View clinical trials related to Facial Neuralgia.
Filter by:Literature shows different pathologies or combination pathologies can cause gluteal region pain and it can be difficult to diagnose. Piriformis syndrome is one of the cause of gluteal region pain, symptoms of myofascial pain syndrome affected gluteus maximus muscle may masquerade as piriformis muscle syndrome or both syndrome can be seen together. The aim of this study is diagnosis myofascial pain syndrome of gluteus maximus muscle and piriformis syndrome by physical examination, special clinical tests and ultrasound guided diagnostic injection test in patients presenting with gluteal pain and evaluate the coexistence of both syndromes.
Role of a neuroma of zygomatic-temporal in triggering of a cluster headache. Exploratory diagnosis, resection, and pathological examination of tumor anticipated .
This study is a randomized controlled study. A total of 75 patients between the ages of 20-50 who have a diagnosis of acute myofacial pain syndrome in the trapezius muscle and have pain for a maximum of 5 days were included in the study. Patients were randomly divided into 3 groups. Group 1 patients received kinesio tape method (25 patients), group 2 patients received trigger point injection method (25 patients), and group 3 patients received neural therapy injection method (25 patients). A 10-15 cm sized I band was applied to the trapezius muscles of the first group patients with the patient's neck in lateral flexion. Then, while the patient's neck is flexed, a Y-shaped 15-20 cm tape will be affixed between C1-7 with the arms of the Y up, and I tape of 5-10 cm is attached on the arms. In group 2 patients, 1 cc lidocaine diluted with 4 cc saline (SF) was applied to the trigger points palpated manually in the trapezius muscles. After the trigger point was squeezed between the thumb and index finger, a few cc of local anesthetic mixture was applied into the trigger point with the injector and exited. In the 3rd group patients, a few cc local anesthetic mixture will be applied intradermally over the trigger point without entering into the trigger points palpated manually in the trapezius muscles. Patients were checked 72 hours and 1 week after the first applications. The pain at rest and during movement of the patients in all 3 groups were evaluated with a visual analog scale (VAS 10 cm). The number of trigger points was determined by the physician by hand palpation. Pressure pain threshold was evaluated with the algometer device. Disability assessment of the patients was made using the neck pain disability index. evaluations were made at the beginning of treatment, 72 hours after and 1 week after treatment.
In severe cases after craniotomy, tracheal intubation is often required, and the removal of tracheal intubation presents certain risks and challenges. Premature removal of the tracheal intubation can lead to failure of extubation and increased proportion of re-intubation, resulting in increased risk of airway injury and hospital-acquired pneumonia, resulting in prolonged hospital stay and even adverse effects on neurological outcomes and mortality. However, delayed extubation can also lead to an increased risk of hospital acquired pneumonia, affecting early recovery and neurological recovery. It can be seen that the accurate evaluation of the possibility of tracheal intubation and the appropriate timing can have a greater impact on the prognosis of patients after craniotomy. However, there are currently no relevant standards or guidelines to guide clinical work. Previous studies have shown that for general critically ill patients, Peak cough flow (PCF) can play a certain role in predicting tracheal intubation, but the results of each study are not consistent. The predictive value of PCF for tracheal intubation and extubation in patients after craniotomy is less relevant. This study intends to use Pneumotachograph to measure the active and passive PCF of patients with extubation, to explore the predictive value of PCF for tracheal intubation after craniotomy, and to provide guidance for the development of clinical extubation decisions.
This is a clinical trial that will be done in the state of Kuwait, at the physical rehabilitation medicine hospital. the participants will be recruited from all over Kuwait, there is a clinical registry upon the ethical committee in Kuwait assigned by the ministry of health.
Objective: To compare the effectiveness of application of low-level laser therapy (LLLT) to trigger points and traditional acupoints for patients with cervical myofascial pain syndrome (MPS). Design: A single-blinded, randomized, placebo-controlled trial Setting: University rehabilitation hospital Participants: One hundred and twenty one patients with cervical MPS Intervention: The investigators performed this experiment using low level 810-nm gallium aluminum arsenide (Ga-Al-As) laser. One hundred participants were randomly assigned to four treatment groups, including (1) acupoint therapy (2) acupoint control (3) trigger point therapy and (4) trigger point control groups. Main Outcome measures: The investigators evaluated the patient's visual analogue scale (VAS) pain scores, pressure pain threshold and cervical range of motion (ROM) before and after the therapy.
This study will evaluate the safety and effectiveness of two drugs-dextromethorphan and topiramate-in treating orofacial (mouth and face) pain. Dextromethorphan, a commonly used cough suppressant, and topiramate, an anti-seizure medicine, block certain receptors on brain and spinal nerve cells that may cause the cells to produce electrical discharges and pain. Patients 18 years of age and older with oral and facial pain with trigeminal nerve damage and who have had pain daily for at least 3 months may be eligible for this study. Candidates will be screened with a medical history, physical examination, blood tests and psychiatric evaluation. These results will serve as baseline values for participants. Those enrolled in the study will take either dextromethorphan or topiramate in a 2-part study as follows: Dextromethorphan In Part 1, patients will take dextromethorphan and lorazepam (a commonly used anti-anxiety drug) separately in two 6-week periods. (Lorazepam is used in this study as an "active placebo" for comparison with dextromethorphan. An active placebo is a drug that does not work for the problem being studied but whose side effects are like those of the test drug.) They will take dextromethorphan for 4 weeks to determine the maximum tolerated dose (the highest dose that does not cause troubling side effects) and will stay on that dose for the remaining 2 weeks. Then they will repeat this process with lorazepam. Patients who respond to either drug may continue with Part 2 of the study, which compares these two drugs four more times to confirm the response seen in Part 1. In Part 2, the maximum tolerated dose will be determined in a 2-week period and that dose will be continued for another 2 weeks. This procedure will be repeated eight times. Throughout the study, patients will keep a daily pain diary. They will be contacted by telephone 2 to 3 times a week during dose escalation to check for side effects. At the end of each of the two 6-week periods in Part 1 and at the end of each 4-week period in Part 2 of the study, patients will have a 1-hour clinic visit. Participants who live more than a few hours' drive from NIH will have a full telephone follow-up evaluation instead of the clinic visits. Topiramate Patients who receive topiramate will follow a plan similar to that described above for dextromethorphan, with the following exceptions. They will take topiramate and an inactive placebo (a look-alike pill that has no active ingredients) in two separate 12-week periods. Patients' maximum tolerated dose will be determined in the first 8 weeks and they will stay on that dose for the remaining 4 weeks of each period. Patients who respond to the medication in Part 1 may continue with Part 2 to confirm the response. Part 2 consists of six 6-week periods. The first 4 weeks of each will be used to determine the maximum tolerated dose and the patient will remain on that dose for the next 2 weeks. Patients will keep a daily pain diary and will be contacted by phone 2 to 3 times a week while doses are being increased. Patients who complete Part 2 of the topiramate study may participate in another phase of the study that will last for 2 years. Those who continue for this phase will take topiramate for the 2-year period. They will be followed regularly by a study nurse and will come to NIH every 6 months for a follow-up visit.