Efficacy of different intensities of percutaneous electrolysis for musculoskeletal pain: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Author:

Sánchez-González Juan Luis,Navarro-López Víctor,Cañada-Sánchez Pablo,Juárez-Vela Raúl,Viñaspre-Hernández Regina Ruiz de,Varela-Rodríguez Sergio

Abstract

ObjectiveA meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) was conducted to determine the effect of ultrasound-guided percutaneous electrolysis (PE) alone or as an adjunct to other interventions on pain intensity generated by musculoskeletal disorders, depending on the intensity of the technique.Data sourcesPUBMED, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, SCOPUS, Health Medical Collection, and CINALH from inception to September 2022 were searched to identify documents.Study selectionPublications investigating the effect of ultrasound-guided PE in musculoskeletal pain.Data extractionData were extracted into predesigned data extraction and tables. Risk of bias was evaluated with the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool (Rob 2.0). Thirteen articles met inclusion criteria.Data analysisRandom-effects meta-analysis models were used to quantify the difference in pain between the PE and control groups.Data synthesisA significant reduction in pain was found in favor of low- (−1.89; 95% CI: −2.69; −1.10; p < 0.001) and high-intensity PE (−0.74; 95% CI: −1.36; −0.11; p: 0.02) compared to control group. Low-intensity PE showed significant reduction in pain in the short (−1.73; 95% CI: −3.13; −0.34; p < 0.02) and long term (−2.10; 95% CI: −2.93; −1.28; p = 0.005), with large effect sizes compared to control group. High-intensity PE only showed significant lower pain than control group in the long term (−0.92; 95% CI: −1.78; −0.07; p < 0.03), with a small effect size, but not in the short term.ConclusionWe found small evidence suggesting that low-intensity PE could be more effective for musculoskeletal pain reduction than high-intensity PE. Nevertheless, scientific evidence on this subject is still scarce and studies comparing the two modalities are warranted.Systematic review registrationwww.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero, identifier CRD42022366935.

Publisher

Frontiers Media SA

Subject

General Medicine

Cited by 3 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3