Effectiveness of percutaneous microelectrolysis and ultrasound in the decrease of pain in myofascial trigger points: evaluation through algometry and visual analog scale

Ortiz, Hernán Andrés de la Barra; Cancino, Jaime Opazo; Peña, Fernanda Sánchez; León, Fernanda Soto; Donoso, Edward Miño; Gaete, Valeria Trecanao

doi:10.5114/pq.2020.95768

Cited by 3 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…MEP induces a controlled local inflammatory process that stimulates tissue repair and is accompanied by an analgesic effect. Research concerning MEP demonstrates positive effects, inter alia, decreasing pain in myofascial trigger points [12].…”

Section: Is There Any Difference Between Electrotherapy and Electrical Stimulation?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Electrical stimulation: then and now. Applications and limitations

Demidaś¹

2021

Physiother Quart.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Electrical stimulation is a branch of physical therapy that applies low and medium frequency currents to stimulate the human body. The effects of electrical impulses on human beings have been observed since antiquity. The development of research in that scope commenced in the 18th century, the most important turning point, and is now continuing. The purpose of this narrative study is to present electrical stimulation in terms of its progressing development and to draw attention to its significant role in the therapeutic processes utilized in numerous medical specializations and comprehensive strength and endurance training of healthy people. The notions 'electrical stimulation' and 'electrotherapy,' as well as differences between electric current applications are explained. The most critical moments in the history of electrical stimulation development are highlighted. Recent research is presented, exhibiting the important role of electrical stimulation both in the therapeutic process and in strength and endurance training. This paper contains the most significant aspects of contemporary application of electrical stimulation, as well as recommendations and limitations for current usage in such areas as whole-body electrostimulation, urinary incontinence, pelvic floor muscle rehabilitation, rehabilitation after anterior cruciate ligament surgery, endurance training, and improvement of physical strength and appearance.

show abstract

Section: Is There Any Difference Between Electrotherapy and Electrical Stimulation?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Electrical stimulation: then and now. Applications and limitations

Demidaś¹

2021

Physiother Quart.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Efficacy of different intensities of percutaneous electrolysis for musculoskeletal pain: A systematic review and meta-analysis

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectiveA meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) was conducted to determine the effect of ultrasound-guided percutaneous electrolysis (PE) alone or as an adjunct to other interventions on pain intensity generated by musculoskeletal disorders, depending on the intensity of the technique.Data sourcesPUBMED, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, SCOPUS, Health Medical Collection, and CINALH from inception to September 2022 were searched to identify documents.Study selectionPublications investigating the effect of ultrasound-guided PE in musculoskeletal pain.Data extractionData were extracted into predesigned data extraction and tables. Risk of bias was evaluated with the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool (Rob 2.0). Thirteen articles met inclusion criteria.Data analysisRandom-effects meta-analysis models were used to quantify the difference in pain between the PE and control groups.Data synthesisA significant reduction in pain was found in favor of low- (−1.89; 95% CI: −2.69; −1.10; p < 0.001) and high-intensity PE (−0.74; 95% CI: −1.36; −0.11; p: 0.02) compared to control group. Low-intensity PE showed significant reduction in pain in the short (−1.73; 95% CI: −3.13; −0.34; p < 0.02) and long term (−2.10; 95% CI: −2.93; −1.28; p = 0.005), with large effect sizes compared to control group. High-intensity PE only showed significant lower pain than control group in the long term (−0.92; 95% CI: −1.78; −0.07; p < 0.03), with a small effect size, but not in the short term.ConclusionWe found small evidence suggesting that low-intensity PE could be more effective for musculoskeletal pain reduction than high-intensity PE. Nevertheless, scientific evidence on this subject is still scarce and studies comparing the two modalities are warranted.Systematic review registrationwww.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero, identifier CRD42022366935.

show abstract

Comparison of the effectiveness of electrolysis and microelectrolysis in the treatment of musculoskeletal pain: a systematic review

Ortiz¹,

Castillo²,

Zarraonandia³

et al. 2023

Physiother Quart.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction. Musculoskeletal pain (MSP) is a frequent reason for consultation; its high prevalence is a concern. Recently, different electrolysis modalities have appeared to reduce MSP, although studies supporting their use and comparing them are limited. This study compared the effectiveness of electrolysis modalities in MSP treatment. Methods. The PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, CiNAHL, and Sciencedirect electronic databases were searched for randomized clinical trials (RCTs) (last update: September 4, 2020). Three independent researchers reviewed titles and abstracts to determine article eligibility. Risk of bias and quality were assessed with the Cochrane risk of bias tool and the PEdro scale. Pain reduction was the main outcome and changes in range of motion or disability/functionality constituted secondary results. Results. overall, 15 RCTs were obtained after eliminating duplicates and applying the selection criteria. Musculoskeletal conditions treated with electrolysis or microelectrolysis included myofascial pain (n = 3), patellar tendinopathy (n = 2), plantar fasciitis (n = 2), pubalgia (n = 1), subacromial impingement (n = 3), epicondylitis (n = 1), calcaneal tendinopathy (n = 2), and whiplash syndrome (n = 1). The studies had a low risk of bias and an average PEdro score of 9. They revealed pain reduction for electrolysis and microelectrolysis at the end of treatment and follow-up evaluations (p < 0.005), and functionality improvement for all experimental groups (p < 0.005). Conclusions. Electrolysis and microelectrolysis treatments reduce pain and improve functionality in MSP conditions. Although both techniques are effective, comparative studies are suggested to determine therapeutic differences and user preferences.

show abstract

Effectiveness of percutaneous microelectrolysis and ultrasound in the decrease of pain in myofascial trigger points: evaluation through algometry and visual analog scale

Cited by 3 publications

References 21 publications

Electrical stimulation: then and now. Applications and limitations

Electrical stimulation: then and now. Applications and limitations

Efficacy of different intensities of percutaneous electrolysis for musculoskeletal pain: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Comparison of the effectiveness of electrolysis and microelectrolysis in the treatment of musculoskeletal pain: a systematic review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About