Comparison of High Power Pain Threshold Ultrasound and Ischemic Compression Techniques for Treatment of Trigger Points
NCT04823013 · Status: COMPLETED · Phase: NA · Type: INTERVENTIONAL · Enrollment: 153
Last updated 2021-03-30
Summary
This study aimed to compare the efficacy of ischemic compression and two different application methods of high power pain threshold ultrasound techniques on latent trigger point treatment. Asymptomatic subjects divided into three groups. First group took high power pain threshold ultrasound in which the intensity is kept constant at the pain level; second group took high power pain threshold ultrasound which the intensity is kept constant at half the pain level and third group took ischemic compression. All participants were asked to complete the questionnaires, which assessed pain, psychological factors and disability before treatment, after 1 week and 1 month follow-up. After each participants completed the questionnaire, the physical therapist evaluated the MTrPs. MTrPs assessment was performed before treatment, immediately after treatment, after 1 week and 1 month follow-up.
Conditions
- Trigger Point Pain, Myofascial
Interventions
- OTHER
-
high power pain threshold ultrasound which the dose was kept constant
Participants in HPPT-US 1 group received the HPPT-US treatment. The intensity was gradually increased from 0.5 W/cm² to the pain threshold level at which the patient verbally reported the pain. The therapist kept the intensity at that level for 5 s, and then moved the US transducer in a circle without the change of the intensity for 15 s. The procedure was repeated 3 times. The patients were asked whether serious pain or any abnormal sensation was felt during HPPT-US. The intensity was varied from 0.5 to 1.2 W/ cm².
- OTHER
-
high power pain threshold ultrasound which the dose reduced to one half
Participants in HPPT-US 2 group also received the HPPT-US treatment. The intensity was gradually increased from 0.5 W/cm² to the pain threshold level at which the patient verbally reported the pain. The therapist kept the intensity at that level for 5 s, then reduced the dose half and moved the US transducer in a circle for 15 s. The procedure was repeated 3 times. The patients were asked whether serious pain or any abnormal sensation was felt during HPPT-US. The intensity was varied from 0.5 to 1.2 W/ cm².
- OTHER
-
ischemic compression
Participants in IC group received ischemic compression therapy. The technique was applied in the sitting position to participants. Ischemic compression was performed by compressing trigger points identified by palpation with tolerable intensity using thumb. The duration for each trigger points was 1 minute. Then the muscle containing the trigger point was applied intramuscular stretching for 30 seconds by therapist
Sponsors & Collaborators
-
Gazi University
lead OTHER
Principal Investigators
-
Gamze G Pala, PhD · Istanbul Aydın University
-
Ebru Kaya Mutlu, Assoc.Prof. · Istanbul University - Cerrahpasa
-
Hanifegül Taşkıran, Prof. · Istanbul Aydın University
Study Design
- Allocation
- RANDOMIZED
- Purpose
- TREATMENT
- Masking
- SINGLE
- Model
- PARALLEL
Eligibility
- Min Age
- 18 Years
- Max Age
- 50 Years
- Sex
- ALL
- Healthy Volunteers
- Yes
Timeline & Regulatory
- Start
- 2017-10-01
- Primary Completion
- 2018-04-01
- Completion
- 2018-04-01
Countries
- Turkey (Türkiye)
Study Locations
More Related Trials
-
Pecto-Intercostal Fascial Block vs. Transversus Thoracic Muscle Plane Block in Cardiac Surgery
NCT04791592 ·Status: COMPLETED ·Phase: NA
-
Ultrasonographic Muscles and Fascia Measurement With Myofascial Pain Syndrome
NCT05359523 ·Status: COMPLETED ·Phase: NA
-
Trigger Point Incidence After Lumbar Disc Herniation Surgery
NCT04136197 ·Status: COMPLETED
-
Interfascial Pressure Into Ultrasound Guided Anterior Quadratus Lumborum Block Application
NCT04094987 ·Status: COMPLETED ·Phase: NA
-
Pecto-Intercostal Fascial Block Versus Transversus Thoracic Muscle Plane Block in Cardiac Surgery
NCT05115357 ·Status: UNKNOWN ·Phase: NA
-
Bilateral Erector Spinae Plane Block for Myofascial Pain Syndrome
NCT05565053 ·Status: COMPLETED ·Phase: NA
-
Effectiveness of Ultrasound Versus Fluoroscopy Guided S1 Injections and Radiofrequency
NCT05247892 ·Status: COMPLETED ·Phase: NA
-
Ultrasound Guided : Retrolaminar Block Versus Thoracic Epidural Analgesia Following Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy
NCT04835415 ·Status: COMPLETED ·Phase: NA
-
Analgesic Efficacy of Erector Spinae and Rectus Sheath Block in Patients Undergoing Laparoscopic Inguinal Hernia Repair
NCT07251400 ·Status: ACTIVE_NOT_RECRUITING ·Phase: NA
-
The Importance of Gluteus Maximus Muscle in Patients With Preliminary Diagnosis of Piriformis Syndrome
NCT05271071 ·Status: COMPLETED ·Phase: NA
-
Transversus Abdominis Plane Block Versus Erector Spina Plane Block
NCT04095325 ·Status: UNKNOWN ·Phase: NA
-
Ultrasound-guided Erector Spinae Plane Block Versus Retrolaminar Block for Postoperative Analgesia in Thoracotomy
NCT05507281 ·Status: COMPLETED ·Phase: NA
-
Transversalis Fascia Plane vs Ilioinguinal and Iliohypogastric Nerve Block for the Treatment of CPIP
NCT06871605 ·Status: RECRUITING ·Phase: NA
-
Comparison of Ultrasound-Guided Bilateral Erector Spinae Plane Block Versus Bilateral Rectus Sheath Block in Adults Undergoing Major Abdominal Surgery
NCT04229420 ·Status: COMPLETED ·Phase: NA
-
Comparison of Erector Spina Plane Block and Thoracic Paravertebral Block for Analgesia After Thoracotomy
NCT06778161 ·Status: COMPLETED ·Phase: NA
-
Comparison of the Efficacy of Transversus Abdominis Plane Block and Erector Spinae Plane Block in Postoperative Analgesia Management After Abdominoplasty
NCT06845215 ·Status: RECRUITING
-
Comparing Between Ultrasound Guided Pectoral Nerve Block Versus Ultrasound Guided Mid-point Transverse Process Block for Postoperative Analgesia in Patients Undergoing Modified Radical Mastectomy
NCT06873893 ·Status: RECRUITING ·Phase: NA
-
mTLIP vs. ITP Blocks in Lumbar Disc Surgery
NCT06391541 ·Status: ACTIVE_NOT_RECRUITING ·Phase: NA
-
Ultrasound Guided Bilateral Erector Spinae Plane Block Versus Tumescent Anesthesia
NCT03558880 ·Status: COMPLETED ·Phase: NA
-
Ultrasound Guided Paravertebral Block Versus Erector Spinae Block for Postoperative Analgesia After Inguinal Hernia Repair in Pediatric Patients
NCT06752252 ·Status: RECRUITING ·Phase: NA
-
ESPB and ACB in Knee Arthroplasty
NCT05613101 ·Status: COMPLETED ·Phase: NA
-
Erector Spinae Plane Block Versus Serratus Anterior Plane Block
NCT06862752 ·Status: COMPLETED ·Phase: NA
-
Erector Spinae Block Versus Combined Pecto-intercostal and Recto-intercostal Fascial Plane Block in Cardiac Surgery
NCT06870383 ·Status: RECRUITING ·Phase: NA
-
Efficacy of Ultrasound Guided Erector Spinae Plane Block
NCT04371705 ·Status: COMPLETED ·Phase: NA
-
Comparison of the Analgesic Efficacy and Duration of Analgesic Effect of Pericapsular Nerve Group Block Block Application With PENG Block and Pulse Radiofrequency Ablation in Chronic Hip Pain
NCT06728488 ·Status: ACTIVE_NOT_RECRUITING ·Phase: NA