Dry needling versus corticosteroid injections to treat tendinopathy: a systematic review

Ifra Aman, Kalpana Zutshi, Depika Singla
{"title":"Dry needling versus corticosteroid injections to treat tendinopathy: a systematic review","authors":"Ifra Aman, Kalpana Zutshi, Depika Singla","doi":"10.1097/ph9.0000000000000014","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"During physical activity and exercises, there is more stress and forces are exerted on the tendon, which increases the risk of injury. There are several studies that suggest dry needling has a positive effect in treating tendinopathy. Corticosteroid injections are the most commonly used treatment for acute and chronic tendon lesions. In this review, we will compare different lines of treatment; dry needling and corticosteroid injections for tendinopathy and their efficacy in reducing symptoms. The aim of this systematic review is to critically analyze the literature to find the effect of dry needling when compared with corticosteroid injection in treating tendinopathy.\n \n \n \n This systematic review was directed according to “Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis” guidelines. The principal research question that was studied “Is dry needling better than corticosteroid injections in treating tendinopathy?” Various different electronic databases were used to search relevant articles using different keywords. Articles were collected altogether and selected on the basis of eligibility criteria. The closing sets of articles were selected after complete screening.\n \n \n \n Both dry needling and corticosteroid injections are effective in treating tendinopathy for both short term whereas dry needling is more significantly effective in long-term use.\n \n \n \n Dry needling is superior to corticosteroid injection in treating tendinopathy.","PeriodicalId":75125,"journal":{"name":"The journal of the International Society of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine","volume":"79 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The journal of the International Society of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/ph9.0000000000000014","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

During physical activity and exercises, there is more stress and forces are exerted on the tendon, which increases the risk of injury. There are several studies that suggest dry needling has a positive effect in treating tendinopathy. Corticosteroid injections are the most commonly used treatment for acute and chronic tendon lesions. In this review, we will compare different lines of treatment; dry needling and corticosteroid injections for tendinopathy and their efficacy in reducing symptoms. The aim of this systematic review is to critically analyze the literature to find the effect of dry needling when compared with corticosteroid injection in treating tendinopathy. This systematic review was directed according to “Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis” guidelines. The principal research question that was studied “Is dry needling better than corticosteroid injections in treating tendinopathy?” Various different electronic databases were used to search relevant articles using different keywords. Articles were collected altogether and selected on the basis of eligibility criteria. The closing sets of articles were selected after complete screening. Both dry needling and corticosteroid injections are effective in treating tendinopathy for both short term whereas dry needling is more significantly effective in long-term use. Dry needling is superior to corticosteroid injection in treating tendinopathy.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
干针与皮质类固醇注射治疗肌腱病变:一项系统综述
背景:在体育活动和锻炼中,肌腱受到更大的压力和力,这增加了损伤的风险。有几项研究表明干针对治疗腱鞘病有积极作用。皮质类固醇注射是急性和慢性肌腱损伤最常用的治疗方法。在这篇综述中,我们将比较不同的治疗方法;干针和皮质类固醇注射治疗肌腱病及其减轻症状的疗效。本系统综述的目的是批判性地分析文献,以发现干针与皮质类固醇注射在治疗腱鞘病方面的效果。方法:本系统评价按照“系统评价和荟萃分析的首选报告项目”指南进行。研究的主要问题是“在治疗肌腱病变方面,干针是否比皮质类固醇注射更好?”使用不同的电子数据库使用不同的关键词搜索相关文章。文章被收集在一起,并根据资格标准进行选择。最后一组文章是经过全面筛选后选出的。结果:干针和皮质类固醇注射对肌腱病变的短期治疗均有效,而长期使用干针更显着有效。结论:干针治疗腱鞘病优于皮质类固醇注射。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
15 weeks
期刊最新文献
Clinical effectiveness of a standardized community-based supervised post-acute rehabilitation model after total knee arthropathy: A pilot study. Special anatomy series. Imaging inner ear structures with high-frequency ultrasound: Application to physical rehabilitation space medicine. Keynote Speakers Oral Presentation 1 and Oral Presentation 2 Specialty Development
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1