Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32819949›Full record

Trial reportBMJ open2020

Comparing two dry needling interventions for plantar heel pain: a randomised controlled trial.

Zaid Al-Boloushi, Eva Maria Gómez-Trullén, Mohammad Arian, Daniel Fernández, Pablo Herrero, Pablo Bellosta-López

2 registry-linked trialsOpen access · goldAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMJ open, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 11 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 21% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT03236779 nacompletednot on this map

A Comparative Study of Two Dry Needling Interventions for Plantar Heel Pain: A Randomized Clinical Trial

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversidad de ZaragozaRan2018 to 2019Enrolled102ConditionsPlantar Fascitis, Myofacial Pain Syndromes, Trigger Point Pain, MyofascialArmsdry needling
NCT07246369 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2024, after this paper: background citation

The Role of Therapeutic Ultrasound in Comparison With Electrical Dry Needling in Chronic Low Back Patients Post Cesarean Section

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity of LahoreRan2024 to 2025Enrolled36ConditionsChronic Low Back Pain (CLBP), Post Cesarean Section PatientArmsElectrical Dry Needling, Ultrasound
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

11 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 19 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Cost-Effectiveness of Two Dry Needling Interventions for Plantar Heel Pain: A Secondary Analysis of an RCT.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021
    Trial
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Zaid Al-BoloushiFisiatría y Enfermería, Universidad de Zaragoza, Zaragoza, Spain.
Eva Maria Gómez-TrullénFisiatría y Enfermería, Universidad de Zaragoza, Zaragoza, Spain.
Mohammad ArianPhysical Therapy, Kuwait Ministry of Health, Safat, Kuwait.
Daniel FernándeziPhysio Research Group, Universidad San Jorge, Facultad de Ciencias de la Salud, Villanueva de Gallego, Spain.
Pablo HerreroiPhysio Research Group, Universidad San Jorge, Facultad de Ciencias de la Salud, Villanueva de Gallego, Spain pherrero@usj.es.ORCID 0000-0002-9201-0120
Pablo Bellosta-LópeziPhysio Research Group, Universidad San Jorge, Facultad de Ciencias de la Salud, Villanueva de Gallego, Spain.ORCID 0000-0003-4750-9077
Universidad San Jorge · ESUniversidad de Zaragoza · ESMinistry of Health · KW

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo compare the effectiveness of dry needling (DN) versus percutaneous needle electrolysis (PNE) for improving the level of pain, function and quality of life (QoL) of patients suffering from plantar heel pain (PHP) provoked by myofascial trigger points.

designA prospective, parallel-group, randomised controlled trial with blinded outcome assessment.

settingA single treatment facility in the State of Kuwait.

participants118 participants were screened for eligibility. Of these, 102 participants were enrolled (30 men (49.5±8.9 years) and 72 women (48.1±8.8 years)) and 68 of them completed the trial.

interventionsTwo parallel groups, one study arm received DN and a stretching protocol whereas the other arm received percutaneous needling electrolysis with a stretching protocol. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome measure was the Foot Pain domain of the Foot Health Status Questionnaire, with 13 questions related to foot health-related domains. Secondary outcome measures included the 0-10 numerical rating scale pain visual analogue scale (VAS) scores, performed before and after each treatment session. In addition, QoL was measured using the EuroQoL-5 dimensions. All measurements were taken at baseline, at 4, 8, 12, 26 and 52 weeks.

resultsFoot Pain domain improved at all time points for DN group (p<0.001; 29.7 (17.8 to 41.5)) and percutaneous needling electrolysis group (p<0.001; 32.7 (18.3 to 47.0)), without significant differences between groups. Pain VAS scores decreased at all time points for both DN (p<0.001; -2.6 (-4.0 to -1.2)) and percutaneous needling electrolysis group (p<0.001; -3.0 (-4.5 to -1.6)). QoL improved at 4 weeks for both DN (p<0.01; 0.15 (0.5 to 0.25)) and percutaneous needling electrolysis group (p<0.01; 0.09 (0.01 to 0.17)) and at 8 and 52 weeks for the PNE group (p<0.01; 0.10 (0.02 to 0.18)), with significant differences between groups for the QoL at 52 weeks (p<0.05; 0.10 (0.01 to 0.18)). There were two small haematomas in the PNE group and one in the DN group. No serious adverse events were reported.

conclusionsBoth PNE and DN were effective for PHP management, reducing mean and maximum pain since the first treatment session, with long lasting effects (52 weeks) and significant differences between groups in the case of QoL at 52 weeks in favour of the PNE group. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03236779.

Indexed as

Dry NeedlingQuality of LifeFemaleHeelHumansKuwaitMalePainProspective Studiespain managementrehabilitation medicinesports medicine

Identifiers

PMID32819949
PMCPMC7440826
OpenAlexW3057361059

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.