The Impact of Dry Needling With Electrical Stimulation on Pain and Disability in Patients With Musculoskeletal Shoulder Pain: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

• Published in: Curēus (Palo Alto, CA) Vol. 15; no. 7; p. e41404
• Main Authors: Baumann, Anthony N, Fiorentino, Andrew, Oleson, Caleb J, Leland, 3rd, John Martin
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: United States Cureus Inc 05.07.2023; Cureus
• Subjects: Acupuncture; Bias; Clinical outcomes; Clinical trials; Electric currents; Interdisciplinary aspects; Manipulative therapy; Meta-analysis; Orthopedics; Pain; Patients; Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation; Physical therapy; Rotator cuff; Shoulder; Systematic review; electrical stimulation; orthopedics; physical therapy; musculoskeletal; shoulder pain; dry needling
• ISSN: 2168-8184; 2168-8184
• DOI: 10.7759/cureus.41404

Musculoskeletal shoulder pain (MSP) is a common orthopedic condition frequently treated by orthopedic surgeons and physical therapists in an interdisciplinary manner. Dry needling with electrical stimulation (DNES) is an increasingly popular intervention used for the conservative treatment of MSP during physical therapy. To date, no systematic review and meta-analysis have examined the impact of DNES on outcomes in patients with MSP. This study aims to explore the effectiveness and safety of DNES in patients with MSP to improve patient outcomes. A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted using PubMed, MEDLINE, CINAHL, and Web of Science from database inception to March 10, 2023. Inclusion criteria were studies with DNES as an intervention, recorded patient outcomes, and randomized controlled trials (RCTs) only. DNES with or without conventional physical therapy (CPT) was compared to CPT alone, which included interventions such as exercise, manual therapy, dry needling without electrical stimulation, and/or interferential current. A total of five RCTs were analyzed from 144 articles retrieved on the initial search. Included patients (n=342) had an average age of 48.75 ± 5.92 years, an average follow-up time of 3.40 ± 1.42 months, and 184 patients receiving DNES with or without CPT. Patients treated with DNES with or without CPT (n=163) had a frequency-weighted mean decrease in pain of 4.8 ± 1.4 points, whereas patients treated with CPT alone (n=158) had a frequency-weighted mean decrease in pain of 3.3 ± 2.2 points. For meta-analysis of pain outcomes (n=321 total patients), DNES with or without CPT improved pain by 1.40/10 points as compared to CPT alone with no significant difference between groups (p=0.203; Cohen's d effect size (ES): 4.352; 95% CI: -2.343, 11.048). Patients treated with DNES with or without CPT (n=118) had a frequency-weighted mean decrease in disability of 34.7 ± 9.1 points. In contrast, patients treated with CPT alone (n=115) had a frequency-weighted decrease in disability of 20.1 ± 5.0 points. For meta-analysis of disability outcomes (n=233 total patients), DNES with or without CPT did not have a significant improvement in disability as compared to CPT alone (p=0.282; Cohen's d ES: 0.543; 95% CI: -0.446, 1.532). No serious adverse effects were reported for patients treated with DNES with or without CPT or CPT alone. DNES with or without CPT may significantly improve pain and disability in patients with MSP. However, DNES with or without CPT does not provide statistically significant improvements in pain or disability compared to CPT alone. Furthermore, DNES appears to be a safe intervention for MSP.