Comparision of Dry Needling techniques versus stretching and ischemic compression techniques in upper trapezius muscle.

Identifier:  TFG:1237

Handle: https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11797/TFG1237

Authors:  Asensio Arqué, Daniel; Cedó Ferré, Oriol; Espejo Nieto, Aaron; Fernández Urra, Javier.

Abstract:
ABSTRACT Objectives: The aim of this bibliographic review is to prove which results we get between different upper trapezius treatments, comparing the effects of the ones that are more invasive like dry needling, both superficial and deep, and other non-invasive treatment such as stretching and ischemic compression, with their advantages and disadvantages between each other. Methods: The search was made in the following databases: Pubmed, Google Academics and PEDro during January and February of 2017. The main measure of the results in this revision has been the subjective pain referred by the patients, measuring with validated scales such as EVA or other questionnaires and measure tools (PPT scale, soft tissue provocation, pain time percentage) that evaluate the pain in its parameters. Also, the functionality has been considered as a variable of results, in which we can find rate of cervical active movement, basal electric activity of the trapezium and the results of DASH questionnaire. To evaluate the methodological quality of the articles chosen, we've been using PEDro scale, which is a highly recommended method of evaluation used in investigations and clinical trials of physiotherapeutically interventions that classifies the studies of its own database, helping to judge the quality and utility of them. Results: We obtained 14 articles after executing our searching strategy. A deep study was made to coerce the data and compare the results of the treatments, putting in common studies with similar measurement tools and method. Most of the comparison results showed that deep dry needling significantly improved the measured pain parameters and functionality in comparison with other non-invasive treatments, however, we cannot say that we have had an optimal methodological quality because the studies should have been quantitatively similar, applying similar election methods, and using the same measure tools to obtain a suitable result comparison. Conclusion: We can say that the techniques we've been studying and comparing work well for the joint range of motion improvement. However, if we can do it, it would be better to combine these techniques in a trigger point treatment to diminish the pain while we improve the muscle functionality.