Efficacy of ultrasound-guided myofascial hydrodissection technique in myofascial pain syndrome of upper trapezius: a randomized controlled trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Myofascial pain syndrome (MPS), a chronic musculoskeletal disorder characterized by myofascial trigger points (MTrPs). The objective is to explore the efficacy and safety of ultrasound-guided myofascial hydrodissection technique (UMHT) compared with trigger point injection of lidocaine (TPI) in the patients with MPS of upper trapezius. This randomized clinical trial was conducted at the rehabilitation medicine center of West China Hospital, Sichuan University, with 41 patients between May and October 2024. Patients were assigned to UMHT group (UMHT) or TPI group (1% lidocaine injection). Outcomes were measured at multiple time points using the Visual Analog Scale (VAS, primary), the short-form McGill pain questionnaire (SF-MPQ), and the neck disability index (NDI). Data were analyzed using SPSS v.29. The VAS scores was significantly decreased after receiving either UMHT (Effect sizes r = 0.716; p < 0.001) or TPI (Effect sizes r = 0.604; p < 0.001) during the 12-week follow-up period, while the SF-MPQ and the NDI showed similar positive results. There was no statistically significant difference between UMHT and TPI in pain reduction and function improvement (p > 0.05). No adverse events had been reported. Both UMHT and TPI demonstrate comparable efficacy and safety profiles in managing MPS of upper trapezius.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".