You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output.
Click here to find out more.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Immediate and short-term effects of the combination of dry needling and percutaneous TENS on post-needling soreness in patients with chronic myofascial neck pain
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Fisioterapia : organo de la Asociacion Espanola de Fisioterapia., October 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1590/bjpt-rbf.2014.0176 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Jose V. León-Hernández, Aitor Martín-Pintado-Zugasti, Laura G. Frutos, Isabel M. Alguacil-Diego, Ana I. de la Llave-Rincón, Josue Fernandez-Carnero |
| Abstract |
Dry needling (DN) and percutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (PENS) are widely used techniques in the treatment of myofascial pain. To investigate the immediate and short-term effects of the combination of DN and PENS compared to DN alone on the upper trapezius muscle. This is a 72-hour follow-up single-blinded randomized controlled trial. Sixty-two volunteer patients with chronic myofascial neck pain with active Myofascial Trigger Points (MTrPs) in the upper trapezius muscle were recruited. Randomization was performed, and 31 patients received DN treatment (DN group) and 31 received DN and PENS (DN+PENS group). The primary outcomes were neck disability index (NDI) and visual analog scale for pain for both post-needling soreness (PNS) and neck pain intensity (NPI). Pressure pain threshold (PPT) and cervical range of motion (CROM) were the secondary outcomes. We detected between-group differences in NPI and PNS in favor of the DN+PENS group immediately after treatment. No between-group differences in NDI were observed. PENS application after dry needling treatment is more effective than dry needling alone for decreasing soreness in the short term and improving neck pain intensity immediately in patients with myofascial chronic neck pain. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 19 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 8 | 42% |
| United States | 3 | 16% |
| Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of | 1 | 5% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 6 | 32% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 14 | 74% |
| Scientists | 3 | 16% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 11% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 325 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 325 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 58 | 18% |
| Student > Master | 48 | 15% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 28 | 9% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 20 | 6% |
| Other | 15 | 5% |
| Other | 64 | 20% |
| Unknown | 92 | 28% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Nursing and Health Professions | 98 | 30% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 85 | 26% |
| Sports and Recreations | 11 | 3% |
| Neuroscience | 5 | 2% |
| Engineering | 4 | 1% |
| Other | 13 | 4% |
| Unknown | 109 | 34% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 15. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 26 September 2018.
All research outputs
#2,458,425
of 25,466,764 outputs
Outputs from Fisioterapia : organo de la Asociacion Espanola de Fisioterapia.
#97
of 872 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#41,272
of 332,797 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Fisioterapia : organo de la Asociacion Espanola de Fisioterapia.
#3
of 10 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,466,764 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 872 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.9. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 332,797 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 10 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 7 of them.