Dry Needling or Percutaneous Electrolysis for Managing Myofascial Trigger Points?
PEDN
1 other identifier
interventional
40
1 country
1
Brief Summary
Dry needling (DN) and percutaneous electrolysis (PE) are minimally invasive physiotherapy techniques commonly used for the management of myofascial trigger points. DN consists of inserting a fine filiform needle into a hyperirritable area within a taut band of skeletal muscle, with the aim of eliciting local twitch responses and reducing myofascial pain. PE follows a similar needle-based approach but combines the mechanical stimulus of the needle with the application of a galvanic electrical current, producing an electrochemical reaction in the targeted tissue. Both techniques have been increasingly used in clinical practice for musculoskeletal pain conditions, including shoulder pain, although the evidence comparing their relative effectiveness remains limited. Shoulder pain is one of the most prevalent musculoskeletal disorders and is frequently associated with the presence of active myofascial trigger points. Among the shoulder muscles, the infraspinatus has been identified as a clinically relevant structure because its trigger points may reproduce referred pain patterns commonly reported by patients with shoulder symptoms and may contribute to pain, reduced strength, altered mobility, and functional disability. Previous studies have suggested that invasive treatment of infraspinatus trigger points may produce short-term improvements in pain sensitivity and shoulder-related symptoms. However, most available research has examined dry needling or percutaneous electrolysis separately, and direct comparisons between both interventions in patients with shoulder pain remain scarce. The physiological mechanisms underlying these techniques are not yet fully understood. Dry needling is thought to act through mechanical and neurophysiological mechanisms, including disruption of dysfunctional motor endplates, reduction of local nociceptive input, elicitation of local twitch responses, and activation of segmental and descending inhibitory pathways. Percutaneous electrolysis may share some of these needling-related effects, while also adding a galvanic current that may induce local biochemical changes and promote tissue recovery processes. Nevertheless, it remains unclear whether the addition of electrical current provides superior clinical effects compared with dry needling alone. Since limited research has directly compared dry needling and percutaneous electrolysis applied to active myofascial trigger points of the infraspinatus in patients with shoulder pain, the present study aimed to compare the effectiveness of both techniques as complementary interventions to manual therapy and therapeutic exercise. Specifically, this study sought to determine whether percutaneous electrolysis or dry needling produced greater short-term improvements in pain intensity and shoulder-related disability.
Trial Health
Trial Health Score
Automated assessment based on enrollment pace, timeline, and geographic reach
participants targeted
Target at P25-P50 for not_applicable
Started Sep 2026
Shorter than P25 for not_applicable
1 active site
Health score is calculated from publicly available data and should be used for screening purposes only.
Trial Relationships
Click on a node to explore related trials.
Study Timeline
Key milestones and dates
First Submitted
Initial submission to the registry
May 30, 2026
CompletedFirst Posted
Study publicly available on registry
June 10, 2026
CompletedStudy Start
First participant enrolled
September 1, 2026
ExpectedPrimary Completion
Last participant's last visit for primary outcome
January 30, 2027
Study Completion
Last participant's last visit for all outcomes
February 1, 2027
June 10, 2026
June 1, 2026
5 months
May 30, 2026
June 9, 2026
Conditions
Keywords
Outcome Measures
Primary Outcomes (1)
Pain intensity
Pain intensity will be assessed using a 10-point visual analogue scale (VAS), where 0 indicates no pain and 10 represents the worst imaginable pain. Participants will be asked to rate their perceived shoulder pain before the intervention and at the 7-day follow-up. Higher scores indicated greater pain intensity.
Baseline (before the intervention on Day 1) and 7 days after the intervention
Secondary Outcomes (3)
Shoulder disability
Baseline (before the intervention on Day 1) and 7 days after the intervention
Adverse effects
From completion of the intervention on Day 1 to 7 days after the intervention
Interventions tolerance
Immediately after completion of the intervention on Day 1
Study Arms (2)
Experimental group
EXPERIMENTALCombination of manual therapy, therapeutic exercise and percutaneous electrolysis
Control group
ACTIVE COMPARATORCombination of manual therapy, therapeutic exercise and dry needling
Interventions
Dry needling will be performed on the most symptomatic active myofascial trigger point of the infraspinatus muscle. Participants will be placed in prone, and the skin will be disinfected with 2% chlorhexidine. A sterile solid filiform needle will be inserted into the trigger point using Hong's technique, consisting of repeated fast-in and fast-out needle movements for 30 seconds, with the aim of eliciting 3-5 local twitch responses. During the 30 seconds procedure, the needle will be connected to the percutaneous electrolysis device (without current) for blinding purposes.
Percutaneous electrolysis will be applied to the most symptomatic active myofascial trigger point of the infraspinatus muscle. Participants will be positioned in prone, and the skin will be cleaned with 2% chlorhexidine. A sterile solid filiform needle will be inserted into the trigger point using a fast-in and fast-out needling approach, with the aim of eliciting 3-5 local twitch responses. During the procedure, a galvanic current of 0.3 mA was applied for 30 seconds.
Manual therapy interventions consist of soft tissue techniques targeting the upper, middle, and lower trapezius, levator scapulae, rhomboids, teres minor, and infraspinatus muscles. The pressure will be adapted to each participant's tolerance and will not exceed moderate pain intensity. Scapular mobilization techniques will be also performed in side-lying, including elevation, depression, protraction, retraction, upward rotation, and downward rotation.
The programme include assisted mobility exercises for shoulder flexion, abduction, external rotation, and internal rotation, followed by strengthening exercises for flexion, extension, abduction, internal rotation, and external rotation. Anterior and posterior shoulder capsule stretching and unloaded Codman pendulum exercises will be also included. Participants will be instructed to perform the exercises once daily until the follow-up assessment, keeping pain below 3-4 points on the visual analogue scale.
Eligibility Criteria
You may qualify if:
- Adults
- Presence of shoulder pain for at least 3 months.
- Shoulder pain intensity greater than 3 points on the visual analogue scale (VAS).
- Shoulder-related disability greater than 20 points on the DASH questionnaire.
- Presence of at least one active myofascial trigger point in the infraspinatus muscle.
- Reproduction of the patient's familiar shoulder pain during palpation of the infraspinatus trigger point.
- Ability to understand the study procedures and provide written informed consent.
You may not qualify if:
- Previous shoulder surgery or traumatic shoulder injury in the affected region.
- Presence of severe structural or systemic pathology affecting the shoulder region, such as fracture, tumour, infection, inflammatory disease, or neurological disorder.
- Clinical signs suggestive of cervical radiculopathy or other neurological conditions that could explain the shoulder symptoms.
- Use of physiotherapy treatment, invasive therapy, or analgesic/anti-inflammatory medication during the week before participation.
- Contraindications to dry needling or percutaneous electrolysis, including needle phobia, anticoagulant therapy, bleeding disorders, pregnancy, pacemaker or implanted electrical devices, local skin infection, or altered skin sensitivity in the treatment area.
Contact the study team to confirm eligibility.
Sponsors & Collaborators
Study Sites (1)
Complutense University of Madrid
Madrid, Madrid, 28040, Spain
MeSH Terms
Conditions
Interventions
Condition Hierarchy (Ancestors)
Intervention Hierarchy (Ancestors)
Central Study Contacts
Study Design
- Study Type
- interventional
- Phase
- not applicable
- Allocation
- RANDOMIZED
- Masking
- QUADRUPLE
- Who Masked
- PARTICIPANT, CARE PROVIDER, INVESTIGATOR, OUTCOMES ASSESSOR
- Purpose
- TREATMENT
- Intervention Model
- PARALLEL
- Sponsor Type
- OTHER
- Responsible Party
- PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR
- PI Title
- Principal Investigator
Study Record Dates
First Submitted
May 30, 2026
First Posted
June 10, 2026
Study Start (Estimated)
September 1, 2026
Primary Completion (Estimated)
January 30, 2027
Study Completion (Estimated)
February 1, 2027
Last Updated
June 10, 2026
Record last verified: 2026-06