Home > Riviste > European Journal of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine > Fascicoli precedenti > Europa Medicophysica 2004 December;40(4) > Europa Medicophysica 2004 December;40(4):293-301

ULTIMO FASCICOLO
 

ARTICLE TOOLS

Estratti

EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF PHYSICAL AND REHABILITATION MEDICINE

Rivista di Medicina Fisica e Riabilitativa dopo Eventi Patologici


Official Journal of the Italian Society of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine (SIMFER), European Society of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine (ESPRM), European Union of Medical Specialists - Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine Section (UEMS-PRM), Mediterranean Forum of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine (MFPRM), Hellenic Society of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine (EEFIAP)
In association with International Society of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine (ISPRM)
Indexed/Abstracted in: CINAHL, Current Contents/Clinical Medicine, EMBASE, PubMed/MEDLINE, Science Citation Index Expanded (SciSearch), Scopus
Impact Factor 2,063


eTOC

 

RANDOMISED CONTROLLED TRIALS  SPECIAL SECTION SOCIETÀ ITALIANA DI MEDICINA FISICA E RIABILITAZIONE (SIMFER) NATIONAL MEETING 2004


Europa Medicophysica 2004 December;40(4):293-301

lingua: Inglese

A randomized controlled study on the effect of two different treatments (frems and tens) in myofascial pain syndrome

Farina S. 1, Casarotto M. 1, Benelle M. 1, Tinazzi M. 1, Fiaschi A. 1, Goldoni M. 1, Smania N. 2

1 Section of Rehabilitation Neurology Department of Neurological and Vision Science University of Verona, Verona, Italy
2 Functional Rehabilitation Service Policlinico G.B. Rossi, Verona, Italy


FULL TEXT  


Aim. Myofascial pain syndrome (MPS) is a frequent cause of chronic muscoloskeletal pain. Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) is one of the most frequently employed treatments in MPS. The aim of this study is to compare the short and medium-term effects of frequency modulated neural stimulation (FREMS) to those of TENS in MPS.
Methods. Forty subjects with upper trapezius MPS were randomly allocated to 1 of 2 groups, treated with either FREMS (n=19) or TENS (n=21). Each treatment consisted in 10 sessions lasting 20 min each. Patients were evaluated before treatment, at 1 week, and at 1 and 3 months after the end of treatment. Clinical evaluation included parameters for measurement of pain levels using the neck pain and disability visual analogue scale (NPDVAS) and algometry, evaluation of myofascial trigger point characteristics and measurement of the range of cervical movement (range of motion, ROM).
Results. The FREMS group showed a significant improvement in the NPDVAS, algometry, in myofascial trigger point characteristics, and in the ROM (homolateral rotation, controlateral rotation, bending and extension) after the end of treatment and at 1 and 3 months follow-up evaluation. The TENS group showed significant improvement in the same outcome measures except for algometry and cervical extension, but these improvements were maintained only at the 1 month follow-up evaluation. However, were not observed statistically significant differences between FREMS of TENS in many of outcome measures.
Conclusion. Both FREMS and TENS have positive short-term effects on MPS. But, medium-term effects were achieved only with FREMS.

inizio pagina

Publication History

Per citare questo articolo

Corresponding author e-mail