The number of systematic reviews (SR) summarizing the literature regarding the clinical effects of Dry Needling (DN) has increased rapidly. Yet, rigorous evidence about the clinical effectiveness of this technique is still lacking. The aim of this umbrella review is to summarize the evidence about the clinical effects of trigger point DN on musculoskeletal disorders across all body regions. PubMed, Web of Science and Embase were searched to identify SRs examining the effect of DN (as a stand-alone intervention or combined with another treatment modality) compared to sham/no intervention or a physical therapy (PT) intervention with at least one clinical outcome in the domain of pain or physical functioning. Risk of bias (RoB) was assessed with the AMSTAR-2 tool. Quantification of the overlap in primary studies was calculated using the corrected covered area (CCA). The electronic search yielded 2286 results, of which 36 SRs were included in this review. Overall, DN is superior to sham/no intervention and equally effective to other interventions for pain reduction at short-term regardless of the body region. Some SRs favored wet needling (WN) over DN for short-term pain reductions. Results on physical functioning outcomes were contradictory across body regions. Limited data is available for mid- and long-term effects. DN has a short-term analgesic effect in all body regions and may be of additional value to the interventions that are used to date in clinical practice. Several studies have shown an additional treatment effect when combining DN to physiotherapeutic interventions compared to these interventions in isolation. There is a substantial need for the standardization of DN protocols to address the problem of heterogeneity and to strengthen the current evidence.

Objective: Specific neck exercises are recommended in the rehabilitation of chronic nonspecific neck pain (CNNP). They are unfortunately often accompanied by acute pain flare-ups. Global exercises might be a beneficial addition, as they activate endogenous analgesia without overloading painful structures. However, it is still unclear which type of exercise is most effective. This randomized controlled trial was done to evaluate the effect of an online blended program of global and specific neck exercises, compared to programs including only 1 of both types of exercise. Methods: Forty-eight patients with CNNP were randomized into 3 groups. Online questionnaires were collected at baseline, at midtreatment, immediately after treatment, and at the 3-month follow-up. Quantitative sensory testing and actigraphy were assessed at baseline and after treatment. Linear mixed-model analyses were performed to evaluate treatment effects within and between groups. Neck pain–related disability after treatment was considered the primary outcome. Results: No time × treatment interaction effects were found. All groups improved in neck pain–related disability, pain intensity, self-reported symptoms of central sensitization, local pain sensitivity, physical activity, and pain medication use. No effects were found on quality of life, sleep quality, depression, anxiety, stress, widespread pain sensitivity, health economics, or actigraphy measurements. A higher global perceived effect was reported after performing the blended program, compared to the other groups. Conclusion: A blended exercise program was not superior to the stand-alone programs in reducing disability. Nevertheless, the global perceived effect of this type of exercise was higher. Future research necessitates larger sample sizes to adequately explore the optimal type of exercise for patients with CNNP. Impact: Exercise therapy should be an important part of the rehabilitation of patients with CNNP, regardless of the type of exercise.

Background/Objectives: Cervicogenic headache (CeH) is linked to upper cervical dysfunctions. The obliquus capitis inferior (OCI) muscle may contribute to restricted cervical rotation at the C1–C2 level, altered proprioception and pain. Dry needling (DN) of the OCI is hypothesized to target these dysfunctions. The aim of this study was to investigate whether a single intervention combining DN and manual therapy (MT) compared to sham needling (SN) and MT, improves C1–C2 rotation, functional, headache-related and psychological outcomes in a subgroup of CeH patients with a positive cervical flexion–rotation test (CFRT). Methods: Thirty-four participants were randomly assigned to (1) DN or (2) SN. The primary outcome was C1–C2 rotational mobility. Secondary outcomes included headache-related parameters (frequency, intensity, duration and perceived effect), functional parameters (cervical mobility, pain pressure thresholds, motor control and proprioception) and psychological parameters (central sensitization, pain catastrophizing, coping strategies and kinesiophobia). Outcomes were re-evaluated at one-week follow-up. Results: Linear mixed-effects models showed a significant and clinically relevant increase of C1–C2 rotation in the DN group compared to the SN group post-intervention (mean difference [MD]: 4.51°; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.74; 7.28), which was maintained at the 1-week follow-up (MD: 5.44°; 95% CI: 2.55; 8.33). No clinically relevant changes were observed in other secondary outcome measures. Conclusions: Targeting the OCI may be of added value in restoring atlanto-axial dysfunction. While short-term mobility gains were observed, a single intervention appears insufficient as a stand-alone treatment to impact functional or psychological outcomes. Future research involving larger samples should examine DN effects as part of a multimodal approach with long-term follow-up.