Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39574485›Full record

ReviewPain reports2024

Dry needling for orofacial pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials.

Adrian Kuzdzal, Edzard Ernst, Pawel Posadzki, Zbigniew Wronski

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Pain reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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.

Adrian KuzdzalCollege of Medical Sciences, Institute of Health Sciences, University of Rzeszów, Rzeszów, Poland.
Edzard ErnstComplementary Medicine, Peninsula Medical School, University of Exeter, Devon, Exeter, United Kingdom.
Pawel PosadzkiFaculty of Rehabilitation, University of Physical Education, Cracow, Poland.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5153-3654
Zbigniew WronskiDepartment of Physiotherapy Fundamentals, Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, Medical University of Warsaw, Warsaw, Poland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Orofacial pain (OFP) is an ache in the front part of the head and typically has musculoskeletal, dental, neural, or sinogenic origin. Dry needling (DN) is the insertion of a solid sterile fine needle through the skin aimed at deactivating the myofascial trigger points has extensively been studied in randomized clinical trials (RCTs). This systematic review was aimed at evaluating the evidence base for the effectiveness of DN for OFP. We searched Medline, Cochrane Central, and Web of Science (from their respective inceptions to February 2024) for RCTs evaluating the effectiveness of DN in patients with OFP. Studies with individuals suffering from cervicogenic or tension type headaches as well as observational studies were excluded. Primary outcomes were pain intensity and severity; secondary outcomes were disability, quality of life, and adverse effects. The review adhered to the methods described by in the Cochrane Handbook. Twenty-four RCTs with a total of 1,318 patients suffering from OFP were included. Most had an unclear or high risk of bias, and the quality of the evidence ranged from very low to low for all comparisons and outcomes. A meta-analysis suggested that, compared with usual care alone, DN + usual care had no effect on pain intensity (visual analogue scale) (standardized mean difference = -1.89, 95% confidence intervals -5.81 to 2.02, very low certainty evidence) at follow-ups of up to 6 weeks. There is little reliable evidence for the effectiveness of DN in reducing OFP. Future, larger, more rigorous studies might reduce the existing uncertainties.

Indexed as

Dry needlingEffectivenessMeta-analysisOrofacial painSafetySystematic reviewTemporomandibular disorders

Identifiers

PMID39574485
PMCPMC11581761

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.