RESUMEN
OBJECTIVES: Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) is an established therapy option in interventional pain medicine. Recent advances in technology have allowed for greater compliance with treatment and improved efficacy in pain control. This article was proposed to fill the gap in the literature addressing this specific patient population and to facilitate further research. Even though there is a lack of consensus among societies and experts on exact parameters of physical therapy (PT) considerations and postoperative limitations in patients with SCS, we propose rehabilitative care for this population should be standardized. As the number of patients with SCS implants grow, it is vital to understand how to appropriately approach patients with implantable devices when additional treatments such as PT are prescribed. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A literature search was performed on the use of PT following SCS implantation. Presently, there is no literature to date which addresses the use of PT in this patient population. The lack of data is the largest hurdle in the creation of formal SCS therapy guidelines. The authors therefore proposed recommendations for rehabilitation based upon a detailed understanding of SCS hardware alongside well-studied physiotherapy concepts. RESULTS: Considerations when initiating PT in the SCS patient population should include: 1) biomechanics and quality of SCS output; 2) therapeutic exercise and spinal manipulation in association with risk for lead migration and fracture; 3) the application of therapeutic modalities and risk for injury to the patient and/or damage to the SCS componentry; and 4) integration of a biopsychosocial, person-centered approach. CONCLUSIONS: PT treatment protocol in patients with a recently implanted SCS device should be person-centered addressing individual needs, values, and goals. Further research is needed to fully appreciate the impact of an interprofessional approach to management of SCS patients, particularly following stimulator implantation.
Asunto(s)
Modalidades de Fisioterapia , Estimulación de la Médula Espinal , Humanos , Estimulación de la Médula Espinal/métodos , Procedimientos Neuroquirúrgicos , Dolor/etiología , Médula EspinalRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Tendinopathy is frequently associated with pain, soft tissue impairments and muscle performance limitations. Dry needling (DN) incorporates a fine filiform needle to penetrate the skin and underlying soft tissue in an effort to decrease pain and improve function. While injectable interventions and gauged-needle tendon fenestration for tendinopathy has been reviewed, DN for tendinopathy has yet to be synthesized. OBJECTIVE: To systematically review the utilization and effects of DN for tendinopathy. METHODS: Six electronic databases (PubMed, CINAHL, Scopus, SportDiscus, PEDro and the Cochrane Library) were searched from inception through August 15, 2020, using appropriate keywords and relevant synonyms. RESULTS: After screening 462 articles, 10 studies met inclusion criteria. Study designs included case reports, case series, and randomized clinical trials. DN was used in isolation in 3/10 studies and as part of a multimodal approach in 7/10 studies. DN was associated with improved pain, function, muscle performance and perceived improvement in each study evaluating the relevant outcome. Conflicting results were found in comparative studies evaluating DN. CONCLUSIONS: DN may be a useful adjunctive treatment in the conservative management of tendinopathy, although its discrete effect is unclear. Very Low-quality evidence and methodological limitations suggest further investigation is warranted.
Asunto(s)
Punción Seca , Tendinopatía , Humanos , Tendinopatía/terapia , Dolor , Agujas , Tratamiento ConservadorRESUMEN
Pain that develops in the coccyx or surrounding tissues is known as coccydynia, which occurs as a result of many etiologies both traumatic and nontraumatic. Although coccydynia most commonly affects middle-aged women, it may be found in both sexes and in all age groups. The aim of this article is to provide an overview of the presentation, diagnostic imaging, and pathophysiology of coccydynia, and to comprehensively review the current treatment options. A review of publications from 1990 to 2020 using search words related to the treatment of coccydynia in PubMed and Google Scholar was completed. Level II evidence was found supporting stretching, manipulation, and extracorporeal shock wave therapy. There are no data from high-quality studies to support injection-based therapy including corticosteroids, prolotherapy, nerve blocks, and radiofrequency ablation, although there are small retrospective and prospective observational studies suggesting benefit. Level III evidence was found supporting coccygectomy for chronic/refractory coccydynia. There are no data from randomized controlled trials to support the use of neuromodulation (sacral burst and dorsal root ganglion stimulation), although there are case reports suggesting benefit. High-level, comparative studies are lacking to guide the treatment of coccydynia and should be a focus for future research studies.