Skip to content

Efficacy of High and Low Intensity Percutaneous Electrolysis for the Treatment of Myofascial Pain Syndrome

Efficacy of High and Low Intensity Percutaneous Electrolysis for the Treatment of Myofascial Pain Syndrome: A Pilot Study

Status
Completed
Phases
NA
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT04390438
Enrollment
15
Registered
2020-05-15
Start date
2020-02-17
Completion date
2020-04-27
Last updated
2020-05-15

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Knee Pain Chronic, Muscle Pain

Keywords

Patellofemoral pain syndrome, Electrolysis, Myofascial Pain Syndromes, Acupuncture

Brief summary

Muscle pain is frequently attributed to myofascial pain syndrome (MPS) in which myofascial trigger points (MTrP) are a characteristic feature. Dry needling is a frequent clinical practice to manage MPS but few evidence is published about percutaneous electrolysis effects for the treatment of MPS. This is a randomized clinical trial with 3 parallel groups: 1) High intensity-short time percutaneous electrolysis; 2) Low intensity-long time percutaneous electrolysis; 3) dry needling control group.

Detailed description

The current study aimed to evaluate changes in rectus femurs active trigger points and patellar tendon pain pressure thresholds and subjective anterior knee pain perception after application of two percutaneous electrolysis methods using a same charge (high intensity and low intensity) compared to a dry needling group in patients with patellofemoral pain syndrome (PFPS) Fifteen patients diagnosed with unilateral PFPS were divided in two experimental groups (high intensity percutaneous electrolysis and low intensity percutaneous electrolysis) and one active control group (dry needling. The duration of the study was 7 days with only one intervention. Pain pressure thresholds were assessed using an algometer before the intervention, immediately after the intervention and after 7 days and a Visual Analogue Scale was used before the treatment and after 7 days to rate the subjective anterior knee pain perception. Also a VAS was used to rate the pain perception during the intervention

Interventions

Needle emplacement with a galvanic electrical current

PROCEDUREDry needling

Needle emplacement without electrical current nor substance

Sponsors

Universidad Francisco de Vitoria
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
TRIPLE (Subject, Investigator, Outcomes Assessor)

Intervention model description

Randomized Clinical trial with 3 parallel groups; 2 experimental groups and 1 control group

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to 45 Years
Healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

* Athletes with knee pain * Presence of at least one active Trigger point

Exclusion criteria

* Farmacologic treatment * Surgery or traumas * Skin alterations or infections * Prior 6 weeks DN nor PT treatment

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Pressure Pain Threshold (Trigger Point)7 daysAlgometry (Wagner analogical algometer)
Pressure Pain Threshold (Patellar Tendon)7 daysAlgometry (Wagner analogical algometer)

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Subjective pain perception7 daysVisual Analogue Scale

Countries

Spain

Outcome results

None listed

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026