Investigating the effects of core stability training on balance and gait in people with multiple sclerosis: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Balance disorders are a common concern in people with multiple sclerosis (PwMS). Core stability exercises are recommended as one of the treatment principles of rehabilitation in patients with balance disorders. This systematic review and meta-analysis investigate the effects of core stabilization exercises (CSE) on balance in PwMS. METHODS: Online databases were searched from 1980 to December 15, 2022, including PubMed/Medline, Scopus, Web of Science, CINAHL, PEDro, Embase, and ProQuest to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) investigating the effects of CSE on balance in PwMS. The methodological qualities of the included studies were assessed using the modified Cochrane risk bias tool for randomized trials. Random-effect meta-analyzes were performed on the Berg balance test and Biodex balance system outcomes. RESULTS: Seven RCTs were included in this study. A total of 379 patients (EDSS<6) were enrolled in the included studies. All researchers had applied CSE within six to ten weeks with the frequency of two to three sessions/week. According to qualitative results, core stability exercise significantly changes the most balanced outcomes. The meta-analyses illustrated that allocated participants to experimental groups had statistically significantly higher Berg balance test scores (standardized mean difference: 1.1; 95 % CI: [0.1, 2.1]) and insignificant lower Biodex score (standardized mean difference: -0.59; 95 % CI: [-1.09, -0.09]) compared to the control groups. CONCLUSION: Six to ten weeks of CSEs is an effective therapeutic strategy for balance improvement in PwMS that can help improve balance, especially in patients with moderate disability levels (EDSS3.5-6). Further randomized clinical trials are needed to compare the efficacy of CSEs and routine balance training in PwMS.

Acute and Short-Term Effects of Dry Needling in Patients with Chronic Nonspecific Low Back Pain and Hamstring Tightness: A Pilot Study.

BACKGROUND: Chronic nonspecific low back pain (LBP) is one of the common health issues. Hamstring tightness contributes to the development of LBP. This study aimed to investigate the acute and short-term effects of deep dry needling (DN) in patients with chronic nonspecific LBP and hamstring muscle tightness. METHODS: A single-group pretest-posttest clinical study design was followed. The outcome measures were the visual analog scale (VAS), passive knee extension (PKE) test, finger-floor distance (FFD) test, and functional rating index (FRI). Patients underwent one session of deep DN of three points on both hamstring muscles, each point for one minute. Patients were assessed before (T0), immediately after (T1), and one week after DN (T2). The FRI was assessed at T0 and T2. RESULTS: Ten women with a mean age of 21.1 years (SD = 1.6) participated in the study. Significant large effect sizes in VAS pain reduction (d = 1.25) and PKE hamstring tightness were obtained (hamstring: right, d = 0.82; left, d = 0.88) at T2. Medium effect sizes were obtained for FFD (d = 0.45) and FRI (d = 0.72) at T2. CONCLUSION: A single session of deep DN improved pain and function and increased hamstring flexibility. This pilot study supports the use of DN in patients with LBP and hamstring tightness; however, future research with a rigorous study design of randomized controlled trial is required to confirm the findings. This trial is registered with IRCT20180511039612N1.

The efficacy of intramuscular electrical stimulation in the management of patients with myofascial pain syndrome: a systematic review.

INTRODUCTION: Myofascial pain syndrome (MPS) is one of the most common disorders causing chronic muscle pain. Almost one-third of patients with musculoskeletal complaints meet the MPS criteria. The aim of this study is to evaluate the effectiveness of intramuscular electrical stimulation (IMES) in patients with MPS through a systematic review method. METHODS: PubMed, Scopus, Embase, ProQuest, PEDro, Web of Science, and CINAHL were systematically searched to find out the eligible articles without language limitations from 1990 to December 30, 2020. All relevant randomized controlled trials that compared the effectiveness of IMES with sham-IMES, dry needling, or exercise therapy in patients with MPS were included. Full texts of the selected studies were critically appraised using Revised Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomized trials (RoB2). RESULTS: Six studies (out of 397) had met our inclusion criteria (involving 158 patients) and were entered to the systematic review. Outcome measures examined in these studies included pain, range of motion, pressure pain threshold, biochemical factors, disability, and amount of analgesic use. In the most studies, it has been shown that IMES is more effective than the control group in improving some outcome measurements such as pain. CONCLUSION: There is preliminary evidence from a few small trials suggesting the efficacy of IMES for the care of myofascial pain syndrome. The data support the conduct of larger trials investigating the efficacy of IMES.