Pressure Pain Thresholds In Patients Research Articles

Therapeutic Neuroscience Education In Fibromyalgia: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Abstract To investigate additive effect of Therapeutic Neuroscience Education (TNE) to pilates exercises in female patients with fibromyalgia (FM).25 female patients FM included in the study. They randomly separated into two groups. There were 11 patients in the intervention group and 14 patients in the control group. Pilates exercises and TNE were applied in the intervention group, and only pilates exercises were applied in the control group. Dynamic Loewenstein Occupational Therapy Cognitive Assessment (DLOTCA), Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), Brief Pain Inventory (BPI), Widespread Pain Index (WPI), Fibromyalgia Impact Questionnare (FIQ), Symptom Severity Scale (SSS), Pain Catastrophizing Scale (PCS), Tampa Scale for Kinesiophobia (TSK), Biopsychosocial Questionnaire (BETY-BQ) and pressure algometer was used for evaluation.After the treatment, control group improved in the “visuomotor construction” and “thinking operations"cognitive areas andtotal score of DLOTCA, BPI-pain severity score, VAS, FIQ, SSS, PCS-magnification, and only left medial knee mean score of pressure pain thresholds (p<0.05). Intervention group improved in the “thinking operations” cognitive area and total score of DLOTCA, BPI-pain severity score, BPI-pain interference score, VAS, WPI, FIQ, SSS, TSK, BETY-BQ and all pressure pain thresholds (excluding left trapezius) (p<0.05). In the comparison of delta values, the intervention group improved more in WPI, FIQ, right trapezius mean score and left trapezius, right quadriceps femoris, right-left medial knee maximum and mean scores of pressure pain thresholds (p<0.05). TNE increased the effectiveness of pilates exercises on pain, functional status and pressure pain thresholds in patients with FM.

Effects of a rehabilitation program in patients with temporomandibular disorders. A case series

Objective The purpose of this prospective case series study was to evaluate the effects of a rehabilitation program based on Splint Therapy (ST), Rhythmic Temporomandibular Joint Mobilization (RTJM), and Self-management (SM) on jaw functional limitations, pain intensity, pressure pain threshold and myoelectric activity in patients with Temporomandibular Disorders (TMDs). Methods A single group of 17 participants (14 females and 3 males; mean age 31.18 ± 9.60 years) with symptoms of TMDs according to Research Diagnosis Criteria for Temporomandibular Disorders was evaluated. Jaw functional limitation scale (JFLS), pain intensity (VAS), pressure pain threshold (PPT), and myoelectric activity (MA) were assessed at baseline, post-treatment, and follow-up after an 8-week rehabilitation program. All statistical analyses were performed using the SPSS package version 20.0. A p = <0.05 was considered statistically significant and an effect size = >0.8 was considered clinically significant. Results Statistically significant differences were found at post-treatment and follow-up for JFLS, VAS, and PPT (p = <0.05). Clinically significant improvements were observed in JFLS (d = 1.99), VAS (d = 1.28), and PPT at post-treatment (d = >0.8). No statistically significant effect was observed for MA at any time point, except for isometric MA in the right masseter between T1 and T2 (p = 0.04). Conclusion This prospective case series suggests that a rehabilitation program based on ST, RTJM, and SM could improve jaw function, pain intensity, and pressure pain threshold in patients with TMDs.

Reliability of Pressure Pain Threshold (PPT) and Conditioned Pain Modulation (CPM) in Participants with and without Chronic Shoulder Pain.

The objectives of this study were to estimate the intra-rater and inter-rater reliability of the Pressure Pain Threshold (PPT) and Conditioned Pain Modulation (CPM) in healthy participants and patients with chronic shoulder pain. Additionally, the Standard Error of Measurement (SEM) and Smallest Detectable Change (SDC) were calculated. Thirty-one healthy volunteers and twenty patients with chronic shoulder pain were assessed using the PPT and CPM by two raters, with a 24 h interval between sessions. Excellent intra-rater reliability was demonstrated for PPT, with similar SEM and SDC when assessed by the same rater. The inter-rater reliability for PPTs in patients was moderate to good (ICC = 0.59-0.89) with higher SEM (73.83-121.98 kPa) and SDC (61.58-97.59) values than the asymptomatic group (ICC = 0.92-0.96, SEM = 49.61-103.12 kPa, SDC = 42.01-56.30) respectively. CPM's intra-rater reliability was good (ICC = 0.82) in the patients and moderate (ICC = 0.67) in the asymptomatic group, while inter-rater reliability was low for the asymptomatic group (ICC = 0.37) and extremely low (ICC = 0.074) for the patients, with comparable SEM and SDC outcomes in both groups. PPT and CPM measurements are highly reliable when conducted by the same rater on the same day. Patients had lower inter-rater PPT reliability but better intra-rater CPM reliability. Clinicians need to be mindful of potential variability when interpreting these test results.

Efficacy of Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation on Pain Intensity and Functionality in Patients With Knee Osteoarthritis: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

The aim of the study is to investigate whether transcranial direct current stimulation is superior to control groups or other interventions for pain relief and improving functionality in knee osteoarthritis patients. PubMed, the Physiotherapy Evidence Database, the Cochrane Library, ProQuest, and Scopus databases were searched from inception to July 2022 to identify randomized clinical trials. The main outcomes were subjective perception of pain intensity measured either with the visual analog scale or with the numeric rating scale; and the functionality, assessed with the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index. As secondary outcomes, pressure pain threshold, conditioned pain modulation, and its safety were evaluated. We identified 10 randomized clinical trials (634 participants). The results showed an important effect favoring transcranial direct current stimulation for pain relief (mean difference = -1.1 cm, 95% confident interval = -2.1 to -0.2) and for improving functionality (standardized mean difference = -0.6, 95% confident interval = -1.02 to -0.26). There was also a significant improvement in pressure pain threshold (mean difference = 0.9 Kgf/cm 2 , 95% confident interval = 0.1 to 1.6). The certainty of evidence according to Grades of Recommendation Assessment, Development and Evaluation was generally moderate. Our findings suggest that transcranial direct current stimulation is a safe treatment for reducing pain intensity, improving functionality, and the pressure pain thresholds in patients with knee osteoarthritis.

Age and Gender, but Not Pain are Associated with Pressure Pain Thresholds in Patients with Temporomandibular Disorders: A Cross-Sectional Study.

This study aims to explore the association of pressure pain thresholds (PPTs) with age, gender, and pain in patients with temporomandibular disorders (TMD). A total of 301 TMD patients (248 female and 53 male) were recruited and classified into the high and low age groups according to their median age of 26 years. Patients' demographics, pain-related variables, TMD-related variables, and PPTs of both left and right temporomandibular joints (TMJs), masseter, and temporalis were collected. Pain duration and visual analog scale of pain (VAS) showed no significant correlations with PPTs (P>0.05). Multiple linear regression analysis revealed a significant positive association of PPTs of all six sites with males (β=0.41-0.72 kg·cm-2, 95% CI (0.19-0.38, 0.74-0.99), P<0.001), as well as with the high age group [β=0.28-0.36 kg·cm-2, 95% CI (0.07-0.20, 0.47-0.53), P<0.020]. Furthermore, PPTs of the left TMJ showed a significant negative association with left pain-related TMD (PT) [β=-0.21 kg·cm-2, 95% CI (-0.38, -0.04), P=0.026], but PPTs of the remaining sites did not show a significant association with PT (P>0.05). Stratified analysis showed that PPTs in females were associated with the high age group [β=0.25-0.37 kg·cm-2, 95% CI (0.04-0.20, 0.45-0.56), P<0.020] and that PPT of the left TMJ was associated with left PT [β=-0.21 kg·cm-2, 95% CI (-0.39, -0.03), P=0.043]. The remaining PPTs did not show a significant association with PT (P>0.05). In males, PPTs did not show significant correlations with age, PT and VAS (P>0.05). PPTs in the orofacial region are associated with gender and age in TMD patients. Pain duration and intensity show no significant correlations with PPTs in TMD patients. Researchers and dentists should take age and gender into account when using PPTs as auxiliary diagnostic indicators for PT.

No Sufficient Evidence for an Immediate Hypoalgesic Effect of Spinal Manual Therapy on Pressure Pain Thresholds in Asymptomatic and Chronic Pain Populations: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Spinal manual therapy (SMT) is often used to treat patients with spinal disorders; however, the underlying mechanisms of SMT are not fully understood. This systematic review and meta-analysis investigates the effect of SMT compared with sham treatment or no intervention on local or remote (segmental or non-segmental) pressure pain thresholds (PPTs) in patients with chronic musculoskeletal conditions and people who are pain free. A systematic search was conducted in the PubMed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and CINAHL databases. Randomized controlled trials investigating the effect of SMT on PPTs in patients with chronic musculoskeletal conditions and in people who were pain free were included. Quality assessment and evidence synthesis were performed according to Cochrane Handbook recommendations. A meta-analysis was performed using standardized mean difference and 95% CIs. Twenty-two reports were included in the present review. There were no significant results for an immediate effect of SMT on local (low certainty of evidence), remote (segmental) (low certainty of evidence), and remote (non-segmental) (low certainty of evidence) PPTs in patients with chronic pain as well as on local (moderate certainty of evidence) and remote (segmental) (low certainty of evidence) PPTs in people who were pain free. A small but significant effect (standardized mean difference = 0.26; 95% CI = 0.01 to 0.51; low certainty of evidence) was observed on remote (non-segmental) PPTs in people who were pain free, which was not considered a meaningful effect size. No immediate, consistent, or meaningful hypoalgetic effect of SMT was shown on PPTs on various body areas. Involvement of spinal or supraspinal underlying mechanisms were, therefore, not confirmed via PPTs but should still be investigated using methods designed to assess central nervous pain processing. No consistent and meaningful hypoalgesic effects of spinal manual therapy were demonstrated on PPTs in participants who were pain free and in patients with chronic musculoskeletal disorders.

Are there differences between a real C0-C1 mobilization and a sham technique in function and pressure pain threshold in patients with chronic neck pain and upper cervical restriction? A randomised controlled clinical trial.

Chronic neck pain is one of the main reasons for visiting a healthcare professional. In recent years, it has been shown that upper cervical restriction may be a factor involved in neck pain. To compare the immediate effects of a real cervical mobilization technique versus a sham cervical mobilization technique in patients with chronic neck pain and upper cervical restriction. This was a randomised, controlled, double-blind clinical trial. Twenty-eight patients with chronic neck pain were recruited and divided into two groups (14 = real cervical mobilization; 14 = sham mobilization). Both groups received a single 5-minute treatment session. Upper cervical range motion, flexion-rotation test, deep cervical activation and pressure pain threshold were measured. In the between-groups comparison, statistically significant differences were found in favour of the real cervical mobilization group in upper cervical extension (p= 0.003), more restricted side of flexion-rotation test (p< 0.001) and less restricted side of flexion-rotation test (p= 0.007) and in the pressure pain threshold of the right trapezius (p= 0.040) and right splenius (p= 0.049). No differences in deep muscle activation were obtained. The real cervical mobilization group generates improvements in upper cervical spine movement and pressure pain threshold of right trapezius and right splenius compared to the sham group in patients with chronic neck pain and upper cervical restriction.

The association between forward head posture and masticatory muscle pressure pain thresholds in patients with temporomandibular joint dissorders: a cross-sectional observational study.

Forward head posture (FHP) is common in patients with temporomandibular joint disorders (TMDs); however, whether it contributes to TMD symptoms remains unclear. The aim of this study was to investigate the association between (1) FHP and masticatory muscle pressure pain thresholds (PPTs) and (2) neck muscle and masticatory muscle PPTs. A total of 145 patients diagnosed with TMD were recruited between December 2020 and April 2021. Data regarding FHP and neck and masticatory muscle PPTs were collected. FHP was characterized by the craniocervical angle (CVA) measured between the horizontal line through C7 and the line between the tragus of the ear and C7. Patients were divided into either the FHP group (CVA ≤ 51°) or the non-FHP group. Differences in the masseter and temporalis muscle PPTs between the two groups were analyzed using the Mann-Whitney U test. The correlation between the CVA, neck, and masticatory muscle PPTs in all patients was determined by Spearman's correlation analysis. There were 70 patients in the FHP group and 75 patients in the non-FHP group. No significant difference in masseter and temporalis muscle PPTs was found between the two groups (p > 0.05). No correlation was found between FHP and masticatory muscle PPTs (p > 0.05). A significant association was found between the neck muscle and masticatory muscle PPTs (p < 0.05). The C5-C6 pillar and masticatory PPTs were either moderately (r = 0.435, masseter muscle) or strongly (r = 0.608, temporalis muscle) correlated, while the correlation between the trapezius and masticatory muscles was moderate (r = 0.378, masseter muscle and r = 0.461, temporalis muscle). FHP was not directly associated with masticatory muscle PPTs. Masticatory muscle PPTs were strongly or moderately associated with neck muscle PPTs. Therefore, the presence of neck pain, not the degree of FHP, in patients with TMD is of significance. In TMD treatment, we should pay attention to and actively relieve neck pain.

Effectiveness of Photobiomodulation Therapy in the Treatment of Myofascial Pain Syndrome of the Upper Trapezius Muscle: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Objective: This systematic review aimed to investigate the efficacy of photobiomodulation therapy (PBMT) on pain and pressure pain threshold (PPT) in patients with myofascial pain syndrome (MPS) of the upper trapezius muscle. Materials and methods: A total of 17 studies (944 patients) were included; data regarding participants, intervention parameters, outcome measures, time of measurement, and follow-up were extracted. Evaluation of the methodological quality was performed by Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro) scale. Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) system was used to assess the quality of evidence. A meta-analysis was performed on 16 studies, and standardized mean difference (SMD), corresponding 95% confidence interval (CI), and overall effect size (ES) were calculated. Results: Meta-analysis using a random-effect model was performed to evaluate the effects of PBMT alone or PBMT plus exercise (EX) compared with placebo, medical treatment, physical therapy (PT) modality, manual therapy, or complementary PT. Assessment according to the PEDro scale revealed 12 high-quality, 3 fair-quality, and 2 low-quality studies. According to the GRADE system, studies exhibited low to medium quality of evidence, with medium ES [SMD -0.54 (95% CI -1.05 to -0.02)] for studies using PBMT alone and large ES [SMD -0.80 (95% CI -1.35 to -0.26)] for PBMT+EX. Conclusions: The present systemic review revealed that PBMT is an effective PT modality for reducing pain and increasing PPT in patients with MPS of the upper trapezius. PBMT, when combined with EX, had more significant effects in reducing pain and increasing PPT compared with controls. The low-quality studies with low to moderate quality of evidence limit the confidence in the effect estimate and recommend further high-quality studies for standardization of treatment protocols and irradiation parameters. PROSPERO registration number: CRD42021241155.

Effect of Integrated neuromuscular inhibition technique versus instrument assisted soft tissue mobilization on chronic mechanical neck pain

Background: Mechanical Neck Pain is considered one of the commonly known musculoskeletal conditions with active trigger points. It incorporates a great effect on economic productivity and becomes a major health problem. Purpose: to compare the effect of integrated neuromuscular inhibition technique versus instrument assisted soft tissue mobilization in patients with chronic mechanical neck pain. Methods: 60 participants were randomly enrolled into three equal groups. Group A received a conventional physical therapy program, Group B received a conventional physical therapy program plus integrated neuromuscular inhibition technique, and Group C received a conventional physical therapy program plus instrument assisted soft tissue mobilization. The measurements were conducted using the Visual Analogue Scale, Cervical Range of Motion, Neck Disability Index and Pressure Algometer. Results: MANOVA test demonstrated a significant pain reduction in the three groups. Cervical ROM revealed that there was more improvement in group C. Neck disability index, there were no significant differences in improvement of three groups. Pain pressure threshold, there was more improvement in group C. Conclusion: Integrated Neuromuscular Inhibition Technique showed superiority than Instrument Assisted Soft Tissue Mobilization in improvements of pain intensity level, cervical ROM, neck disability level and pressure pain threshold in patients with chronic mechanical neck pain.

Effects of active scapular correction on cervical range of motion, pain, and pressure pain threshold in patients with chronic neck pain and depressed scapula: a randomized controlled trial

ABSTRACT Background Correction of scapular alignment is advocated as a component for alleviating symptoms for patients with neck pain. Objective The study aimed to examine the effect of active scapular correction on cervical range of motion (ROM), pain, and pressure pain threshold (PPT) in patients with chronic neck pain with depressed scapula. Methods A randomized control trial research design was conducted. Twenty-eight participants with chronic neck pain and depressed scapula were randomly assigned to either the intervention (n = 14) or control (n = 14) group. Active cervical rotation ROM, pain at maximum cervical rotation, and PPT over the upper trapezius muscle region were measured at baseline and post active scapular correction. Results The participants in the intervention group showed significantly greater active cervical rotation ROM and less pain at maximum cervical rotation than the control group, both on the ipsilateral (p < 0.01) and contralateral (p < 0.05) sides of the depressed scapula. No significant difference in PPT between the groups was demonstrated (p = 0.194). Conclusion Active scapular correction intervention resulted in an immediate increase in active cervical rotation ROM and a decrease in neck pain at maximum cervical rotation.

Validity and reliability of the Egyptian algometer in patients with bruxism

IntroductionPressure pain threshold has been quantified by using a gold standard algometer in patients with bruxism. However, the expense associated with quantifying pressure pain threshold to detect trigger points with a gold standard algometer precludes its use in the clinic. This study aimed to measure the reliability and validity of the more accessible Egyptian algometer for pressure pain threshold evaluation in patients with bruxism.MethodsA descriptive repeated-measures study was performed among 100 participants with bruxism. Pressure pain threshold values were collected from the left temporalis, right temporalis, left masseter, and right masseter muscles with the participants sitting. Pressure pain thresholds were assessed over 2 sessions separated by a 1-week interval.ResultsIntraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) determined the intra-rater reliability and Pearson correlation analysis determined the validity of the Egyptian algometer. ICC equalled 0.878, 0.785, 0.896, and 0.903 for the right masseter, left masseter, right temporalis, and left temporalis muscles, respectively. The standard error of measurement ranged from 0.24 to 0.5, the minimal detectable difference ranged from 0.66 to 1.41, ICC ranged from 0.785 to 0.903. Pearson correlation values were 0.673, 0.670, 0.408, and 0.705 for the right masseter, left masseter, right temporalis, and left temporalis muscles, respectively.ConclusionsHigh ICCs indicated a strong agreement between the measurement systems, suggesting that the Egyptian algometer is a reliable and valid device for quantification of pressure pain threshold in patients with bruxism.

Efficacy of OM Chanting and Ardh-Matsyendrasana on Neck Pain Disability and Pressure Pain Threshold in Patients with Mechanical Neck Pain: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Background: This study aimed to assess efficacy of Ardh-Matsyendrasana and OM chanting on neck pain disability and pressure pain threshold (PPT) in mechanical neck pain, compared with conventional ...

Effectiveness of manual therapy in patients with thumb carpometacarpal osteoarthritis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

ABSTRACT Background: The effectiveness of Manual Therapy (MT) in thumb carpometacarpal osteoarthritis (OA) is unclear.Objective: This study aimed to determine the effectiveness of MT for functional outcomes in patients with thumb carpometacarpal OA. Design: Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials. Methods: An electronic search was performed in the Medline, Central, Embase, PEDro, Lilacs, Cinahl, SPORTDiscus, and Web of Science databases. The eligibility criteria for selecting studies included randomized clinical trials that compared MT versus other interventions in functional outcomes, such as thumb and/or hand function questionnaires, pinch and/or grip strength, thumb and/or hand range of motion, and pain intensity or pressure pain threshold in patients with thumb carpometacarpal OA. Results: Five clinical trials met the eligibility criteria; for the quantitative synthesis, four studies were included. The mean difference (MD) for grip strength was 0.87kg (95% CI = 0.29–1.44, p = .003), for pinch strength was 0.10kg (95% CI = –0.01–0.20, p = .06), and for the pressure pain threshold was 0.64kg/cm2 (95% CI = 0.07–1.20, p = .03). All differences were in favor of the MT group. Conclusions: In the short-term, there was moderate to high evidence, with statistically significant differences in the functional outcomes, in favor of MT versus sham interventions in patients with thumb carpometacarpal OA. However, these differences are not clinically important.

Effect of Transversus abdominis muscle training on pressure-pain threshold in patients with chronic low Back pain

BackgroundTherapeutic training is the most commonly used treatment methods for chronic low back pain (CLBP), and the use of a pressure biofeedback unit for transversus abdominis muscle (TrA) training is one of the core muscle training methods. The study aim of this research is to explore the effects of different intensities (sham training, low-intensity and high-intensity) of TrA muscle training on people with CLBP in pressure-pain threshold (PPT).MethodsA total of 45 patients with CLBP were recruited, of whom 44 were included in the analysis. Fifteen, 14, and 15 were included in the sham training group, the low-intensity group, and the high-intensity group, respectively. A pressure biofeedback unit was used in performing a one-time TrA training intervention involving 30 times of 180 mmHg TrA contraction training at high intensity for 10 min and 15 times of 100 mmHg TrA contraction training at low intensity for 5 min. The sham training group completed comfort exercises and did not undergo training. The evaluation indicators were as follows: PPT, short-form McGill pain questionnaire, and body surface pain radiation.ResultsHigh-intensity training could activate more waist core muscles than low-intensity training. Significant changes on PPT (units: kgf) were observed in the following four muscles immediately after high-intensity training: iliopsoas [0.69 (0.13–1.25) 95% CI, p = 0.020]; quadratus lumborum [0.84 (0.23–1.45) 95% CI, p = 0.012]; erector spinae [0.66 (0.18–1.15) 95% CI, p = 0.011]; transversus abdominis [0.70 (0.26–1.14) 95% CI, p = 0.004], and in three muscles after low-intensity training: quadratus lumborum [0.61 (0.17–1.05) 95% CI, p = 0.009]; transversus abdominis [0.14 (from − 0.15 to 0.43) 95% CI, p = 0.022]; piriformis [0.55 (0.13–0.98) 95% CI, p = 0.014]. The change in body surface pain radiation immediately after exercise was [− 10.87 (from − 17.51 to − 4.22) 95% CI, p = 0.003] for high-intensity training and [− 5.21 (from − 9.40 to − 1.03) 95% CI, p = 0.019] for low-intensity training.ConclusionsTrA training could increase the PPT of the waist core muscles and reduce the radiation range of waist pain. The benefits of high-intensity training are higher than those of low-intensity training.Trial registrationChiCTR-TRC-13003701. Registered 18 October 2013.Code of ethical approval: 2018069.

High Rate of Pain Sensitization in Musculoskeletal Shoulder Diseases: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Pain sensitization, defined as an increased responsiveness of nociceptive neurons to normal input, is detected in several musculoskeletal diseases, but there are no systematic reviews or meta-analyses about pain sensitization in shoulder pain. The aim of the study was to document pain sensitization rate and its impact in patients with shoulder pain. PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science were searched on January 8, 2020. Level I-IV studies, evaluating pain sensitization in musculoskeletal shoulder disorders through validated methods (questionnaires/algometry) were included. The primary outcome was pain sensitization rate. Secondary outcomes were the pain sensitivity level measured as pressure pain threshold, temporal summation, conditioned pain modulation, and suprathreshold heat pain response. Associated demographic and psychosocial factors were evaluated. The rate of abnormal pressure pain threshold in patients with shoulder pain varied from 29% to 77%. Questionnaires detected pain sensitization in 11% to 24% of patients. This meta-analysis showed no difference in pressure pain threshold and central pain modulation but documented a significant difference in terms of suprathreshold heat pain response, indicating a hypersensitivity state in patients with shoulder pain versus asymptomatic controls. The only factor that was constantly found to correlate with higher sensitivity was a lower postoperative outcome. Pain sensitization has a high rate among patients with musculoskeletal shoulder pain, regardless of the specific etiology, and this may lead to worse clinical outcome after treatment of the primary disease. The best way to assess pain sensitization still needs to be identified as the assessment methods results in used high variability in the documented pain sensitization rate.

Stretching and relaxing the plantar fascia may change plantar fascia thickness but not pressure pain thresholds: a cross-sectional study of patients with plantar fasciopathy

BackgroundDespite the established relevance of ultrasonography and assessment of pressure pain thresholds in patients with plantar fasciopathy, patient and probe positioning has been mostly ignored and are not necessarily reported in research. The primary aim of this study was to compare plantar fascia thickness in stretched and relaxed positions in patients with plantar fasciopathy. The secondary aim was to compare plantar heel pressure pain thresholds in these positions.MethodsIn this cross-sectional study, we measured the plantar fascia thickness with ultrasonography, and localised pressure pain thresholds using pressure algometry of 20 patients with plantar fasciopathy. These were assessed bilaterally, with the plantar fascia in both a stretched and relaxed position. In the stretched position, toes were maximally dorsiflexed, while in the relaxed position participants’ feet were hanging freely over the end of the table.ResultsThe plantar fascia of the most symptomatic foot was significantly thicker when stretched compared with the relaxed position (sagittal: mean difference 0.2 mm, 95%CI: 0.1–0.4, P = 0.013; frontal: mean difference − 0.27, 95%CI: − 0.49 to − 0.06, P = 0.014). The plantar fascia was significantly thinner in the frontal plane compared with the sagittal plane in both positions (stretched: mean difference − 0.2 mm, 95%CI: − 0.42 to − 0.03, P = 0.025; relaxed: mean difference − 0.3 mm, 95%CI:-0.49 to − 0.08, P = 0.008). There was no difference between pressure pain thresholds in stretched or relaxed positions in either foot (P > 0.4).ConclusionsThe plantar fascia was significantly thicker in a stretched compared with a relaxed position and in the sagittal compared with the frontal plane, but differences were smaller than the standard deviation. Pressure pain thresholds were not different between the positions. These results highlight the importance of how ultrasonography is performed and reported in research to allow for replication.Trial registrationThe study was pre-registered September 25th, 2017 on ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03291665).

Evidence of localized and widespread pressure pain hypersensitivity in patients with tension-type headache: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

This meta-analysis evaluates pressure pain sensitivity values in symptomatic and distant pain-free areas comparing individuals with tension-type headache to controls. Electronic databases were searched for cross-sectional or prospective case-control studies comparing pressure pain thresholds in patients with tension-type headache to headache-free controls. Data were extracted by three reviewers. The methodological quality was assessed by the Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale. Meta-analyses of trigeminal, extra-trigeminal (neck) and distant pain-free areas in tension-type headache were compared to headache-free controls. Frequency of tension-type headache and gender were taken into account. Twenty studies were included. Patients with tension-type headache exhibited lower pressure pain thresholds than headache-free controls: Trigeminal (MD -49.11 kPa, 95% CI -66.05 to -32.17), cervical spine (MD -88.17 kPa, 95% CI -108.43 to -67.92) and distant pain-free areas (MD -98.43 kPa, 95% CI -136.78 to -60.09). Differences were significant for chronic, episodic, and mixed episodic and chronic tension-type headache within the trigeminal and neck (symptomatic areas), but only significant for chronic tension-type headache (MD -102.86, 95% CI -139.47 to -66.25 kPa) for distant pain-free areas. In general, women had lower pressure pain thresholds than men. The methodological quality ranged from fair (45%) to good (40%). The results showed a high heterogeneity and publication bias. This first meta-analysis addressing pressure pain thresholds differences in symptomatic and distant pain-free areas between patients with tension-type headache and controls found low to moderate evidence supporting the presence of pressure pain hypersensitivity in the trigeminal and neck areas in tension-type headache in comparison with headache-free controls. Sensitivity to pressure pain was widespread only in chronic, not episodic, tension-type headache (moderate evidence).Registration number: https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/R29HY.

Treatment of Neck Pain With Myofascial Therapies: A Single Blind Randomized Controlled Trial

ObjectiveThis study aimed to investigate the effects of myofascial release therapy vs a standard physical therapy program in patients with neck pain (NP). MethodsThis was a randomized controlled trial in which 54 participants with mechanical NP were randomly assigned into an experimental group (EG) or a comparison group (CG). The EG group (n = 27) received 5 therapy sessions of myofascial release therapy while the CG group (n = 27) received 10 sessions of massage, ultrasound therapy, and transcutaneous electric nerve stimulation over a 2-week period. Outcome measures were the numerical pain rating scale (NPRS), pressure pain thresholds (PPTs) and range of motion at the end of treatment and at 1-month follow-up. ResultsAt 1-month follow-up, between-group differences in change scores were found in the NPRS (mean = –1.56, 95% confidence interval [CI] [–2.30 to –0.81]; P < .001), in the right thoracic PPT (mean = 0.35, 95% CI [0.03-0.66]; P = .031), and in both left (mean = 0.34, 95% CI [0.08-0.61]; P = .012) and right (mean = 0.29, 95% CI [0.04-0.54]; P = .026) suboccipital PPTs. The success rate was 63.0% in the CG and 92.6% in the EG. The number needed to treat was 3.38 (95% CI = 1.99-11.23). ConclusionsMyofascial release therapy could be better than a standard physical therapy program for improving pain and suboccipital PPTs in patients with NP. However, the difference between both treatments is less than the minimum detectable change of the NPRS.

No difference in pressure pain threshold and temporal summation after lumbar spinal manipulation compared to sham: A randomised controlled trial in adults with low back pain

BackgroundChanges in quantitative sensory tests have been observed after spinal manipulative therapy (SMT), particularly in pressure pain thresholds (PPT) and temporal summation (TS). However, a recent systematic review comparing SMT to sham found no significant difference in PPT in patients with musculoskeletal pain. The sham-controlled studies were generally low quality, and conclusions about other quantitative sensory tests could not be made. ObjectivesWe aimed to perform a sham-controlled study with the specific objective of investigating changes in PPT and TS short-term after lumbar SMT compared to sham manipulation in people with low back pain. MethodsThis was a double-blind randomised controlled trial comparing high-velocity low-amplitude lumbar SMT against sham manipulation in participants with low back pain. Primary outcome measures were PPT at the calf, lumbar spine and shoulder, and TS at the hands and feet. These were measured at baseline, then immediately, 15 min and 30 min post-intervention. ResultsEighty participants (42 females) were included in the analyses (mean age 37 years), with 40 participants allocated to each intervention group. Significant between-group differences were only observed for calf PPT, which could be explained by a decrease in PPT (increased sensitivity) after SMT and an increase after sham. Feet TS decreased significantly over time after both SMT and sham, and any other changes over time were inconsistent. ConclusionsOur results suggest that lumbar SMT does not have a short-term hypoalgesic effect, as measured with PPT and TS, when compared to sham manipulation in people with low back pain.