatments of spasticity often have side effects or are insufficiently effective. Dry needling (DN) has been proposed as a potential additional option to consider in the multimodal treatment of post-stroke spasticity, although questions about its safety remain. The goal of this study is to assess the safety of DN in stroke patients.
METHODS: A systematic search in Medline, Embase, The Cochrane Library, Web of Science, CIHNAL and PEDro was conducted in June 2023. Two reviewers independently screened abstracts according to the eligibility criteria.
RESULTS: Twenty-five articles were included in this review. Only six studies reported adverse events, all of which were considered minor. None of the included studies reported any serious adverse events. In four of the included studies anticoagulants were regarded as contra-indicative for DN. Anticoagulants were not mentioned in the other included studies.
CONCLUSIONS: There is a paucity of literature concerning the safety of DN in stroke patients. This review is the first to investigate the safety of DN in stroke patients and based on the results there is insufficient evidence regarding the safety of DN in stroke patients.
CONCLUSIONS: Although DN could be a promising treatment in post-stroke spasticity, further research is indicated to investigate its mechanism of action and its effect on outcome. However, before conducting large clinical trials to assess outcome parameters, the safety of DN in stroke patients must be further investigated.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the therapeutic effects of dry needling on lateral epicondylitis and identify a relatively more effective needling technique.
METHODS: English databases (Pubmed, Web of Science, Scopus, EBSCO, ScienceDirect, Taylor & Francis, ProQuest, Cochrane, Ovid, and Embase) and Chinese databases (China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wanfang, and VIP) were searched.
METHODS: This study included randomized controlled trials for comparing the effectiveness of dry needling with other treatment methods for lateral epicondylitis. The primary outcome measures were pain intensity and elbow disability, while the secondary outcome measures included grip strength and upper limb function.
METHODS: Data extraction was performed by 2 researchers who used the Cochrane risk of bias analysis tool and the Physiotherapy Evidence Database checklist to assess the risk of bias and methodological quality of the included studies. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach was used to assess the quality of evidence.
RESULTS: A total of 17 studies that involved 979 subjects were included in this research. Dry needling exhibited a significant advantage in improving pain intensity among patients with lateral epicondylitis within 1 week after treatment (mean difference [MD]=-0.95, 95% confidence interval [CI], -1.88 to -0.02). Within 1 week and in the follow-ups that exceeded 1 week, dry needling also demonstrated better improvement in elbow disability (<1 week: standardized mean difference [SMD]=-1.37, 95% CI, -1.88 to -0.86; ≥1 week: SMD=-1.32, 95% CI, -2.23 to -0.4) and grip strength (<1 week: SMD=0.27, 95% CI, 0.01 to 0.53; ≥1 week: SMD=0.45, 95% CI, 0.02 to 0.88). Trigger point dry needling with local twitch response exhibited more significant improvement in pain intensity within 1 week (MD=-1.09, 95% CI, -1.75 to -0.44).
CONCLUSIONS: Dry needling demonstrates good therapeutic effects on pain intensity (within 1 week), function, and grip strength among patients with lateral epicondylitis. Local twitch response is necessary in treatment that targets trigger points.

OBJECTIVE: To provide dermatologists with more clinical experience in treating androgenetic alopecia, we evaluated the effect and safety of combined microneedling therapy for androgenetic alopecia.
METHODS: Studies on combined microneedling for hair loss were comprehensively searched by us in PubMed, Excerpta Medica Database, and the Cochrane Library Database. The literature search spanned the period from 2012 to 2022. Inclusion and exclusion criteria were developed, and the literature was screened according to this criteria. The Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool was used to assess the quality of the studies. The researcher applied Revman 5.3 and Stata 15.1 software to analyze the data after extracting information from the data.
RESULTS: Finally, 13 RCTs involving 696 AGA patients were included to compare the clinical effectiveness and adverse events of combined MN therapy with single MN therapy or single drug therapy for AGA. The results of meta-analysis showed as follows: (1) Hair density and diameter changes: The combined MN group was significantly better than any single treatment group, and the differences were statistically significant (MD = 13.36, 95% CI = [8.55, 18.16], Z = 5.45, p < 0.00001; MD = 18.11, 95% CI = [13.70, 22.52], Z = 8.04, p < 0.00001; MD = 13.36, 95% CI = [8.55, 18.16], Z = 5.45, p < 0.00001; MD = 2.50, 95% CI = [0.99, 4.02], Z = 3.23, p = 0.001); (2) the evaluation of satisfaction for efficacy: The doctor satisfaction rating of the combined MN group was significantly higher than that of any single treatment group, with statistical difference (RR = 2.03, 95% CI = [1.62, 2.53], Z = 6.24, p < 0.00001). The difference between the two groups regarding patients satisfaction was not significant (RR = 3.44, 95% CI = [0.67, 17.59], Z = 1.49, p = 0.14). (3) Safety: There was no statistical difference in the incidence of adverse reactions between combination therapy and monotherapy (RR = 0.83, 95% CI = [0.62, 1.12], Z = 1.22, p = 0.22).
CONCLUSIONS: The combined MN group showed statistically significant improvement in hair density and diameter, and good safety compared with monotherapy.

BACKGROUND: There is a continuing interest in finding effective methods for scar treatment. Dry needling is gaining popularity in physiotherapy and is defined by Western medicine as a type of acupuncture. The terms acupuncture and dry needling have been used interchangeably so we have focused on the efficacy of dry needling or acupuncture in scar treatment.
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this systematic review was to determine the usefulness of dry needling or local acupuncture for scar treatment. In our search process, we used the terms \'acupuncture,\' \'needling,\' or \'dry needling\' to identify all relevant scientific papers. We have focused on the practical aspects of local management of different scar types with dry needling or acupuncture.
METHODS: The search strategy included different combinations of the following keywords: \'scar\', \'keloid\', \'dry needling\', \'needling\', \'acupuncture\', \'treatment\', \'physical therapy\'. This systematic review was conducted in accordance with PRISMA guidelines. MEDLINE (PubMed, EBSCOHost and Ovid), EMBASE (Elsevier), and Web of Science databases were searched for relevant publications from inception through October 2023.
METHODS: The studies that investigated the effectiveness of dry needling or acupuncture for scar treatment were included.
METHODS: The main extraction data items were: the needling technique; needle: diameter, length; needling locations; manual needling manipulation; number of sessions; settings; outcomes and results.
RESULTS: As a result of a comprehensive search, 11 manuscripts were included in the systematic review, of which eight were case reports, two were randomized trials and one study concerned case series. Two case reports scored 2-4 out of 8 points on the JBI checklist, five studies scored 5-7, and one study scored 8 points. The methodological quality of the two clinical trials was rated as good or fair on the PEDro scale. The case series study scored 7 of 10 points on the JBI checklist. A meta-analysis was not possible as only two randomized trials, eight case reports, and one case series were eligible for review; also, scar assessment scales and pain severity scales were highly heterogeneous.
CONCLUSIONS: The studies differed regarding the delivery of dry needling or local acupuncture for scar treatment. Differences included treatment frequency, duration, number of treatments, selection of needle insertion sites, number of needles used, angle of needle placement, and use of manual needling manipulation.
BACKGROUND: INPLASY no. 202310058.

BACKGROUND:  Myofascial pain syndrome (MPS) is a common source of pain in primary care or pain clinics. There are many different ways to manage and treat MPS, such as physical exercise, trigger points massage, and dry needling.
OBJECTIVE:  The objective of this overview is to highlight and discuss the evidence-based treatment of myofascial pain by dry needling in patients with low back pain.
METHODS:  A systematic review was made based on meta-analysis (MA) and randomized controlled trials (RCTs) related to dry needling treatment for myofascial pain in patients with lumbar pain, published from 2000 to 2023.
RESULTS:  A total of 509 records were identified at first. Seventy were published before 2000, so they were excluded. From the remaining 439 studies, ninety-two were RCTs or MA, of which 86 additional studies were excluded for the following reasons: not related to dry needling treatment (n = 79), not published in English (n = 4), duplicated (n = 1), project protocol (n = 1), and not related to myofascial pain (n = 1). So, this review was based on 4 RCTs and two MA. These studies compared dry needling efficacy to other treatments, such as acupuncture, sham dry needling, laser therapy, physical therapy, local anesthetic injection, ischemic compression, and neuroscience education. Despite outcomes and follow-up period varied between them, they showed that dry needling can decrease post-intervention pain intensity and pain disability.
CONCLUSIONS:  Dry needling is an effective procedure for the treatment of myofascial pain in patients with acute and chronic low back pain. Further high-quality studies are needed to clarify the long-term outcomes.
BACKGROUND:  A síndrome dolorosa miofascial (SDM) é uma fonte comum de dor em centros primários de atenção à saúde ou nas clínicas de dor. Existem muitas formas diferentes de manejar e tratar a SDM, como o exercício físico, a massagem dos pontos de gatilho e o agulhamento a seco.
OBJECTIVE:  O objetivo desta revisão é destacar e discutir o tratamento baseado em evidências da dor miofascial por agulhamento a seco em doentes com dor lombar. MéTODOS:  Foi realizada uma revisão sistemática baseada em metanálises (MA) e ensaios clínicos randomizados (RCTs) relacionados ao tratamento da dor miofascial com agulhamento a seco em pacientes com dor lombar, publicados de 2000 a 2023.
RESULTS:  Foram identificados, inicialmente, um total de 509 registos. Setenta deles, publicados antes de 2000, foram excluídos. Dos 439 estudos restantes, 92 eram RCTs ou MA, dos quais 86 foram excluídos pelas seguintes razões: não relacionados a tratamento com agulhamento a seco (n = 79), não publicados em inglês (n = 4), duplicados (n = 1), protocolo de projeto (n = 1) e não relacionados com dor miofascial (n = 1). Assim, esta revisão baseou-se em quatro RCTs e duas MA. Esses estudos compararam a eficácia do agulhamento seco com outros tratamentos, tais como acupuntura, agulhamento a seco “sham”, terapia com laser, fisioterapia, injeção de anestésico local, compressão isquêmica e educação em neurociências. Apesar de os resultados e o período de seguimento variarem entre os estudos, os estudos demonstram que o agulhamento a seco pode diminuir a intensidade da dor pós-intervenção e a incapacidade relacionada à dor. CONCLUSãO:  O agulhamento a seco é um procedimento eficaz para o tratamento da dor miofascial em pacientes com dor lombar aguda e crônica. Mais estudos são necessários para esclarecer sua eficácia a longo prazo.

UNASSIGNED: The objective of this study was to assess the evidence for the impact of dry needling (DN) on hip pain and function.
UNASSIGNED: Medline/PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science and Cochrane CENTRAL databases were searched systematically through June 2022 for randomized clinical trials (RCTs) investigating the impact of DN on hip pain and function. Version 2 of the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomized trials (RoB 2) was used to assess risk of bias. Descriptive analysis was conducted to explain the outcomes and adverse events of DN in hip joint diseases. Meta-analysis was not feasible due to significant heterogeneity.
UNASSIGNED: A total of seven eligible studies (including 273 patients) were included out of 2152 screened records. Five studies were in participants with hip osteoarthritis (OA; n = 3), greater trochanteric pain syndrome (GTPS; n = 1) or piriformis syndrome (n = 1); the other two studies were conducted in healthy athletes (n = 2). Two articles assessed changes in participants\' short-term visual analog scale (VAS) scores (<1 week), one of which showed that DN significantly reduced pain (P < 0.05). One-week VAS scores were analyzed in three studies, all of which demonstrated reduced scores following DN (P < 0.05). Hip range of motion (ROM) and muscle force were also improved following DN. No serious side effects were reported.
UNASSIGNED: DN may be safe and effective at relieving hip pain and improving hip function. DN performs significantly better than several different types of control intervention (including sham DN, no treatment, corticosteroid injections and laser). Strong evidence (high degree of certainty around the results) is lacking, and future studies should ideally use longer follow-up periods and larger sample sizes.
UNASSIGNED: CRD42022297845 (PROSPERO).

OBJECTIVE: Evaluate benefits and harms of needling therapies (NT) for chronic primary low back pain (CPLBP) in adults to inform a World Health Organization (WHO) standard clinical guideline.
METHODS: Electronic databases were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing NT compared with placebo/sham, usual care, or no intervention (comparing interventions where the attributable effect could be isolated). We conducted meta-analyses where indicated and graded the certainty of evidence.
RESULTS: We screened 1831 citations and 109 full text RCTs, yeilding 37 RCTs. The certainty of evidence was low or very low across all included outcomes. There was little or no difference between NT and comparisons across most outcomes; there may be some benefits for certain outcomes. Compared with sham, NT improved health-related quality of life (HRQoL) (physical) (2 RCTs; SMD = 0.20, 95%CI 0.07; 0.32) at 6 months. Compared with no intervention, NT reduced pain at 2 weeks (21 RCTs; MD = - 1.21, 95%CI - 1.50; - 0.92) and 3 months (9 RCTs; MD = - 1.56, 95%CI - 2.80; - 0.95); and reduced functional limitations at 2 weeks (19 RCTs; SMD = - 1.39, 95%CI - 2.00; - 0.77) and 3 months (8 RCTs; SMD = - 0.57, 95%CI - 0.92; - 0.22). In older adults, NT reduced functional limitations at 2 weeks (SMD = - 1.10, 95%CI - 1.71; - 0.48) and 3 months (SMD = - 1.04, 95%CI - 1.66; - 0.43). Compared with usual care, NT reduced pain (MD = - 1.35, 95%CI - 1.86; - 0.84) and functional limitations (MD = - 2.55, 95%CI - 3.70; - 1.40) at 3 months.
CONCLUSIONS: Based on low to very low certainty evidence, adults with CPLBP experienced some benefits in pain, functioning, or HRQoL with NT; however, evidence showed little to no differences for other outcomes.