Musculoskeletal pain is a health challenge with various treatment strategies. The study has been accomplished with the aim to reveal the effect of mineral water with different mineral content on musculoskeletal pain and related symptoms experienced. A randomized controlled single-blinded parallel-group study has been performed (145 participants with pain; 5 groups). The duration of treatment was 2 weeks, whereas follow-up has taken 3 months. Change in pain after a single procedure and the pain parameters with related symptoms during the study period have been measured. The effect size using Cohen's d has been estimated. Small effect (0.2-0.4) on pain has been distinguished after each mineral water procedure. Tap water procedures have been effective in 60% of cases. Twenty grams per liter water baths have had a small effect on pain intensity and tender points, body flexibility, and spinal mobility, and a medium one on sleep quality, and reduced CRP. Forty grams per liter water has hada small effect on pain intensity, frequency, and spinal mobility, and a medium one on flexibility, fatigue, and sleep quality, and reduced ESR. Sixty grams per liter water has had a small effect on pain parameters and fatigue, and a medium one on flexibility and sleep quality, and reduced ESR. Theeffect lasting up to 2 months has been identified mostly in the 60 g/L group. Tap water has had a short time effect on pain intensity and tender points. There have not been any changes of sufficient significance identified in the control group and any differences between mineral water groups. Sufficient difference between mineral and tap water groups has been determined in pain intensity, spinal mobility, and sleep quality, whereas in the case of the control group, significant difference in pain intensity and frequency, flexibility, and spinal mobility has been identified. The consumption ofpain medication has significantly decreased in all mineral water groups. The total mineral content of the water has no significant influence on the reduction of musculoskeletal pain. Mineral water baths have small effect on pain and medium effect on other musculoskeletal disease-related symptoms and pain medication consumption lasting up to 3 months; it is more beneficial than tap water or no treatment for the improvement of symptoms associated with musculoskeletal diseases. Even single balneotherapy procedure results in small pain reduction.

AIMS:To investigate the effect of exercise training on musculoskeletal pain in patients with type 2 diabetes.

METHODS:The intervention was exercise twice weekly for 12 weeks. The primary outcome was musculoskeletal pain assessed using a 0-10 Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) in 11 body sites. Secondary outcomes were use of analgesics, glycaemic control and body weight.

RESULTS:The participants (n=69) were 66±10 years old, 38 were men and 50 completed the intervention. Pain in the limbs was more frequently reported by the participants compared to a matched general population (80.9% vs 65.3%, p=0.007). The participants who had any pain at baseline (NRS>0) and severe pain (NRS>3) reported significantly decreased pain in the feet, calf muscles, knees, thighs, hips, lower back and arms after the training period. Use of analgesics was unchanged, HbA1c (mmol/mol) decreased from 60±15 to 54±11, p<0.001 and body weight (kg) decreased from 100.5±19.1 to 98.6±17.7, p=0.005.

CONCLUSIONS:The participants with type 2 diabetes reported more frequent pain than a matched general population. The training intervention was associated with reduced musculoskeletal pain. Reduced pain may together with a positive impact on glycaemic control be an important motivational factor in patients with type 2 diabetes to perform exercise training.

Prolotherapy is an injection-based complementary and alternative medical therapy for chronic musculoskeletal pain. Prolotherapy techniques and injected solutions vary by condition, clinical severity, and practitioner preferences; over several treatment sessions, a fairly small volume of an irritant or sclerosing solution is injected at sites on painful ligament and tendon insertions and in adjacent joint space during several treatment sessions. Prolotherapy is becoming increasingly popular in the United States and internationally and is actively used in clinical practice. Prolotherapy has been assessed as a treatment for various painful chronic musculoskeletal conditions that are refractory to"standard of care"therapies. Although anecdotal clinical success guides the use of prolotherapy for many conditions, clinical trial literature supporting evidence-based decision-making for the use of prolotherapy exists for low back pain, several tendinopathies, and osteoarthritis.

Prolotherapy is a technique that involves the injection of an irritant, usually a hyperosmolar dextrose solution, typically in the treatment of chronic painful musculoskeletal conditions. Despite its long history and widespread use as a form of complementary therapy, there still are disparities over its optimal indications and injection preparations. There are, however, numerous studies available regarding the use and efficacy of prolotherapy for various musculoskeletal conditions. The most frequently published indication is in the treatment of chronic low back pain, but there are recent studies that examined its use in the management of refractory tendinopathies as well as osteoarthritis. There is growing evidence to suggest that prolotherapy may be helpful in treating chronic low back pain when coupled with adjunctive therapies, such as spinal manipulation or corticosteroid injections. There is also evidence to suggest that prolotherapy is effective in treating refractory tendinopathies, particularly for lateral epicondylosis and Achilles tendinopathy. Additional larger, randomized controlled trials are needed to make specific recommendations regarding ideal protocols and indications. There is emerging evidence for the use of prolotherapy as a treatment option for osteoarthritis; however, further studies are needed to conclusively demonstrate its efficacy. Overall, prolotherapy remains a promising option for the treatment of painful musculoskeletal conditions, particularly when other standard treatments have proved ineffective.

PURPOSE:Explore the feasibility of a Tai Chi intervention to improve musculoskeletal pain, emotion, cognition, and physical function in individuals with posttraumatic stress disorder.

DESIGN:Two-phase, one-arm quasi-experimental design.

METHOD:Phase 1: 11 participants completed one Tai Chi session, feasibility questionnaire, and were offered participation in Phase 2, a 12-week Tai Chi intervention. Ten participants participated in Phase 2. Pain intensity, interference, physical function scales, an emotional battery, and cognition tests were used for pre- and postintervention outcome measures. Paired t tests and thematic analysis were used for analysis.

FINDINGS:In Phase 1, most felt Tai Chi would benefit health (90.9%) and expressed interest in continuing Tai Chi (6.73 out of 7). Phase 2 results showed improvement in fear-affect (raw t = -2.64, p = .03; age adjusted t = -2.90, p = .02), fear-somatic arousal (raw t = -2.53, p = .035), List Sorting Working Memory (raw t = 2.62, p = .031; age adjusted t = 2.96, p = .018), 6-Minute Walk Test ( t = 3.541, p = .008), and current level of Pain Intensity ( t = -4.00, p = .004).

CONCLUSIONS:Tai Chi is an acceptable, holistic treatment to individuals with musculoskeletal pain and posttraumatic stress disorder. It may reduce pain, improve emotion, memory, and physical function.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether Tai Chi improves pain, disability, physical performance, and/or health-related quality of life (HRQOL) in people with chronic musculoskeletal pain. METHODS: Eight databases were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Two independent reviewers rated trial quality and extracted trial data. Effect sizes and 95% confidence intervals were calculated for individual trials, and pooled effect sizes were calculated using a random-effects model. RESULTS: Seven RCTs were selected for inclusion in the review. Of these, 6 studied people with chronic arthritis and 1 studied people with chronic tension headaches. The trials were typically small and of low methodologic quality. The pooled effect size for arthritic populations on a 0-100 scale was 10.1 (range 6.3-13.9) points for pain reduction, and was 9.6 (range 5.2-14.0) points for disability reduction. Additionally, physical performance and HRQOL outcomes favored the Tai Chi intervention, but of these outcomes, only the level of tension and satisfaction with general health were statistically significant. CONCLUSION: The available data on the effect of Tai Chi are sparse and derived principally from low-quality studies. These data suggest that Tai Chi has a small positive effect on pain and disability in people with arthritis. The extent to which it benefits other forms of musculoskeletal pain is unclear.