NCT06604962

Intramuscular Electrical Stimulation on Upper Trapezius With Trigger Points

Intramuscular Electrical Stimulation Using Inverse Electrodes Placement on Electromyographic Activity and Pressure Pain Threshold in the Upper Trapezius With Trigger Points - A Randomized Controlled Trial

• Status: Completed
• Phase: N/A
• Study type: Interventional
• Enrollment: 36 (actual)
• Sponsor: Gulf Medical University · Academic / Other
• Sex: All
• Age: 18 Years – 25 Years
• Healthy volunteers: Accepted

Summary

The prevalence of myofascial pain ranges from 30 to 93% and can result in sensorimotor and autonomic deficits. In routine neuromuscular electrical stimulation, conventional electrode placement (CEP) and inverse electrode placement (IEP) are used to deliver electrical stimulation for pain modulation. However, Whether pain modulation can be achieved better from the intramuscular electrical stimulation (IMES) using the inverse electrode placement (IEP) or the conventional electrode placement (CEP) is still an open issue. Thus, current study's aim to compare the effects of IMES using IEP and CEP, and sham-IMES on pressure pain threshold (PPT), EMG activity, upper trapezius (UT) muscle length and pain severity in the UT muscle with myofascial trigger points (MTrPs) among young adults.

Detailed description

Myofascial trigger points (MTrPs) are defined as discrete areas of tenderness in taut bands of skeletal muscles that are painful. The upper trapezius (UT) muscle has been found to be often affected by MTrPs, which can result in altered sensory-motor function. MTrPs may be related to pressure pain sensitivity and alterations in the upper trapezius muscle activity. A reduction in PPTs and increased electromyographic (EMG) activity of the UT muscle with MTrPs can be respectively interpreted as increased pain receptors sensitization and motor endplate activity. In routine clinical practice, exercises, TrP injections, medications, and alternative therapies such as acupuncture dry needling (DN) are used to treat MTrPs. In recent years, some studies have reported that intramuscularly delivered electrical stimulation is a potential resource for the management of myofascial pain syndrome (MPS). Evidence from the literature suggests that IMES is effective in conditions such as adhesive capsulitis, MPS, and other non-traumatic musculoskeletal disorders. In routine neuromuscular electrical stimulation, conventional electrode placement (CEP) is used, in which an active cathode pole is placed in the peripheral target tissue and a reference anode is placed over the spinal level for peripheral pain modulation. Inverse electrode placement (IEP) is a alternate electrode placement method in which a cathode pole is placed over the spinal level and an anode pole over the distal parts of the limbs. IEP model experiments on MPS and non-traumatic shoulder pain disorders achieved significant clinical outcomes for shoulder pain and associated functional disabilities. Although IMES is effective in reducing the pain threshold and changing EMG activity, the difference between the effects of IMES based on IEP and CEP on PPT and EMG activity (%MVIC) remains unknown. In line with previous study findings, this study hypothesized that IMES using IEP would achieve significant changes in the PPT, EMG activity, muscle length, and pain severity of the UT muscle with TrPs compared with IMES using CEP and Sham-IMES

Conditions

• Myofacial Pain Syndrome

Interventions

Type	Name	Description
PROCEDURE	IMES using IEP	First group (n=12) received IMES using inverse electrode placement. The needle electrode inserted into the paraspinal region was connected to the active or cathode pole of the electrical stimulator. The reference or anode pole of the electrical stimulator was connected to the electrode that was inserted into the MTrP area of the UT muscle. The muscle was stimulated for 10 min with a tolerable intensity in a single session to induce muscle relaxation
PROCEDURE	IMES using CEP	Second group (n=12) underwent IMES with conventional electrode placement. In this group, the cathode pole of the stimulator was connected to the needle inserted into the UT muscle, and the anode pole was connected to the needles of the paraspinal region of the cervical spine. Needle electrodes were connected using alligator clip connectors. The muscle was stimulated for 10 min with a tolerable intensity in a single session to induce muscle relaxation.
OTHER	Sham-IMES	Third group (n=12) received sham-IMES. Similar to the experimental intervention groups, the cathode pole of the stimulator was connected to the needle inserted into the UT muscle, and the anode pole was connected to the needles of the paraspinal region of the cervical spine. However, the delivered IMES was very minimal intensity

Timeline

• Start date: 2023-10-28
• Primary completion: 2024-03-30
• Completion: 2024-04-25
• First posted: 2024-09-20
• Last updated: 2024-10-01

Locations

1 site across 1 country: United Arab Emirates