Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34857021›Full record

SynthesisChiropractic & manual therapies2021

Corticosteroid injection or dry needling for musculoskeletal pain and disability? A systematic review and GRADE evidence synthesis.

Luis Fernando Sousa Filho, Marta Maria Barbosa Santos, Gabriel Henrique Freire Dos Santos, Walderi Monteiro da Silva Júnior

Open access · goldAbstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Chiropractic & manual therapies, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 20% 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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 18 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Observational
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Ultrasound-Guided Fascial Hydrodissection with Eperisone: A Retrospective Study on Efficacy and Safety in Lumbodorsal Fasciitis Treatment.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2024
    Article
  9. Review
  10. 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

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Luis Fernando Sousa FilhoGraduate Program in Physical Education, Federal University of Sergipe, Av Marechal Rondon, s/n, Rosa Elze, São Cristovão, Sergipe, 49100-000, Brazil. fernandosouf@hotmail.com.ORCID 0000-0001-7308-0548
Marta Maria Barbosa SantosDepartment of Physical Therapy, Federal University of Sergipe, Av Marechal Rondon, s/n, Rosa Elze, São Cristovão, Sergipe, 49100-000, Brazil.
Gabriel Henrique Freire Dos SantosDepartment of Physical Therapy, Federal University of Sergipe, Av Marechal Rondon, s/n, Rosa Elze, São Cristovão, Sergipe, 49100-000, Brazil.
Walderi Monteiro da Silva JúniorGraduate Program in Physical Education, Federal University of Sergipe, Av Marechal Rondon, s/n, Rosa Elze, São Cristovão, Sergipe, 49100-000, Brazil.
Universidade Federal de Sergipe · BR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCorticosteroid injection and dry needling have been used in the treatment of musculoskeletal conditions, but it is unclear which intervention is the most effective. The purpose of this study was to compare the effects of corticosteroid injection and dry needling for musculoskeletal conditions at short-, medium-, and long-term follow-up.

methodsElectronic databases were searched up to 31 October 2021. Two researchers independently screened titles, abstracts and full-text articles. Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) that investigated the effectiveness of dry needling compared to corticosteroid injection in patients over 18 years with a musculoskeletal condition were included in the review. The studies had to report pain and/or disability as outcome. Risk of bias was assessed by using the revised Cochrane Collaboration tool (RoB 2.0). Quality of evidence was evaluated by using the GRADE approach.

resultsSix studies were included (n = 384 participants). Four musculoskeletal conditions were investigated. There is very low-quality evidence that CSI is superior to DN for reducing heel pain (plantar fasciitis) and lateral elbow pain at short- and medium-term follow-up, but not for myofascial pain and greater trochanteric pain. There is very low-quality evidence that DN is more effective than CSI at long-term follow-up for reducing pain in people with plantar fasciitis and lateral epicondylitis. Very low-certainty evidence shows that there is no difference between DN and CSI for disability at short-term follow-up. One study showed that CSI is superior to DN at medium-term follow-up and another observed that DN is superior to CSI for reducing disability at long-term.

conclusionsThere are no differences between DN and CSI in pain or disability for myofascial pain and greater trochanteric pain syndrome. Very-low certainty evidence suggests that CSI is superior to DN at shorter follow-up periods, whereas DN seems to be more effective than CSI at longer follow-up durations for improving pain in plantar fasciitis and lateral epicondylitis. Large RCTs with higher methodological quality are needed in order to draw more incisive conclusions. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42020148650.

Indexed as

Dry NeedlingMusculoskeletal PainPersons with DisabilitiesAdrenal Cortex HormonesHumansPain MeasurementAdrenal Cortex HormonesAcupunctureDisabilityManual therapyPainSteroids

Identifiers

PMID34857021
PMCPMC8638538
OpenAlexW3216028761

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.