↓ Skip to main content

Neurophysiological and psychophysical effects of dry versus sham needling of the infraspinatus muscle in patients with chronic shoulder pain: a randomized feasibility study

Overview of attention for article published in Archives of Physiotherapy, October 2021
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
2 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
29 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Neurophysiological and psychophysical effects of dry versus sham needling of the infraspinatus muscle in patients with chronic shoulder pain: a randomized feasibility study
Published in
Archives of Physiotherapy, October 2021
DOI 10.1186/s40945-021-00118-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Antoine Laramée, Guillaume Léonard, Mélanie Morin, Mélanie Roch, Nathaly Gaudreault

Abstract

Dry needling (DN) is increasingly used for treating myofascial trigger points (MTrPs) and has shown significant effects on pain and function. This study aimed to assess feasibility of conducting a randomized sham-controlled trial and to collect preliminary data on the effects of infraspinatus DN on corticospinal excitability and mechanical pain sensitivity. This randomized feasibility study included adults with chronic non-traumatic shoulder pain and a infraspinatus MTrP. Participants were randomized to receive real DN or sham DN in the infraspinatus MTrP. Feasibility outcomes included data pertaining to recruitment, retention of participants, completeness and safety of assessment procedures. Neurophysiological and psychophysical outcomes included corticospinal excitability and mechanical pain sensitivity measured by active motor threshold (aMT) and pressure pain threshold (PPT), respectively. They were assessed at baseline, immediately after and 24 h post-intervention. Twenty-one participants were recruited over a 6-month period. Nineteen participants completed the treatment and follow-up assessment. Motor evoked potential responses were discernible in all but 1 participant. Only 1 minor adverse event related to transcranial magnetic stimulation (mild headache) affected the measurements. No DN adverse effects were recorded in both groups. An overall completeness rate of 81% was reached, with 70% completeness in the DN group and 91% in the sham group. Data analysis revealed that real DN increased corticospinal excitability (reduced aMT) 24 h post-intervention (Mdn = - 5.96% MSO, IQR = 5.17, p = 0.04) and that sham DN triggered similar responses immediately after the intervention (Mdn = - 1.93% MSO, IQR = 1.11, p = 0.03). Increased mechanical pain sensitivity (reduced PPT) was significant only in the sham group, both immediately (Mdn = - 0.44 kg/cm2, IQR = 0.49, p = 0.01) and 24 h post-intervention (Mdn = - 0.52 kg/cm2, IQR = 1.02, p = 0.02). Changes in corticospinal excitability was positively correlated with changes in mechanical pain sensitivity in the DN group, both immediately (r = 0.77, p = 0.02) and 24 h post-intervention (r = 0.75, p = 0.05). The present study demonstrates the feasibility of quantifying the neurophysiological and psychophysical effects of DN, and provides recommendations and guidelines for future studies. Moreover, it provides preliminary evidence that DN may increase corticospinal excitability of the infraspinatus muscle in patients with chronic shoulder pain and that the relationship of neurophysiological and psychophysical effects is promising to better understand its mechanisms of action. NCT04316793 ; retrospectively registered November 3, 2020.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 29 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 29 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Unspecified 9 31%
Student > Bachelor 4 14%
Student > Master 3 10%
Other 1 3%
Student > Ph. D. Student 1 3%
Other 1 3%
Unknown 10 34%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Unspecified 9 31%
Medicine and Dentistry 4 14%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 7%
Social Sciences 1 3%
Sports and Recreations 1 3%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 12 41%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 01 March 2022.
All research outputs
#16,061,963
of 25,394,764 outputs
Outputs from Archives of Physiotherapy
#127
of 160 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#231,622
of 441,859 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Archives of Physiotherapy
#5
of 7 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,394,764 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 160 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 18.5. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 441,859 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 7 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 2 of them.