Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38813497›Full record

Trial reportTurkish journal of medical sciences2023

Comparison of the effectiveness of instrument-assisted soft tissue mobilization and extracorporeal shock wave therapy in myofascial pain syndrome.

Şeyda Candeniz, Seyit Çitaker, Gökhan Maraş, Hatice Esra Yavuzer, Hasan Yildirim, Zafer Günendi

Abstract readRandomized Controlled TrialComparative Study
In one paragraph

Trial report in Turkish journal of medical sciences, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
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.

Şeyda CandenizDepartment of Therapy and Rehabilitation, Kızılcahamam Vocational School of Health Services Ankara University, Ankara, Turkiye.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1318-6580
Seyit ÇitakerDepartment of Physiotherapy and Rehabilitation, Faculty of Health Sciences, Gazi University, Ankara, Turkiye.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4215-6797
Gökhan MaraşDepartment of Physiotherapy and Rehabilitation, Faculty of Health Sciences, Gazi University, Ankara, Turkiye.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3450-2490
Hatice Esra YavuzerDepartment of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Kızılcahamam Public Hospital, Ankara, Turkiye.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0002-0183-4843
Hasan YildirimFaculty of Kamil Özdağ Science, Department of Mathematics, Karamanoğlu Mehmetbey University, Karaman, Turkiye.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4582-9018
Zafer GünendiDepartment of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Faculty of Medicine, Gazi University, Ankara, Turkiye.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0696-5834

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background/aim: 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). Materials and methods: 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. Results: 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). Conclusions: 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.

Indexed as

Extracorporeal Shockwave TherapyMyofascial Pain SyndromesRange of Motion, ArticularAdolescentAdultFemaleHumansMiddle AgedPain MeasurementQuality of LifeTherapy, Soft TissueTreatment OutcomeYoung Adultextracorporeal shock wave therapyinstrument-assisted soft tissue mobilizationMyofascial pain syndromepainpressure pain thresholdrange of motion

Identifiers

PMID38813497
PMCPMC10760573

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.