Evaluation of the Sympathetic Skin Response to the Dry Needling Treatment in Female Myofascial Pain Syndrome Patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to evaluate sympathetic nervous system (SNS) activity following dry needling (DN) treatment, by using the sympathetic skin response (SSR) method in female patients diagnosed with myofascial pain syndrome (MPS). METHODS: Twenty-nine MPS patients with trapezius muscle pain and 31 healthy subjects were included in this study. During a single treatment session, DN treatment was applied into trigger points, for a duration of 10 minutes. Healthy patients were subjected to SSR in weeks 1 and 4; whereas the patient group was subjected to SSR 1 week prior to their treatment and in the first, second, third and fourth weeks following the completion of their treatment. RESULTS: We found diminished latency on both sides. A significantly high algometer measurement (P < 0.05) was observed in the control group. DN treatment was effective in diminishing the visual analog scale (VAS) (P < 0.001), pressure pain threshold (PPT) (P < 0.01), and SSR (P < 0.001). No SSR change was detected in the healthy group after the follow-up period (P > 0.05). CONCLUSION: DN is an effective treatment in MPS and trigger point (TP). This original study is the first to deal with the SSR in MPS and weekly SSR trailing, requiring further investigation to solidy findings.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".