PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
October 5, 2025Artificial Organs1 citationsOpen Access

A Comparison Study Between Electrical Muscle Stimulation and Transcutaneous Electrical Nerve Stimulation on Treatment of Myofascial Pain Syndrome

View Full Paper
SCSeekaow ChurproongBMBenjamin MetcalfePMPolly McGuigan

Key Points

  • EMS with active stretching significantly improved pain intensity and pressure pain threshold in participants.
  • Pain intensity showed a significant reduction with EMS + AS (t(40) = -6.01, p < 0.001), highlighting its efficacy.
  • Short-duration treatments of EMS were compared against TENS and sham stimulation to evaluate clinical outcomes.
  • Findings support the idea that EMS can mimic therapeutic passive stretching, offering a novel treatment pathway.

Abstract

ABSTRACT Background Myofascial pain syndrome (MPS) originates from myofascial trigger points (MTPs)– hypersensitive nodules commonly found in the trapezius muscle (TM) that cause pain and functional limitations. While transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) is a conventional treatment, a novel approach combining electrical muscle stimulation (EMS) with active stretching (AS) has recently been developed (EMS + AS). Methods EMS electrodes were placed transversely across muscle fibers to induce localized contractions and thus greater stretch of MTP‐containing regions compared to AS alone. EMS plays a role similar to a therapist's hand in passive stretching in that it provides resistance force. Forty‐one participants with MTPs in the TM received single sessions of EMS + AS, sham stimulation (SS) + AS, and TENS. Each session included three 10‐s stimulations with 10‐s rest intervals. Pain intensity (PI), pressure pain threshold (PPT), and surface electromyography (sEMG) for maximal voluntary contraction (%MVC) amplitude analysis of TM function improvement were the three outcome measures used to assess treatment effectiveness. To evaluate the immediate effects of short‐duration treatments with EMS + AS compared to SS + AS and TENS. All three treatments were applied in a randomized order. Results EMS + AS showed significant improvements in PI and PPT ( t (40) = −6.01 and t (40) = 5.38, p < 0.001, respectively). EMS + AS showed a small sEMG activity during TM function improvement of 0.49 ± 0.056 %MVC at post‐treatment, normalized to pre‐treatment values. Compared to SS + AS and TENS, EMS + AS significantly increased PPT changes ( F (2,120) = 13.442, p < 0.001); however, there were no significant differences in PI or mean %MVC. Conclusions This study demonstrates that EMS generates a local contraction instead of a full contraction for a muscle. EMS's effect is related to the aim of mimicking passive stretching performed by the therapist's hand. Ultimately, EMS + AS has the potential to be an effective approach for alleviating MPS symptoms.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Churproong et al. (2025) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/68e25378d6d66a53c24741bchttps://doi.org/10.1111/aor.70017
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper