EFFECTS OF MIOFASCIAL RELEASE AND PERCUTANEOUS MICROELETROLYSIS IN TYPE HEADACHE

NCT ID: NCT03225053

Last Updated: 2017-07-21

Basic Information

• Recruitment Status: UNKNOWN
• Clinical Phase: NA
• Total Enrollment: 60 participants
• Study Classification: INTERVENTIONAL
• Study Start Date: 2017-08-20
• Study Completion Date: 2018-01-30

Brief Summary

A headache is a more common disorder and one that prevails over a lifetime of much of the population. Among the causes are in the stress and spasms of the pericranial musculature, presence of painful sensitivity in the region, decrease of pain threshold, and a presence of trigger points (PGs) that can also cause as headaches. The solutions for health and health, in addition to Percutaneous Microelectrolysis (MEP®), which is used in the application of low intensity galvanic current through the acupuncture needle. Although it is a very common pathology, it is still little studied and a lack of information is a question of solutions such as crisis of care. This work justifies the negative bones of CTT in university students, as this has repercussions on the quality of life, besides proposing a therapeutic approach to reduce the symptomatology. The present study aims to investigate the effects of myofascial release techniques, MEP® and an association of therapies, observing the impact on quality of life and repercussions on academic performance. This is a controlled clinical trial of a convenience-based approach, consisting of universities between the 1st and 10th Physical Therapy course of Estácio Ponta Negra, over 18 years of age, who are not present in the application of the questionnaires, It is necessary to use the medicine of the analgesic type. The volunteers are evaluated through the HIT-6 and SF-36 questionnaires, after a selection of pain evaluation, PGs and algometry. The randomization will consist of 4 groups, after a consultation and an immediate re-evaluation and a second time and a new intervention and re-evaluation. A descriptive and inferential statistics will be performed through the SPSS 20.0 program. The normality of the data is observed by the Kolmogorov-Smirnov (KS) test. For a comparison between groups whose parametric data are applied or anova test with post hoc tukey comingue of significance of 5% (p <0.05). It is believed that the use of the association of myofascial release techniques and Percutaneous Microelectronics promotes greater benefits in tension headache.

Conditions

Trigger Point; Tension-Type Headache

Study Design

• Allocation Method: NA
• Intervention Model: SINGLE_GROUP
• Primary Study Purpose: TREATMENT
• Blinding Strategy: NONE

Study Groups

MEP® technique

G1 (n = 15), referred to as LMF, will be submitted to the myofascial release technique consisting of: classic massage (superficial sliding, deep sliding, pumping-kneading, pulse and four-finger smear and sliding) Minutes. G2 (n = 15) will be applied to the MEP® technique, in which the needles will be introduced in three occasions during each session, in different points of the musculature of the most painful region, for a total of 3 minutes. The G3 (n = 15) will execute the two techniques above, being applied the first version Myofascial and later to the MEP®. G4 (n = 15) will be the control group, not performing any of the interventions. The reevaluations will occur immediately and after 48 hours of the intervention.

Group Type: EXPERIMENTAL

MEP® technique

Intervention Type: DEVICE

G1 (n = 15), referred to as LMF, will be submitted to the myofascial release technique consisting of: classic massage (superficial sliding, deep sliding, pumping-kneading, pulse and four-finger smear and sliding) Minutes. G2 (n = 15) will be applied to the MEP® technique, in which the needles will be introduced in three occasions during each session, in different points of the musculature of the most painful region, for a total of 3 minutes. The G3 (n = 15) will execute the two techniques above, being applied the first version Myofascial and later to the MEP®. G4 (n = 15) will be the control group, not performing any of the interventions. The reevaluations will occur immediately and after 48 hours of the intervention.

Interventions

MEP® technique

G1 (n = 15), referred to as LMF, will be submitted to the myofascial release technique consisting of: classic massage (superficial sliding, deep sliding, pumping-kneading, pulse and four-finger smear and sliding) Minutes. G2 (n = 15) will be applied to the MEP® technique, in which the needles will be introduced in three occasions during each session, in different points of the musculature of the most painful region, for a total of 3 minutes. The G3 (n = 15) will execute the two techniques above, being applied the first version Myofascial and later to the MEP®. G4 (n = 15) will be the control group, not performing any of the interventions. The reevaluations will occur immediately and after 48 hours of the intervention.

Intervention Type: DEVICE

Other Intervention Names

classic massage (superficial sliding, deep sliding, pumping-kneading, pulse and four-finger smear and sliding)

Eligibility Criteria

Inclusion Criteria

• Be over 18 years old, they will be present at the time of ordering, not being pregnant and not taking analgesic medication at least 24 hours before the intervention.

Exclusion Criteria

• More than 20% of the questionnaire data are incomplete and if during the research the volunteer presents some discomfort.

• Minimum Eligible Age: 18 Years
• Maximum Eligible Age: 40 Years
• Eligible Sex: FEMALE
• Accepts Healthy Volunteers: Yes

Sponsors

Rodrigo Marcel Valentim da Silva

OTHER

Sponsor Role: lead

Responsible Party

Rodrigo Marcel Valentim da Silva

Principal Investigator

Responsibility Role: SPONSOR_INVESTIGATOR

Central Contacts

Rodrigo M Valentim da Silva, Doctor

Role: CONTACT

marcelvalentim@hotmsil.com

55 (084) 999517077

Other Identifiers

RSilva

Identifier Type: -

Identifier Source: org_study_id