Article

OBJECTIVE: To retrieve, appraise, and synthesize the results of studies on the
prevalence of active and latent myofascial trigger points (MTrPs) in subjects
with spinal pain disorders.
DATA SOURCES: The databases PubMed, Embase, and
CINAHL were searched, with no date or language restrictions. Search terms
included controlled and free-text terms for spinal disorders and MTrPs. Further
searches were conducted in Google Scholar and by contacting 3 experts in the
field. Citation tracking of eligible studies was performed. STUDY SELECTION: Two
reviewers independently selected observational studies assessing the prevalence
of active and/or latent MTrPs in at least 1 group of adults with a spinal
disorder. Twelve studies met the eligibility criteria. DATA EXTRACTION:
Methodologic quality was assessed by 2 reviewers independently using a modified
version of the Downs and Black checklist. Two reviewers also used a customized
form to extract studies and subjects' characteristics and the proportions of
subjects with active and/or latent MTrPs in each muscle assessed. DATA SYNTHESIS:
A meta-analysis was performed when there was sufficient clinical homogeneity in
at least 2 studies for the same spinal disorder. The Grading of Recommendations
Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach was used to rate the body of
evidence in each meta-analysis. A qualitative description of the results of
single studies was provided. Low-quality evidence underpinned pooled estimates of
MTrPs in the upper-body muscles of subjects with chronic neck pain. The point
prevalence of MTrPs in different muscles of other disorders (eg,
whiplash-associated disorders, nonspecific low back pain) was extracted from
single studies with low methodologic quality and small samples. Active MTrPs were
found to be present in all assessed muscles of subjects diagnosed with different
spinal pain disorders. Latent MTrPs were not consistently more prevalent in
subjects with a spinal disorder than in healthy controls. CONCLUSIONS: The MTrPs
point prevalence estimates in this review should be viewed with caution because
future studies with large samples and high methodologic quality are likely to
change them substantially.
CI - Copyright (c) 2016 American Congress of Rehabilitation Medicine. Published by
Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Langue : ANGLAIS