ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Although chronic shoulder pain is highly prevalent and myofascial trigger points (mTrP) are thought to be found in the majority of patients with shoulder complaints, the influence on the pain mechanism remains unclear. There are only very few controlled clinical studies on the effects of manual trigger point compression therapy. OBJECTIVE: This randomized controlled trial (RCT) compared the short-term effects of manual trigger point compression therapy (n = 6) with manual sham therapy (n = 6) in patients with unilateral shoulder pain due to myofascial syndrome (MFS). MATERIAL AND METHODS: The measurement data were collected before and after two sessions of therapy. Pressure pain thresholds (PPT) of mTrP and symmetrically located points on the asymptomatic side were measured together with neutral points in order to detect a potential unilateral or generalized hyperalgesia. Additionally, the pain was assessed on a visual analog scale (VAS) at rest and during movement and the neck disability index (NDI) and disabilities of the arm, shoulder and hand (DASH) questionnaires were also completed and evaluated. RESULTS: Both treatment modalities led to a significant improvement; however, the manual trigger point compression therapy was significantly more effective in comparison to sham therapy, as measured by different parameters. CONCLUSION: The significant improvement of PPT values in the interventional group even at sites that were not directly treated, indicates central mechanisms in pain threshold modulation induced by manual compression therapy. The weaker but still measurable effects of sham therapy might be explained by the sham modality being a hands on technique or by sufficient stimulation of the trigger point region during the diagnostics and PPT measurements.
Subject(s)
Myofascial Pain Syndromes/therapy , Shoulder Pain/therapy , Therapy, Soft Tissue/methods , Adult , Aged , Disability Evaluation , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Myofascial Pain Syndromes/diagnosis , Pain Measurement/methods , Pain Threshold , Placebo Effect , Shoulder Pain/diagnosis , Treatment OutcomeABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Means to improve patient satisfaction and their compliance are essential for the successful outcome of medical interventions, e.g. supply of orthopedic shoes or orthoses in orthopedic patients. A useful validated questionnaire to monitor the subjective opinion of the patients is still lacking. METHODS: In a randomised single blinded study we created a new questionnaire with two parts. Part one deals with ten questions on patient data and illness. Part two consists of 13 questions about pain, disabilities in activities of daily life (ADL), use of painkillers, satisfaction, history of ulceration, correction of shoes and orthoses, handling and compliance using a scale of 1-6. Questions were chosen by asking a group of experts (four experienced physicians of two universities and four shoemaker master-craftsmen). Then an items reduction was performed. The reliability was tested in a pre- and retest in 20 patients of our orthopedic clinic. Then the questionnaire was validated by comparing 40 patients of our orthopedic clinic (intervention group) with 180 subjects without orthopedic treatment (control group) chosen at random. The questionnaire was always done anonymously and without the help of the interviewer. Exclusion criteria for the control group were any kind of orthopedic treatment of the lower limb in the last 2 years, orthopedic shoes or lumbar sciatic pain. Exclusion criteria for both groups were minor or major amputations, inability to walk outdoors without help. RESULTS: We demonstrated highly significant differences for each single question and the total score between orthopedic patients and healthy probands. Additionally, we saw significantly poorer scores for patients suffering from diabetes in the control group, patients with polyneuropathy and those without polyneuropathy, as well as for women vs. men. There was a high rate of diabetics (11â%) in the control group in analogy to the current literature. DISCUSSION: The new questionnaire discriminates highly significantly between healthy and ill probands. Interindividually a screening of people at risk is possible or a comparison of different interventions. Intraindividually it could be used to monitor patient satisfaction after interventions. Objectivation of patient satisfaction is important to improve their compliance and outcome.
