ArticleTurkish journal of physical medicine and rehabilitation2024
Effectiveness of static, dynamic and combined dry needling techniques in the management of myofascial pain syndrome: A three-group study.
Article in Turkish journal of physical medicine and rehabilitation, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- The utilization of dry needling - a survey of contemporary clinical practice within the USA.The Journal of manual & manipulative therapy · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: This study aims to evaluate and compare the therapeutic effectiveness of static dry needling (S-DN), dynamic dry needling (D-DN), and a combined technique (CT) for managing myofascial pain syndrome (MPS). Patients and methods: Between January 1, 2023 and April 15, 2023, a total of 38 patients (9 males, 29 females; mean age: 40.5±12.7 years; range, 22 to 63 years) with MPS who experienced neck pain for less than six months and had at least one painful myofascial trigger point in the trapezius, rhomboids, or levator scapula muscle were included in the study. The patients were divided into three groups: D-DN, S-DN, and CT. Measurements included the Visual Analog Scale (VAS), range of motion (ROM), Neck Disability Index (NDI), and the European Quality of Life 5 Dimensions 3 Level Version (EQ5D3L). All measurements were made at baseline (T0), after the first treatment session (T1), after the final session (T2), and one-month post-treatment (T3). Results: The group treated with S-DN showed less significant improvement in ROM scores compared to other treatment methods. Both the D-DN and S-DN groups showed decreased VAS scores at rest and during motion across all time points, compared to the CT group. The NDI scores decreased in all groups, while the EQ5D3L scores exhibited no variations between groups or across any time point irrespective of the treatment method employed. Conclusion: Our study results suggest that all three methods are effective in treating MPS, with D-DN potentially being the preferred method over S-DN and CT due to its time efficiency.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.