Comparing two dry needling interventions for plantar heel pain: a randomised controlled trial

Zaid Al-Boloushi, Eva Maria Gómez-Trullén, Mohammad Arian, Daniel Fernández, Pablo Herrero, Pablo Bellosta-López, Zaid Al-Boloushi, Eva Maria Gómez-Trullén, Mohammad Arian, Daniel Fernández, Pablo Herrero, Pablo Bellosta-López

Abstract

Objectives: To compare the effectiveness of dry needling (DN) versus percutaneous needle electrolysis (PNE) for improving the level of pain, function and quality of life (QoL) of patients suffering from plantar heel pain (PHP) provoked by myofascial trigger points.

Design: A prospective, parallel-group, randomised controlled trial with blinded outcome assessment.

Setting: A single treatment facility in the State of Kuwait.

Participants: 118 participants were screened for eligibility. Of these, 102 participants were enrolled (30 men (49.5±8.9 years) and 72 women (48.1±8.8 years)) and 68 of them completed the trial.

Interventions: Two parallel groups, one study arm received DN and a stretching protocol whereas the other arm received percutaneous needling electrolysis with a stretching protocol.

Primary and secondary outcome measures: The primary outcome measure was the Foot Pain domain of the Foot Health Status Questionnaire, with 13 questions related to foot health-related domains. Secondary outcome measures included the 0-10 numerical rating scale pain visual analogue scale (VAS) scores, performed before and after each treatment session. In addition, QoL was measured using the EuroQoL-5 dimensions. All measurements were taken at baseline, at 4, 8, 12, 26 and 52 weeks.

Results: Foot Pain domain improved at all time points for DN group (p<0.001; 29.7 (17.8 to 41.5)) and percutaneous needling electrolysis group (p<0.001; 32.7 (18.3 to 47.0)), without significant differences between groups. Pain VAS scores decreased at all time points for both DN (p<0.001; -2.6 (-4.0 to -1.2)) and percutaneous needling electrolysis group (p<0.001; -3.0 (-4.5 to -1.6)). QoL improved at 4 weeks for both DN (p<0.01; 0.15 (0.5 to 0.25)) and percutaneous needling electrolysis group (p<0.01; 0.09 (0.01 to 0.17)) and at 8 and 52 weeks for the PNE group (p<0.01; 0.10 (0.02 to 0.18)), with significant differences between groups for the QoL at 52 weeks (p<0.05; 0.10 (0.01 to 0.18)). There were two small haematomas in the PNE group and one in the DN group. No serious adverse events were reported.

Conclusions: Both PNE and DN were effective for PHP management, reducing mean and maximum pain since the first treatment session, with long lasting effects (52 weeks) and significant differences between groups in the case of QoL at 52 weeks in favour of the PNE group.

Trial registration number: NCT03236779.

Keywords: pain management; rehabilitation medicine; sports medicine.

Conflict of interest statement

Competing interests: None declared.

© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2020. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Participant flow chart. DN, dry needling; PNE, percutaneous needle electrolysis.

References

    1. Landorf KB. Plantar heel pain and plantar fasciitis. BMJ Clin Evid 2015;2015:1111.
    1. Martin RL, Davenport TE, Reischl SF, et al. . Heel pain-plantar fasciitis: revision 2014. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2014;44:A1–33. 10.2519/jospt.2014.0303
    1. McPoil TG, Martin RL, Cornwall MW, et al. . Heel pain--plantar fasciitis: clinical practice guildelines linked to the international classification of function, disability, and health from the orthopaedic section of the American Physical Therapy Association. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2008;38:A1–18. 10.2519/jospt.2008.0302
    1. Dommerholt J, Grieve R, Layton M, et al. . An evidence-informed review of the current myofascial pain literature--January 2015. J Bodyw Mov Ther 2015;19:126–37. 10.1016/j.jbmt.2014.11.006
    1. Tong KB, Furia J. Economic burden of plantar fasciitis treatment in the United States. Am J Orthop 2010;39:227–31.
    1. Rio E, Mayes S, Cook J. Heel pain: a practical approach. Aust Fam Physician 2015;44:96–101.
    1. Travell JG, Simons DG. Myofascial pain and dysfunction : the trigger point manual. Baltimore: Williams & Wilkins, 1982.
    1. Cotchett MP, Munteanu SE, Landorf KB. Effectiveness of trigger point dry needling for plantar heel pain: a randomized controlled trial. Phys Ther 2014;94:1083–94. 10.2522/ptj.20130255
    1. Eftekharsadat B, Babaei-Ghazani A, Zeinolabedinzadeh V. Dry needling in patients with chronic heel pain due to plantar fasciitis: a single-blinded randomized clinical trial. Med J Islam Repub Iran 2016;30:401.
    1. Hains G, Boucher PB, Lamy A-M. Ischemic compression and joint mobilisation for the treatment of nonspecific myofascial foot pain: findings from two quasi-experimental before-and-after studies. J Can Chiropr Assoc 2015;59:72–83.
    1. Renan-Ordine R, Alburquerque-Sendín F, de Souza DPR, et al. . Effectiveness of myofascial trigger point manual therapy combined with a self-stretching protocol for the management of plantar heel pain: a randomized controlled trial. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2011;41:43–50. 10.2519/jospt.2011.3504
    1. Cole C, Seto C, Gazewood J. Plantar fasciitis: evidence-based review of diagnosis and therapy. Am Fam Physician 2005;72:2237–42.
    1. Rosenbaum AJ, DiPreta JA, Misener D. Plantar heel pain. Med Clin North Am 2014;98:339–52. 10.1016/j.mcna.2013.10.009
    1. Toomey EP. Plantar heel pain. Foot Ankle Clin 2009;14:229–45. 10.1016/j.fcl.2009.02.001
    1. Sweeting D, Parish B, Hooper L, et al. . The effectiveness of manual stretching in the treatment of plantar heel pain: a systematic review. J Foot Ankle Res 2011;4:19. 10.1186/1757-1146-4-19
    1. Abat F, Diesel W-J, Gelber P-E, et al. . Effectiveness of the Intratissue percutaneous electrolysis (EPI®) technique and isoinertial eccentric exercise in the treatment of Patellar tendinopathy at two years follow-up. Muscles Ligaments Tendons J 2014;4:188–93. 10.32098/mltj.02.2014.18
    1. Abat F, Sánchez-Sánchez JL, Martín-Nogueras AM, et al. . Randomized controlled trial comparing the effectiveness of the ultrasound-guided galvanic electrolysis technique (USGET) versus conventional electro-physiotherapeutic treatment on patellar tendinopathy. J Exp Orthop 2016;3:34. 10.1186/s40634-016-0070-4
    1. Valera-Garrido F, Minaya-Muñoz F, Medina-Mirapeix F. Ultrasound-Guided percutaneous needle electrolysis in chronic lateral epicondylitis: short-term and long-term results. Acupunct Med 2014;32:446–54. 10.1136/acupmed-2014-010619
    1. Al-Boloushi Z, Gómez-Trullén EM, Bellosta-López P, et al. . Comparing two dry needling interventions for plantar heel pain: a protocol for a randomized controlled trial. J Orthop Surg Res 2019;14:31. 10.1186/s13018-019-1066-4
    1. Landorf KB, Radford JA, Hudson S. Minimal important difference (mid) of two commonly used outcome measures for foot problems. J Foot Ankle Res 2010;3:7. 10.1186/1757-1146-3-7
    1. Dommerholt J, Cs Fernández-de-las-Peñas. Trigger point dry needling : an evidenced and clinical-based approach. Edinburgh; New York: Churchill Livingstone/Elsevier, 2013.
    1. Lewit K. The needle effect in the relief of myofascial pain. Pain 1979;6:83–90. 10.1016/0304-3959(79)90142-8
    1. Bennett PJ, Patterson C, Wearing S, et al. . Development and validation of a questionnaire designed to measure foot-health status. J Am Podiatr Med Assoc 1998;88:419–28. 10.7547/87507315-88-9-419
    1. Landorf KB, Keenan A-M, Herbert RD. Effectiveness of foot orthoses to treat plantar fasciitis: a randomized trial. Arch Intern Med 2006;166:1305–10. 10.1001/archinte.166.12.1305
    1. Radford JA, Landorf KB, Buchbinder R, et al. . Effectiveness of calf muscle stretching for the short-term treatment of plantar heel pain: a randomised trial. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 2007;8:36. 10.1186/1471-2474-8-36
    1. Riskowski JL, Hagedorn TJ, Hannan MT. Measures of foot function, foot health, and foot pain: American Academy of orthopedic surgeons lower limb outcomes assessment: foot and ankle module (AAOS-FAM), Bristol foot score (BFS), revised foot function index (FFI-R), foot health status questionnaire (FHSQ), Manchester foot pain and disability index (MFPDI), podiatric health questionnaire (PHQ), and Rowan foot pain assessment (ROFPAQ). Arthritis Care Res 2011;63 Suppl 11:S229–39. 10.1002/acr.20554
    1. Barnes A, Sullivan J, Pappas E, et al. . Clinical and functional characteristics of people with chronic and recent-onset plantar heel pain. Pm R 2017;9:1128–34. 10.1016/j.pmrj.2017.04.009
    1. Boonstra AM, Schiphorst Preuper HR, Reneman MF, et al. . Reliability and validity of the visual analogue scale for disability in patients with chronic musculoskeletal pain. Int J Rehabil Res 2008;31:165–9. 10.1097/MRR.0b013e3282fc0f93
    1. Bijur PE, Silver W, Gallagher EJ. Reliability of the visual analog scale for measurement of acute pain. Acad Emerg Med 2001;8:1153–7. 10.1111/j.1553-2712.2001.tb01132.x
    1. Price DD, McGrath PA, Rafii A, et al. . The validation of visual analogue scales as ratio scale measures for chronic and experimental pain. Pain 1983;17:45–56. 10.1016/0304-3959(83)90126-4
    1. Herdman M, Gudex C, Lloyd A, et al. . Development and preliminary testing of the new five-level version of EQ-5D (EQ-5D-5L). Qual Life Res 2011;20:1727–36. 10.1007/s11136-011-9903-x
    1. van Hout B, Janssen MF, Feng Y-S, et al. . Interim scoring for the EQ-5D-5L: mapping the EQ-5D-5L to EQ-5D-3L value sets. Value Health 2012;15:708–15. 10.1016/j.jval.2012.02.008
    1. Cohen J. Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. New York, NY: Routledge Academic, 1988.
    1. Coretti S, Ruggeri M, McNamee P. The minimum clinically important difference for EQ-5D index: a critical review. Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res 2014;14:221–33. 10.1586/14737167.2014.894462
    1. Landorf KB, Radford JA. Minimal important difference: values for the foot health status questionnaire, foot function index and visual analogue scale. Foot 2008;18:15–19. 10.1016/j.foot.2007.06.006
    1. Wariaghli G, Allali F, Berrada K, et al. . The patient acceptable symptom state of chronic musculoskeletal pain measured on a visual analog scale in Moroccan patients. Pain Med 2013;14:103–9. 10.1111/j.1526-4637.2012.01529.x
    1. Perreault T, Dunning J, Butts R. The local twitch response during trigger point dry needling: is it necessary for successful outcomes? J Bodyw Mov Ther 2017;21:940–7. 10.1016/j.jbmt.2017.03.008
    1. Lopez-Martos R, Gonzalez-Perez L-M, Ruiz-Canela-Mendez P, et al. . Randomized, double-blind study comparing percutaneous electrolysis and dry needling for the management of temporomandibular myofascial pain. Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal 2018;23:e454–62. 10.4317/medoral.22488
    1. Sterling M, Vicenzino B, Souvlis T, et al. . Dry-needling and exercise for chronic whiplash-associated disorders: a randomized single-blind placebo-controlled trial. Pain 2015;156:635–43. 10.1097/01.j.pain.0000460359.40116.c1
    1. Taşoğlu Özlem, Şahin Onat Şule, Bölük H, et al. . Comparision of two different dry-needling techniques in the treatment of myofascial pain syndrome. Agri 2017;29:9–16. 10.5505/agri.2016.38991
    1. Brady S, McEvoy J, Dommerholt J, et al. . Adverse events following trigger point dry needling: a prospective survey of chartered physiotherapists. J Man Manip Ther 2014;22:134–40. 10.1179/2042618613Y.0000000044

Source: PubMed

Sponsorzy i współpracownicy

Warunki medyczne

Interwencje lekowe

3
Subskrybuj