OBJECTIVE: The goal of this study was to compare the effects of trigger point (TRP) mesotherapy and acupuncture (ACP) mesotherapy in the treatment of patients with chronic low back pain. DESIGN: Short term randomized controlled trial. SETTING:62 subjects with chronic low back pain were recruited at outpatients Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation Clinic at the University of Rome "La Sapienza" in the period between July 2006 and May 2008. INTERVENTION: Study subjects were assigned to receive 4 weeks treatments with either trigger point mesotherapy (TRP mesotherapy, n=29) or acupoints mesotherapy (ACP mesotherapy, n=33). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Pain intensity with a pain visual analogic scale (VAS) and verbal rating scale (VRS) and pain disability withMcGill Pain Questionnaire Short Form (SFMPQ), Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMQ) and Oswestry Low Back Pain Disability Questionaire (ODQ). RESULTS: ACP mesotherapy shows a more effective results in VRS and VAS measures in the follow-up (p(VRS)=<.001 and p(VAS)=<.001). The SF-MPQ measure shows a better results for ACP instead of TRP with statistically significant differences between groups and time (p=.035). Participants reported a slight discomfort at the time of the inoculation, and 15% reported slight neck pain in ACP mesotherapy group. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that the response to ACP mesotherapy may be greater than the response to TRP mesotherapy in the short term follow-up. This technique could be nevertheless a viable option as an adjunct treatment in an overall treatment planning of CLBP.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: The goal of this study was to compare the effects of trigger point (TRP) mesotherapy and acupuncture (ACP) mesotherapy in the treatment of patients with chronic low back pain. DESIGN: Short term randomized controlled trial. SETTING: 62 subjects with chronic low back pain were recruited at outpatients Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation Clinic at the University of Rome "La Sapienza" in the period between July 2006 and May 2008. INTERVENTION: Study subjects were assigned to receive 4 weeks treatments with either trigger point mesotherapy (TRP mesotherapy, n=29) or acupoints mesotherapy (ACP mesotherapy, n=33). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Pain intensity with a pain visual analogic scale (VAS) and verbal rating scale (VRS) and pain disability with McGill Pain Questionnaire Short Form (SFMPQ), Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMQ) and Oswestry Low Back Pain Disability Questionaire (ODQ). RESULTS: ACP mesotherapy shows a more effective results in VRS and VAS measures in the follow-up (p(VRS)=<.001 and p(VAS)=<.001). The SF-MPQ measure shows a better results for ACP instead of TRP with statistically significant differences between groups and time (p=.035). Participants reported a slight discomfort at the time of the inoculation, and 15% reported slight neck pain in ACP mesotherapy group. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that the response to ACP mesotherapy may be greater than the response to TRP mesotherapy in the short term follow-up. This technique could be nevertheless a viable option as an adjunct treatment in an overall treatment planning of CLBP.