Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online 2018-1
Effectiveness of myofascial trigger point therapy in chronic back pain patients is considerably increased when combined with a new,integrated,low-frequency shock wave vibrotherapy (Cellconnect Impulse): A two-armed,measurement repeated,randomized,controlled pragmatic trial
The prevalence of chronic back pain poses major challenges for all health care systems and patients worldwide. Myofascial trigger therapy (MT), although a very popular standard non-pharmaceutical form of treatment, only shows small to medium effectiveness.
OBJECTIVE:
To test a new vibrotreatment (Cellconnect Impulse) transmitting low-frequency, vertical shock waves in a routine clinical practice.
METHODS:
Eligible patients were adults seeking physiotherapeutic treatment. They were randomly allocated to either six treatments of MT or to six treatments of combined MT and vibrotreatment. Outcome parameters were pain intensity, pain days, pain duration, and quality of life.
RESULTS:
The pain relieving effects of the combined treatment were very large ( 1.6). It clearly outperformed MT and considerably improved patients’ health related quality of life.
CONCLUSIONS:
Combining MT with Cellconnect Impulse enhances the physiotherapeutic effectiveness of treating chronic back pain.
van HeckeOAustinSKKhanRA, et al. Neuropathic pain in the general population: A systematic review of epidemiological studies. Pain2014; 155: 654-62.
2.
MansfieldKESimJJordanJLJordanKP. A systematic review and meta-analysis of the prevalence of chronic widespread pain in the general population. Pain2016; 157: 55-64.
3.
MeucciRDFassaAGFariaNM. Prevalence of chronic low back pain: Systematic review. Rev Saude Publica2015; 49: 1. doi: 10.1590/S0034-8910.2015049005874
4.
SchmidtCORaspeHPfingstenM, et al. Back pain in the German adult population. Prevalence, severity, and sociodemographic correlates in a multiregional survey. Spine2007; 32: 2005-2011.
5.
KellerAHaydenJBombardierCvan TulderM. Effect sizes of non-surgical treatments of non-specific low-back pain. European Spine J2007; 16: 1776-1788.
6.
ChiarottoAClijsenRFernandez-de-Las PenasCBarberoM. Prevalence of myofascial trigger points in spinal disorders: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Arch Phys Med Rehabil2016; 97: 316-37.
7.
MyburghCLarsenAHHartvigsenJ. A systematic, critical review of manual palpation for identifying myofascial trigger points: Evidence and clinical significance. Arch Phys Med Rehabil2008; 89: 1169-1176.
8.
ToughEAWhiteARRichardsSCampbellJ. Variability of criteria used to diagnose myofascial trigger point pain syndrome – evidence from a review of the literature. Clin J Pain2007; 23: 278-286.
9.
BronCde GastADommerholtJ, et al. Treatment of myofascial trigger points in patients with chronic shoulder pain: A randomized, controlled trial. BMC Medicine2011; 9: 8. DOI: 10.1186/1741-7015-9-8
10.
ChenQBensamounSBasfordJRThompsonJMAnKN. Identification and quantification of myofascial taut bands with magnetic resonance elastography. Arch Phys Med Rehabil2007; 88: 1658-1858.
11.
ShahJPDanoffJVDesaiMJ, et al. Biochemicals associated with pain and inflammation are elevated in sites near to and remote from active myofascial trigger points. Arch Phys Med Rehabil2008; 89: 16-23.
12.
NiddamDMChanRCLeeSH, et al. Central representation of hyperalgesia from myofascial trigger point. Neuroimage2008; 39: 1299-1306.
13.
ShahJPGilliamsEA. Uncovering the biochemical milieu of myofascial trigger points using in vivo microdialysis: An application of muscle pain concepts to myofascial pain syndrome. J Bodyw Mov Ther2008; 12: 371-384.
14.
LeeSLeeDParkJ. Effects of extracorporeal shockwave therapy on patients with chronic low back pain and their dynamic balance ability. J Phys Ther Sci2014; 26: 7-10.
15.
SecoJKovacsFMUrrutiaG. The efficacy, safety, effectiveness, and cost-effectiveness of ultrasound and shock wave therapies for low back pain: A systematic review. Spine J2011; 11: 966-977.
16.
ZwarensteinM. CONSORT for pragmatic trials. In: MoherDAltmanDGSchulzKFSimeraIWagerE, (eds). Guidelines for Reporting Health Research. A User’s Manual. Chichester: John Wiley and Sons, UK, 2014; 113-121.
17.
SchneiderR. Getting in sync: A new ready-to-use biofield resonance device (Vita Chip) reduces chronic pain and increases wellbeing. NBE2015; 3: 85-93.
18.
SchneiderR (in press). From pain to pleasure: A newly developed essential oil inhaler (AromaStick)® alters pain dynamics and increases well-being. Results from two randomized, controlled documentation studies. Current Psychopharmacology.
19.
JensenMPKarolyPO’RiordanEFBlandFBurnsRS. The subjective experience of acute pain. An assessment of the utility of 10 indices. Clin J Pain1989; 5: 153-159.
20.
WilliamsonAHoggartB. Pain: A review of three commonly used pain rating scales. J Clin Nurs2005; 14: 798-804.
21.
SiegristJBroerMJungeA. Profil der Lebensqualität chronisch Kranker. Göttingen: Belz, 1996.
22.
HunterJESchmidtF. Methods of meta-analysis: Correcting error and bias in research findings. London: Sage2004.
23.
CohenJ. Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Hillsdale, NJ: Laurence Erlbaum Associates2008.
24.
BorensteinMHedgesLVHigginsJPTRothsteinHR. Introduction to meta-analysis. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons2009.
25.
BranchM. Malignant side effects of null-hypothesis significance testing. Theory & Psychol2014; 24: 256-277.
26.
LambdinC. Significance tests as sorcery: Science is empirical – significance tests are not. Theory & Psychol2012; 22: 67-90.
27.
IoannidisJPA. Why most published research findings are false. PLoS Medicine2005; 2: 0696-0701.
28.
LykkenDT. Statistical significance in psychological research. Psychol Bull1968; 70: 151-159.
29.
BakanD. The test of significance in psychological research. Psychol Bull1966; 66: 423-437.
30.
ArmstrongJS. Statistical significance tests are unnecessary even when properly done and properly interpreted: Reply to commentaries. Int J Forecast2007; 23: 335-336.
31.
HubbardR. Alphabet soup: Blurring the distinctions between p’s and α’s in psychological research. Theor & Psychol2004; 14: 295-327.
32.
ThompsonB. Statistical significance tests, effect size reporting and the vain pursuit of pseudo-objectivity. Theor & Psychol1999; 9: 191-196.
HubbardRArmstrongJS. Why we don’t really know what statistical significance means: Implications for educators. JME2006; 28: 114-120.
35.
WilkinsonL. Statistical methods in psychology journals: Guidelines and explanations. Am Psychol1999; 54: 594-604.
36.
HallerSKraussS. Misinterpretations of significance: A problem students share with their teachers? MPR2002; 7: 1-20.
37.
MorrisSB. Estimating effect sizes from pretest-posttest-control groups designs. Organ Res Meth2008; 11: 364-386.
38.
CummingG. Understanding the new statistics: Effect sizes, confidence intervals, and meta-analysis (Multivariate Applications Series). New York: Routledge2012.
39.
BalikiMNGehaPYFieldsH, et al. Predicting value of pain and analgesia: Nucleus accumbens response to noxious stimuli changes in the presence of chronic pain. Neuron2010; 66: 149-160.
40.
SimonsLEElmanIBorsookD. Psychological processing in chronic pain: A neural systems approach. Neurosci Biobehav Rev2014; 39: 61-78.
41.
BendelowGAWilliamsSJ. Transcending the dualisms: Towards a sociology of pain. Soc Health & Illness2008; 17: 139-165.
42.
BushnellMCCekoMLowLA. Cognitive and emotional control of pain and its disruption in chronic pain. Nature Rev Neurosci2013; 14: 502-511.
43.
CampbellCMEdwardsRR. Mind-body interactions in pain: The neurophysiology of anxious and catastrophic pain-related thoughts. Transl Res2009; 153: 97-101.
44.
SchneiderRKuhlJ. Placebo forte: Ways to maximize unspecific treatment effects. Med Hypotheses2012; 78: 744-751.
