Effect of Dry Cupping and Ischemic Compression on the Trigger Point on the Upper Trapezius Muscle

November 5, 2021 updated by: Agnieszka Zdrodowska, Józef Piłsudski University of Physical Education

Ischemic compression is considered the fastest and most common method for providing relief in trigger point therapy, whereas cupping therapy is not a method often used for this purpose. The muscle that has a great impact on tension-type headaches and neck pain is the trapezius, whose upper fibres are where the most common trigger point in the back is located.

The aim of this study was to evaluate and compare the effectiveness of single ischemic compression and single dry cupping therapy on the most common trigger point, on the descending part of the trapezius muscle.

Study Overview

Study Type

Interventional

Enrollment (Actual)

25

Phase

  • Not Applicable

Contacts and Locations

This section provides the contact details for those conducting the study, and information on where this study is being conducted.

Study Locations

    • Mazowieckie
      • Warsaw, Mazowieckie, Poland, 00-968
        • Józef Piłsudski University of Physical Education in Warsaw

Participation Criteria

Researchers look for people who fit a certain description, called eligibility criteria. Some examples of these criteria are a person's general health condition or prior treatments.

Eligibility Criteria

Ages Eligible for Study

18 years to 30 years (Adult)

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Genders Eligible for Study

All

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

  • age 18-30
  • student of The Józef Piłsudski University of Physical Education in Warsaw
  • written consent to participate in the study

Exclusion Criteria:

  • past or current injury to the trapezius.
  • past or current injury of the cervical spine limiting mobility of this segment.
  • broken skin at the examination site.
  • cardiological disease and use of blood pressure medication, histamine medication and analgesics
  • elevated body temperature, illness symptoms and a period of convalescence.
  • a missed anti-Covid procedure before each examination.
  • inability to find trigger points.

Study Plan

This section provides details of the study plan, including how the study is designed and what the study is measuring.

How is the study designed?

Design Details

  • Primary Purpose: Supportive Care
  • Allocation: N/A
  • Interventional Model: Single Group Assignment
  • Masking: None (Open Label)

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm
Intervention / Treatment
Experimental: Experimental
Each person participated in three tests with an interval of approximately one week between them.
The participant lay on his front on a couch. The examiner applied a plastic cup on a pre-marked trigger point, suctioned it with a mechanical pump and left it for 2 minutes. This was a stationary application with medium suction force. Therapy was performed on both sides. Measurements were taken before and 2 minutes after the therapy.
The participant lay on his front on a couch for 4 minutes without any activity and without anyy intervention. Measurements were taken before and after the session.
The participant lay on his front on a couch. The researcher applied pressure to a pre-marked trigger point using the thumb for 2 minutes until tissue resistance was felt. This included 60-second compression and after a break of a few seconds, another 60 seconds of compression. Therapies were performed on each side. Measurements were taken before and 2 minutes after the therapy.

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Pain pressure threshold test (PPT)
Time Frame: changes from baseline in pain pressure threshold at 2 minutes after the session
The trigger points of the upper section of the trapezius on the right and left sides were determined by palpation and were also indicated using a marker. A Wagner FDX 50 Force Gage algometer was applied to the trigger point. The pressure force was increased by 1kg/cm2/s until the patient felt pain, which was the pain pressure threshold (PPT) measured in kg/cm2. The test was performed on both sides. The test was performed twice on each side - before and 2 minutes after the session.
changes from baseline in pain pressure threshold at 2 minutes after the session
Cervical spine mobility test
Time Frame: changes from baseline in cervical spine mobility at 2 minutes after the session
Each examination began in a sitting position with a cervical spine mobility test. The following bone points were marked on the participants' skin using a marker: spinous process of the 7th cervical vertebra, external occipital protuberance, the top of the chin, the jugular notch of the sternum, the mastoid of the temporal bone, and the acromion process of the scapula. Next, a linear measurement of the range of motion was performed using a tape measure to ascertain the distance between the marked points in the initial position and after the active movement for flexion (forward bending), extension (backward bending), lateral bending and rotation to both sides, respectively. The mobility was determined by the difference of the two measurements. The test for each movement (i.e. flexion (forward flexion), extension (backward flexion), lateral flexion and both sides rotation) was performed twice - before and 2 minutes after the session.
changes from baseline in cervical spine mobility at 2 minutes after the session

Secondary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Height
Time Frame: Measurements were taken before the first session
Height measured in meters
Measurements were taken before the first session
Weight
Time Frame: Measurements were taken before the first session
Weight measured in kilograms
Measurements were taken before the first session

Collaborators and Investigators

This is where you will find people and organizations involved with this study.

Investigators

  • Principal Investigator: Agnieszka Zdrodowska, PH.D, Józef Piłsudski University of Physical Education in Warsaw

Study record dates

These dates track the progress of study record and summary results submissions to ClinicalTrials.gov. Study records and reported results are reviewed by the National Library of Medicine (NLM) to make sure they meet specific quality control standards before being posted on the public website.

Study Major Dates

Study Start (Actual)

January 23, 2021

Primary Completion (Actual)

March 30, 2021

Study Completion (Actual)

March 30, 2021

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

October 23, 2021

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

November 5, 2021

First Posted (Actual)

November 17, 2021

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Actual)

November 17, 2021

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

November 5, 2021

Last Verified

November 1, 2021

More Information

Terms related to this study

Other Study ID Numbers

  • SKE 01-03/2021

Drug and device information, study documents

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product

No

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product

No

This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.

Subscribe