Effectiveness of Dry Needling with Intramuscular Electrical Stimulation versus Exercise Therapy in Patients with Chronic Low-Back Pain- A Pilot Study
Poster Presentation
Paper ID : 1619-12THCONG
Oral / Poster Presentation File: photo_۲۰۲۰-۱۰-۲۹_۱۰-۴۴-۳۰.jpg
Authors
1Department of Physical Education and Sport Sciences, Faculty of Human Sciences, Shams Education Institute of Science and Technology, Tabriz, Iran
2Department of Physical Education and Sport Sciences, Faculty of Human Sciences, Ardabil Branch, Islamic Azad University, Ardabil, Iran.
Abstract
Chronic low back pain (CLBP) is defined as pain in the lumbosacral area of the spine, of more than 12 weeks' duration. The pain may or may not be referred to other locations, and it usually causes limitations in range of motion (ROM). CLBP is generally considered a result of mechanical causes and not related to an underlying condition such as infection, neoplasm, or fracture. The causes may stem from nociceptive, neuropathic, or psychological processes, or a combination of these. The management includes different approaches including patient education; behavioral treatment; lumbar support; traction; or the use of physical therapy modalities such as massage, superficial heat or cold, exercise, transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation, and laser therapy. The aim of this study was to compare the effectiveness of dry needling with intramuscular electrical stimulation versus exercise therapy program in patients with CLBP.
In total, 13 females (age: 32.62 ± 6.62) were allocated randomly to the dry needling with intramuscular electrical stimulation (DNS, n=6) and exercise therapy groups (EXS, n=7). In the DNS group, dry needling was applied once a week for total 4 weeks. The EXS group performed a core stabilization exercises program under vision of a physiotherapist 3 times a week for total 4 weeks. The outcomes measured were pain level by visual analog scale (VAS), functional disability by both the Roland Disability Questionnaire (RDQ), and the Modified Oswestry Disability Questionnaire (MODQ).
VAS, RDQ, and MODQ results did not show any significant between group differences (P>0.05). In EXS group, VAS results did not show significant improve after 4 week treatment in EXS group (P=.063), but MODQ and RDQ results demonstrated significant improve (P<0.05). In DNS group, RDQ results did not show significant improve after 4 week treatment in EXS group (P=.093), but MODQ and VAS results demonstrated significant improve (P<0.05).
It seems both treatments are effective in the treatment of CLBP.
In total, 13 females (age: 32.62 ± 6.62) were allocated randomly to the dry needling with intramuscular electrical stimulation (DNS, n=6) and exercise therapy groups (EXS, n=7). In the DNS group, dry needling was applied once a week for total 4 weeks. The EXS group performed a core stabilization exercises program under vision of a physiotherapist 3 times a week for total 4 weeks. The outcomes measured were pain level by visual analog scale (VAS), functional disability by both the Roland Disability Questionnaire (RDQ), and the Modified Oswestry Disability Questionnaire (MODQ).
VAS, RDQ, and MODQ results did not show any significant between group differences (P>0.05). In EXS group, VAS results did not show significant improve after 4 week treatment in EXS group (P=.063), but MODQ and RDQ results demonstrated significant improve (P<0.05). In DNS group, RDQ results did not show significant improve after 4 week treatment in EXS group (P=.093), but MODQ and VAS results demonstrated significant improve (P<0.05).
It seems both treatments are effective in the treatment of CLBP.
Keywords
Dry needling; Intramuscular electrical stimulation, Core stabilization exercises; chronic low back pain
Subjects