Pressure Pain Threshold of the Upper Trapezius Trigger Point: A Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis of Baseline Values and Their Modification after Physical Therapy

Background: Myofascial trigger points (TrP) are diagnosed upon the presence of clinical signs among which hypersensitivity is considered one of the most important. The detection of the pressure pain threshold (PPT) is used to quantify the degree of hypersensitivity. However, there is a lack of normative data about how hypersensitive a TrP is. Therefore, the objective was to quantify the PPT for myofascial TrP in the upper trapezius muscle and its modification after manual or instrumental physical therapy interventions. Methods: A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted among three databases (MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, and PEDro). Two independent reviewers conducted the electronic search and assessed the methodological quality of the included studies. Results: Eleven studies with a high-risk bias indicated that the PPT at TrP sites was 105.11 kPa lower (95% CI: -148.93; -61.28) at active TrP sites (Chi-squared = 1.07, df = 1 (p = 0.30), I-2 = 7%) compared to the PPT of the upper trapezius muscles of healthy subjects. In addition, the PPT of TrP was also lower than the reference values coming from the pain-free population. Moreover, the PPT increased after both manual and instrumental treatment by 28.36 kPa (95% CI: 10.75; 45.96) and 75.49 kPa (95% CI: 18.02; 132.95), respectively. Conclusions: The results of the present study show that TrP has a decreased PPT when compared to healthy muscles and that physical therapy may increase the PPT. However, the clinical relevance of this decreased PPT needs to be further elucidated. Further, the high risk of bias in all the retrieved studies undermines the validity of the results.

Automated summary

The study found that the PPT at TrP sites was lower compared to healthy muscles, and that physical therapy interventions can increase the PPT. However, the clinical relevance of this decreased PPT needs further clarification, and the high risk of bias in all the retrieved studies may impact the validity of the results.