Table 3 MT treatment cycle and follow-up in pain
Author, year | Follow-up | Treatment (week) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
Period | Effect | Description | ||
Abbott, 2013 [30] | 1 year | + | The improvements in pain and disability were evident at 9 weeks and sustained for a year. | 9 |
Chiranthanut, 2014 [31] | NR | NR | NR | 3 |
Dong, 2021 [32] | 3-6 month | +- | Mild recurrence of symptoms and signs during follow-up time (22/105). No severe relapses seen | 4 |
Feng, 2014 [33] | NR | NR | NR | 4 |
Fitzgerald, 2016 [34] | 1 year | - | MT may have some short term benefit. | 9 |
Lai, 2020 [35] | NR | NR | NR | 6 |
Liang, 2012 [36] | NR | NR | NR | 3 |
Lin, 2018 [37] | 1, 3 month | + | The 1-month and 3-month follow-ups were showed a more consistent treatment effect than after 4 weeks of treatment. | 4 |
Liu, 2019 [38] | NR | NR | NR | 8 |
Peng, 2018 [39] | 6 month | + | At the 6-month follow-up after MT treatment, VAS scores were significantly lower compared with pre-treatment | 4 |
Perlman, 2006 [40] | 16 week | + | MT was largely sustained at the 16-week follow-up visit. | 8 |
Perlman, 2012 [41] | 16, 24week | + | MT showed improvements. | 8 |
Qu, 2020 [42] | NR | NR | NR | 4 |
Wu, 2015 [43] | NR | NR | NR | 8 |
Xu, 2021 [44] | NR | NR | NR | 4 |
Yao, 2018 [45] | NR | NR | NR | 2 |
Yuan, 2018 [46] | NR | NR | NR | 3 |
Zhang, 2014 [47] | NR | NR | NR | 4 |
Zhang, 2018 [48] | NR | NR | NR | 4 |
Yang, 2022 [49] | NR | NR | NR | 1.5 |
Xu, 2022 [50] | NR | NR | NR | 4 |
Ma, 2022 [51] | NR | NR | NR | 4 |
Liu, 2022 [52] | NR | NR | NR | 4 |
Liu, 2023 [53] | NR | NR | NR | 4 |
Guo, 2022 [54] | 16 week | NR | NR | 8 |