The Aim of This Study is to Compare the Effects of Instrument-assisted Soft Tissue Mobilization (IASTM) and Extracorporeal Shock Wave Therapy (ESWT) Used in Myofascial Pain Syndrome (MPS) and to Determine Whether They Are Superior to Conservative Treatment (CT)
NCT ID: NCT05699798
Last Updated: 2023-01-27
Study Results
The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.
Basic Information
Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.
COMPLETED
NA
42 participants
INTERVENTIONAL
2022-06-27
2022-10-14
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
Related Clinical Trials
Explore similar clinical trials based on study characteristics and research focus.
Extracorporeal Shock-wave Therapy in Myofascial Pain Syndrome
NCT06987721
Effect of Shock Wave Therapy on Myofascial Pain Syndrome in Adolescent Athletes
NCT06845475
Extracorporeal Shockwave Therapy vs Mesotherapy in the Treatment of Myofascial Pain Syndrome: a Case-control Study
NCT06246591
Effectiveness of Shock-wave Therapy in Patients With Myofascial Pain Syndrome
NCT04814017
Comparison of Focused ESWT by Frequency for Patients With Myofascial Pain Syndrome
NCT04998630
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
Randomization:42 female patients included in the study were randomized into 3 groups.
Interventions:The first group received a Conservative Treatment (CT) program including Hotpack (HP), Ultrasound (US) and Transcutaneous Electrical Nerve Stimulation (TENS), which is routinely given in physical therapy clinics. The second group was given Instrument-Assisted Soft Tissue Mobilization (IASTM) treatment in addition to the CT we applied in the first group. Extracorporeal Shock Wave Therapy (ESWT) was applied to the third group in addition to the CT we applied in the first group. In addition, a home exercise program consisting of neck stretching exercises was given to all participants. The effects of treatments on pain severity, pressure pain threshold, cervical joint range of motion, neck mobility, sleep, activity-pain, quality of life, anxiety and depression were evaluated before and after treatment.
Conditions
See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.
Study Design
Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.
RANDOMIZED
PARALLEL
TREATMENT
NONE
Study Groups
Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.
Conservative Treatment (CT)
Includes Hotpack, TENS, Ultrasound and home exercise programs. HP, US and TENS applications were applied for 3 weeks, with a total of 15 sessions, 5 sessions per week. HP application for 20 minutes, ultrasound for 5 minutes and TENS for 20 minutes were applied to the patients. The CT protocol was applied to all three groups in the same way.
Conservative Treatment (CT)
Conservative treatment (HP, US, TENS) was applied for 3 weeks, with 5 sessions per week, a total of 15 sessions.
Instrument Assisted Soft Tissue Mobilization (IASTM)
Includes Hotpack, TENS, Ultrasound, home exercise programs and Instrument-assisted Soft Tissue Mobilization Technique. The IASTM therapy was applied for three weeks, two sessions per week, for a total of 6 sessions.
Instrument-assisted Soft Tissue Mobilization (IASTM)
IASTM was performed only on the neck and upper back muscles on the aching side using the sweep technique on the origo and insertion lines. A total of 6 sessions were applied, two sessions per week for 3 weeks.
Conservative treatment (HP, US, TENS) was applied for 3 weeks, with 5 sessions per week, a total of 15 sessions.
Extracorporeal Shock Wave Therapy (ESWT)
Includes Hotpack, TENS, Ultrasound, home exercise programs and Extracorporeal Shock Wave Therapy treatment. The ESWT therapy was applied for three weeks, two sessions per week, for a total of 6 sessions.
Extracorporeal Shock Wave Therapy (ESWT)
ESWT therapy was applied on the muscle with active trigger point, at 1.5-2.0 bar pressure, at 10 Hz frequency, 2000 beats in each session, twice a week, in total 6 sessions.
Conservative treatment (HP, US, TENS) was applied for 3 weeks, with 5 sessions per week, a total of 15 sessions.
Interventions
Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.
Conservative Treatment (CT)
Conservative treatment (HP, US, TENS) was applied for 3 weeks, with 5 sessions per week, a total of 15 sessions.
Instrument-assisted Soft Tissue Mobilization (IASTM)
IASTM was performed only on the neck and upper back muscles on the aching side using the sweep technique on the origo and insertion lines. A total of 6 sessions were applied, two sessions per week for 3 weeks.
Conservative treatment (HP, US, TENS) was applied for 3 weeks, with 5 sessions per week, a total of 15 sessions.
Extracorporeal Shock Wave Therapy (ESWT)
ESWT therapy was applied on the muscle with active trigger point, at 1.5-2.0 bar pressure, at 10 Hz frequency, 2000 beats in each session, twice a week, in total 6 sessions.
Conservative treatment (HP, US, TENS) was applied for 3 weeks, with 5 sessions per week, a total of 15 sessions.
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
* To be diagnosed with Myofascial Pain Syndrome (MPS) according to Simons diagnostic criteria (having 5 major and at least one minor criterion)
* Detection of a trigger point in the trapezius muscle
* Not receiving any treatment for MPS in the last 1 month
Exclusion Criteria
* Tumor
* Fibromyalgia
* Mental or psychotic disorders
* Venous insufficiency
* Active infection
* Pregnancy
* Allergic skin diseases
* Acute rheumatic diseases
18 Years
FEMALE
No
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
Gazi University
OTHER
Ankara University
OTHER
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
şeyda candeniz
Instructor
Principal Investigators
Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.
Seyda CANDENIZ, PhD
Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR
Ankara University
Zafer GUNENDI, Prof.Dr.
Role: STUDY_DIRECTOR
Gazi University
Seyit CITAKER, Prof.Dr.
Role: STUDY_DIRECTOR
Gazi University
Locations
Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.
Ankara University
Ankara, , Turkey (Türkiye)
Countries
Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
candeniz-001
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id
More Related Trials
Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.