The Effect of Electric Stimulation Techniques on Pain and Tenderness at the Myofascial Trigger Point: A Systematic Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Myofascial pain is a prevalent chronic pain disorder, affecting a large proportion of the general population. Electric stimulation techniques such as transcutaneous electric stimulation (TENS) and electroacupuncture have been shown to be effective for managing chronic pain conditions including myofascial pain. The goal of this study was to review the literature on the effectiveness of electric stimulation techniques on myofascial pain. METHODS: A comprehensive systematic search of three databases-Medline, EMBASE, and Cochrane CENTRAL-was conducted using key words related to myofascial pain and trigger points, as well as various electric stimulation techniques. A total of 15 articles passed the inclusion and exclusion criteria for the study. Data were extracted from these studies and assessed qualitatively and quantitatively. Standardized mean differences (SMDs) were computed from pain intensity measures extracted from these studies. Subgroup analyses were performed to assess the effectiveness of treatment modality, number of treatment sessions, frequency of stimulation, location of treatment, and duration of treatment. RESULTS: The SMD for electric stimulation techniques on reported pain intensity was significant (P = 0.03), as was the SMD for the electroacupuncture subgroup (P = 0.02); the TENS subgroups' effect was not significant (P = 0.17). The subgroup analyses tentatively suggest that frequency and number of treatments do not influence pain intensity, whereas the duration of treatment may have an effect. The qualitative results of this study revealed variability in the results among studies delivering TENS treatments. CONCLUSIONS: Electric stimulation is effective at mitigating reported pain intensity at the location of the trigger point. Electroacupuncture presented with significant and larger effect sizes of improvement relative to TENS for reported pain intensity. Given that this review included a small number of studies, there is a need for additional research to confirm its findings. Additionally, studies assessing the parameters and physiological location of treatment are needed to inform the clinical use and recommendations of electric stimulation treatments.
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 | 0.008 | 0.032 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.008 | 0.007 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.009 | 0.009 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".