No description available.

Dissertation submitted in partial compliance with the requirements for the Masters Degree in Technology: Chiropractic, Durban University of Technology, 2011. / Background: Myofascial pain is a disorder, characterized by the presence of trigger points (MTrP). It is recognised by unique features which include a tender point in a taut band of muscle, a local twitch response (LTR), a characteristic referred pain pattern, and the reproduction of the patient’s usual pain upon examination. A debate exists as to the precise diagnostic criteria used in identifying trigger points. This has hampered the standardized assessment and treatment of Myofascial Pain Syndrome and has led to contradictory findings being reported by various authors due to the lack of a reliable diagnostic tool. Objectives: The first objective was to determine the inter-examiner reliability of palpation of MTrPs in the trapezius and gluteus medius muscles. The second objective was to determine whether training and standardization in palpation techniques would improve inter-examiner reliability of palpation of MTrPs. Methods: This study was designed as a quantitative pre and post intervention interexaminer reliability study. Three examiners (one qualified Chiropractor, one senior chiropractic intern from the CDC and the researcher) were used to examine sixty patients (thirty symptomatic and thirty asymptomatic) for MTrPs. This study was conducted in two phases. During the myofascial examination of patients examiners were required to determine whether a MTrP was present or absent, differentiate whether the MTrP was active or latent and determine the presence or absence of the five characteristics of MTrP (tender point in a taut band of muscle, a local twitch response (LTR), a pain characteristic referred pain pattern, the reproduction of the patient’s usual pain and a jump sign) however, in phase one the researchers were blinded to the characteristics being investigated. Subsequent to phase one, examiners had to attend two, one hour discussion sessions to reduce individual variation in the application of palpation techniques. Results: Inter-examiner reliability was assessed using Fleiss Kappa statistic, percentage agreement and confidence intervals. The results show that three examiners are able to attain acceptable agreement in the palpation of MTrPs, since the features (described above) were shown to improve considerably in phase two after the training session in which standardization of techniques was emphasized. Conclusion: This study provides preliminary evidence that MTrP palpation is reliable and therefore, useful diagnostic tool in the identification of MTrPs and the diagnosis of Myofascial Pain Syndrome.

M.Tech. / The term „myofascial‟ is derived from the word „myo‟ meaning muscle and „fascia‟ meaning connective tissue. Myofascial pain syndrome is a regional pain syndrome characterized by the presence of myofascial trigger points (Mense and Simons, 2001). The most crucial component of myofascial pain is muscle shortening from contracture (or „spasm‟). In fact, myofascial pain does not exist without muscle shortening. Prolonged shortening not only causes pain in the muscle but also physically pulls on tendons, thereby straining them and distressing the bone and joints they insert into and act upon (Gunn, 2002). Trigger points are most often discussed in the setting of myofascial pain syndromes, in which widespread or regional muscular pain is associated with hyperalgesia, psychological disturbance and significant restriction of daily activities (Huguenin, 2004).

M.Tech. / Problem Statement: Myofascial Pain Syndrome (MPS) is a painful and prevalent muscular condition that is characterized by the development of myofascial trigger points (TrP’s). These are locally tender when active and are able to refer pain through specific patterns to other areas of the body distal from the trigger point (Manga, 2008). Myofascial trigger points are a frequently overlooked and misunderstood source of the distressingly ever-present musculoskeletal aches and pains of mankind and many authors have found that the trapezius muscle is most often the muscle that has frequent myofascial trigger points (Travell and Simons, 1999). Much debate and discussion has arisen on the merits of the fanning dry needling technique compared to that of the static dry needling technique, but research evidence is very limited. Some practitioners prefer the static technique over the fanning technique as it reduces the presence and amount of post-needling soreness, as well as reduces the possibility of penetrating a blood vessel resulting in hemorrhaging. Other practitioners prefer the fanning technique as it increases the chances of locating the loci of the TrP, as well as increasing the chances of eliciting a local twitch response and possibly making this method more effective in deactivating a TrP than the static technique. Aim of Study: The aim of this study was to compare the effects of static myofascial dry needling to the effects of fanning myofascial dry needling of an active trigger point (TrP1) in the upper trapezius muscle in order to determine which of the two treatments is more effective with regards to decreasing neck pain and disability as well as increasing pressure pain threshold in patients with neck pain due to Trapezius Myofascial Pain Syndrome. Method: Forty participants underwent a general screening to determine whether they had active myofascial trigger points in the upper fibers of the trapezius muscle.

M.Tech. / Myofascial pain has become a major cause of disability and chronic pain in our society today. Left untreated, myofascial pain syndrome can become a chronic pain condition. Chronic pain conditions can not only cause disability due to pain, but can also lead to related conditions such as depression, physical deconditioning due to lack of exercise, disturbance of sleep and other psychological and behavioural disturbances (Rachlin, 1994). The aim of this study was to determine whether cryotherapy or moist heat therapy was a superior therapeutic modality when applied to active Infraspinatus muscle trigger points post-dry needling. Participants were recruited into the study by the use of advertisements put up at various places on the university campus as well as in the University of Johannesburg Chiropractic Day Clinic. Fourty participants that conformed to the specific inclusion and exclusion criteria were recruited. The participants were randomly placed into two groups containing twenty participants in each group. Group A received cryotherapy post-dry needling and Group B received moist heat therapy post dry needling. Each participant received four treatments. The subjective and objective measurements were taken on the first, third and fifth visits. The fifth visit was scheduled to take final subjective and objective data only. The subjective data was obtained by measuring the participant‟s perception of their myofascial pain using the Visual Analogue Pain Scale. The objective data was obtained from the readings of the Algometer instrument, measuring the pressure pain threshold of the active myofascial trigger points in the Infraspinatus muscle. The results of this study indicated that both cryotherapy and moist heat therapy significantly benefited the participants in terms of the treatment of the active myofascial trigger points of the Infraspinatus muscle. However, based on the results, final conclusions could not be formulated on whether the dry needling itself would be beneficial without needing the cryotherapy or the moist heat therapy, as neither modality proved superior over the other.

Cenário clínico: A síndrome dolorosa miofascial (SDM), causa comum de dor musculoesquelética, pode ser incapacitante e desafiadora terapeuticamente, devido à ineficácia dos tratamentos convencionais para dor. Intervenções terapêuticas alternativas precisam ser pesquisadas para alcançar vias do processo de doença não contempladas com a terapêutica clássica. Dentre estas, o uso da melatonina, com efeitos cronobiótico, ansiolítico e analgésico, tem se apresentado como uma opção terapêutica atrativa no tratamento da SDM, que cursa com alterações de sono, dor, sintomas depressivos e de ansiedade. Objetivos: Avaliar a eficácia da melatonina exógena na redução da dor, no limiar de dor à pressão (LDP) e na qualidade de sono de pacientes com SDM facial. Métodos e Resultados: Um estudo randomizado, controlado foi realizado em 45 mulheres com dor miofascial, com idades entre 18 e 40 anos, segundo critérios Research Diagnostic Criteria for Temporomandibular Disorder (RDC/TMD). A eficácia da melatonina oral foi avaliada na redução da dor e melhora tanto do limiar de dor a pressão (LDP) como da qualidade do sono. Os participantes foram randomizados para receber 5 mg / dia de melatonina, 5 mg / dia ciclobenzaprina, ou placebo durante um período de quatro semanas. O efeito absoluto das intervenções, apresentado como ES (tamanho do efeito) sobre a dor: placebo versus melatonina foi de 2,08 (1,17-2,97) e de ciclobenzaprina vs placebo foi de -1,25 (0,45-2,06)]. O número de pacientes necessários para tratar (NNT) para evitar a dor moderada a intensa foi 3 (95% CI, 2-4) e 18 (95% IC, 9 a a) nos grupos de melatonina e de ciclobenzaprina, respectivamente, em relação ao placebo. O ES no LDP melatonina vs placebo e ciclobenzaprina vs placebo foi de 2,72 (1,69-3,75) e 1,01 (0,23-1,79), respectivamente. O ES na escala visual analógica de Qualidade de Sono (VASQS) utilizada para avaliar a forma como as pacientes se sentiram ao acordar, durante o período de tratamento, foi nos grupos melatonina versus placebo de 2,47 (1,49-3,45) e 1,01 (0,23-1,79), respectivamente. Conclusão: Melatonina foi mais eficaz do que placebo para melhorar a dor miofascial crônica facial e ambos os tratamentos foram mais eficazes do que placebo para melhorar o LDP e a qualidade de sono. / Background: The Myofascial Pain Syndrome (SDM), a common cause of musculoskeletal pain, can course with disability and can be a therapeutical challenge, due to the ineffectiveness of conventional treatments for pain. Alternative therapeutic interventions must be researched to achieve the process of the disease process that in not dealt with the classical therapy. Among these, the use of melatonin, which takes effect chronobiotic, anxiolytic and analgesic, has been presented as an attractive therapeutic option in the treatment of SDM, which leads to sleep disturbances, pain, anxiety and depressive symptoms. Objectives: Evaluate the efficacy of exogenous melatonin in reducing pain, pain pressure threshold (PPT) and the sleep quality of patients with chronic myofascial face pain. Methods and Results: A randomized, controlled trial was conducted with 45 females, aged 18 to 40 years who presented myofascial pain according to the Research Diagnostic Criteria for Temporomandibular Disorder (RDC/TMD) guidelines. The efficacy of oral melatonin was evaluated in reducing pain and improving both the pain pressure threshold (PPT) and sleep quality. Participants were randomized to receive 5 mg/day melatonin, 5 mg/day cyclobenzaprine, or a placebo during a four-week period. The absolute effect of interventions, presented as ES (effect size) on pain for melatonin vs. placebo was 2.08 (1.17 to 2.97) and for cyclobenzaprine vs. placebo -1.25 (0.45 to 2.06)], respectively. The Number of Patients Needed to be Treated (NNT) to prevent moderate to intense pain was 3 (95% CI, 2 to 4) and 18 (95% CI, 9 to ) in the melatonin and cyclobenzaprine groups, respectively compared to the placebo. The ES on the PPT for melatonin vs. placebo and cyclobenzaprine vs. placebo was 2.72 (1.69 to 3.75) and 1.01 (0.23 to 1.79), respectively. The ES on the Visual Analog Sleep Quality Scale (VASQS) scores used to assess how they felt when they woke up during the treatment period for the melatonin vs. placebo were 2.47 (1.49 to 3.45) and 1.01 (0.23 to 1.79), respectively. Conclusion: Melatonin was more effective than placebo for improving chronic myofascial face pain and both treatments were more effective than placebo for improving sleep quality and the PPT.

Cenário clínico: A síndrome dolorosa miofascial (SDM) pode ser incapacitante e desafiadora terapeuticamente, devido à ineficácia dos tratamentos convencionais para a dor. Objetivos: O objetivo deste estudo foi avaliar a eficácia da estimulação intramuscular (EIM) na redução da dor e melhora da saúde física e mental de pacientes com SDM. Conduzimos um ensaio clínico randomizado controlado em 60 mulheres, com idades entre 20 e 40 anos, que foram randomizadas para receber EIM, infiltração com lidocaína e falsa eletroneuroestimulação transcutânea (TENS-placebo), duas vezes por semana, durante 4 semanas. Resultados: A redução do percentual de alívio de dor observada na escala análogo-visual de dor (EAVD) durante a primeira semana após o final do tratamento no grupo TENS-placebo foi de 14,01 [intervalo de confiança (IC) 95%; 2,89 a 25,12], o que foi significativamente menor em comparação com o observado nos grupos de infiltração com lidocaína e de EIM, de 43,86% [IC 95%; 26,64 a 61,08] e de 49,74% (IC 95%, 28,95 a 70,54), respectivamente. O tamanho do efeito (TE) sobre a dor, na comparação de TENS-placebo com a EIM e infiltração com lidocaína foi de 1,48 [IC 95%; 0,76 a 2,19] e de 1,20 [0,43 a 1,40], respectivamente. O tamanho do efeito (TE) sobre a dor, na comparação de TENS-placebo com a EIM e infiltração com lidocaína foi de 1,48 [IC 95%; 0,76 a 2,19] e de 1,20 [0,43 a 1,40], respectivamente. A EIM melhorou significativamente os escores da saúde física e mental e o limiar de dor à pressão (LDP). Valores baixos do LDP, antes do tratamento, preveem uma redução do risco de 43% para apresentar um TE pequeno/moderado na dor no grupo da EIM e atitudes positivas, em todas intervenções, aumentaram a probabilidade para uma redução significante na intensidade da dor relatada.. Conclusões: A EIM foi mais efetiva do que o TENS-placebo e pelo menos equivalente à infiltração com lidocaína no tratamento da SDM e na melhora dos sintomas depressivos e da saúde física e mental. / Background: Myofascial pain syndrome (MPS) can be disabling and therapeutically challenging, because of the inefficacy of traditional pain treatment. Objectives: The objective of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of intramuscular stimulation (IMS) in reducing pain and improving physical and mental health in patientes with MPS. Methods: We conducted a controlled trial in 60 females, aged 20 to 40 years, where the participants were randomized to receive IMS, lidocaine infiltration or TENS-placebo twice a week for 4 weeks. Results: The reduction in the percent pain on a VAS (Visual Analogue-Scale) after the end of the first week of treatment in the TENSplacebo group was 14.01 [95% confidence interval (CI); 2.89 to 25.12], which was significantly lower than for the lidocaine infiltration and IMS groups, which reported 43.86% [95% CI; 26.64 to 61.08] and 49.74 % (95% CI, 28.95 to 70.54), respectively. The ES (effect size) on pain comparing TENS-placebo vs. IMS and TENS-placebo vs. lidocaine-infiltration were 1.48 [95% CI; 0.76 to 2.19] and 1.20 [0.43 to 1.40], respectively. IMS significantly improved the mental and physical health scores and the PPT. Lower PPT values pretreatment predicted a reduction of the risk by 43% of the small/moderate ES in terms of pain in the IMS group and positive attitudes, in all interventions, improved the probability a significant reduction in current pain intensity. Conclusions: IMS was more effective than TENS-placebo and at least equivalent to lidocaine infiltration in treating MPS and improving physical and mental health.

Cenário clínico: A síndrome dolorosa miofascial (SDM) pode ser incapacitante e desafiadora terapeuticamente, devido à ineficácia dos tratamentos convencionais para a dor. Objetivos: O objetivo deste estudo foi avaliar a eficácia da estimulação intramuscular (EIM) na redução da dor e melhora da saúde física e mental de pacientes com SDM. Conduzimos um ensaio clínico randomizado controlado em 60 mulheres, com idades entre 20 e 40 anos, que foram randomizadas para receber EIM, infiltração com lidocaína e falsa eletroneuroestimulação transcutânea (TENS-placebo), duas vezes por semana, durante 4 semanas. Resultados: A redução do percentual de alívio de dor observada na escala análogo-visual de dor (EAVD) durante a primeira semana após o final do tratamento no grupo TENS-placebo foi de 14,01 [intervalo de confiança (IC) 95%; 2,89 a 25,12], o que foi significativamente menor em comparação com o observado nos grupos de infiltração com lidocaína e de EIM, de 43,86% [IC 95%; 26,64 a 61,08] e de 49,74% (IC 95%, 28,95 a 70,54), respectivamente. O tamanho do efeito (TE) sobre a dor, na comparação de TENS-placebo com a EIM e infiltração com lidocaína foi de 1,48 [IC 95%; 0,76 a 2,19] e de 1,20 [0,43 a 1,40], respectivamente. O tamanho do efeito (TE) sobre a dor, na comparação de TENS-placebo com a EIM e infiltração com lidocaína foi de 1,48 [IC 95%; 0,76 a 2,19] e de 1,20 [0,43 a 1,40], respectivamente. A EIM melhorou significativamente os escores da saúde física e mental e o limiar de dor à pressão (LDP). Valores baixos do LDP, antes do tratamento, preveem uma redução do risco de 43% para apresentar um TE pequeno/moderado na dor no grupo da EIM e atitudes positivas, em todas intervenções, aumentaram a probabilidade para uma redução significante na intensidade da dor relatada.. Conclusões: A EIM foi mais efetiva do que o TENS-placebo e pelo menos equivalente à infiltração com lidocaína no tratamento da SDM e na melhora dos sintomas depressivos e da saúde física e mental. / Background: Myofascial pain syndrome (MPS) can be disabling and therapeutically challenging, because of the inefficacy of traditional pain treatment. Objectives: The objective of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of intramuscular stimulation (IMS) in reducing pain and improving physical and mental health in patientes with MPS. Methods: We conducted a controlled trial in 60 females, aged 20 to 40 years, where the participants were randomized to receive IMS, lidocaine infiltration or TENS-placebo twice a week for 4 weeks. Results: The reduction in the percent pain on a VAS (Visual Analogue-Scale) after the end of the first week of treatment in the TENSplacebo group was 14.01 [95% confidence interval (CI); 2.89 to 25.12], which was significantly lower than for the lidocaine infiltration and IMS groups, which reported 43.86% [95% CI; 26.64 to 61.08] and 49.74 % (95% CI, 28.95 to 70.54), respectively. The ES (effect size) on pain comparing TENS-placebo vs. IMS and TENS-placebo vs. lidocaine-infiltration were 1.48 [95% CI; 0.76 to 2.19] and 1.20 [0.43 to 1.40], respectively. IMS significantly improved the mental and physical health scores and the PPT. Lower PPT values pretreatment predicted a reduction of the risk by 43% of the small/moderate ES in terms of pain in the IMS group and positive attitudes, in all interventions, improved the probability a significant reduction in current pain intensity. Conclusions: IMS was more effective than TENS-placebo and at least equivalent to lidocaine infiltration in treating MPS and improving physical and mental health.

Cenário clínico: A síndrome dolorosa miofascial (SDM), causa comum de dor musculoesquelética, pode ser incapacitante e desafiadora terapeuticamente, devido à ineficácia dos tratamentos convencionais para dor. Intervenções terapêuticas alternativas precisam ser pesquisadas para alcançar vias do processo de doença não contempladas com a terapêutica clássica. Dentre estas, o uso da melatonina, com efeitos cronobiótico, ansiolítico e analgésico, tem se apresentado como uma opção terapêutica atrativa no tratamento da SDM, que cursa com alterações de sono, dor, sintomas depressivos e de ansiedade. Objetivos: Avaliar a eficácia da melatonina exógena na redução da dor, no limiar de dor à pressão (LDP) e na qualidade de sono de pacientes com SDM facial. Métodos e Resultados: Um estudo randomizado, controlado foi realizado em 45 mulheres com dor miofascial, com idades entre 18 e 40 anos, segundo critérios Research Diagnostic Criteria for Temporomandibular Disorder (RDC/TMD). A eficácia da melatonina oral foi avaliada na redução da dor e melhora tanto do limiar de dor a pressão (LDP) como da qualidade do sono. Os participantes foram randomizados para receber 5 mg / dia de melatonina, 5 mg / dia ciclobenzaprina, ou placebo durante um período de quatro semanas. O efeito absoluto das intervenções, apresentado como ES (tamanho do efeito) sobre a dor: placebo versus melatonina foi de 2,08 (1,17-2,97) e de ciclobenzaprina vs placebo foi de -1,25 (0,45-2,06)]. O número de pacientes necessários para tratar (NNT) para evitar a dor moderada a intensa foi 3 (95% CI, 2-4) e 18 (95% IC, 9 a a) nos grupos de melatonina e de ciclobenzaprina, respectivamente, em relação ao placebo. O ES no LDP melatonina vs placebo e ciclobenzaprina vs placebo foi de 2,72 (1,69-3,75) e 1,01 (0,23-1,79), respectivamente. O ES na escala visual analógica de Qualidade de Sono (VASQS) utilizada para avaliar a forma como as pacientes se sentiram ao acordar, durante o período de tratamento, foi nos grupos melatonina versus placebo de 2,47 (1,49-3,45) e 1,01 (0,23-1,79), respectivamente. Conclusão: Melatonina foi mais eficaz do que placebo para melhorar a dor miofascial crônica facial e ambos os tratamentos foram mais eficazes do que placebo para melhorar o LDP e a qualidade de sono. / Background: The Myofascial Pain Syndrome (SDM), a common cause of musculoskeletal pain, can course with disability and can be a therapeutical challenge, due to the ineffectiveness of conventional treatments for pain. Alternative therapeutic interventions must be researched to achieve the process of the disease process that in not dealt with the classical therapy. Among these, the use of melatonin, which takes effect chronobiotic, anxiolytic and analgesic, has been presented as an attractive therapeutic option in the treatment of SDM, which leads to sleep disturbances, pain, anxiety and depressive symptoms. Objectives: Evaluate the efficacy of exogenous melatonin in reducing pain, pain pressure threshold (PPT) and the sleep quality of patients with chronic myofascial face pain. Methods and Results: A randomized, controlled trial was conducted with 45 females, aged 18 to 40 years who presented myofascial pain according to the Research Diagnostic Criteria for Temporomandibular Disorder (RDC/TMD) guidelines. The efficacy of oral melatonin was evaluated in reducing pain and improving both the pain pressure threshold (PPT) and sleep quality. Participants were randomized to receive 5 mg/day melatonin, 5 mg/day cyclobenzaprine, or a placebo during a four-week period. The absolute effect of interventions, presented as ES (effect size) on pain for melatonin vs. placebo was 2.08 (1.17 to 2.97) and for cyclobenzaprine vs. placebo -1.25 (0.45 to 2.06)], respectively. The Number of Patients Needed to be Treated (NNT) to prevent moderate to intense pain was 3 (95% CI, 2 to 4) and 18 (95% CI, 9 to ) in the melatonin and cyclobenzaprine groups, respectively compared to the placebo. The ES on the PPT for melatonin vs. placebo and cyclobenzaprine vs. placebo was 2.72 (1.69 to 3.75) and 1.01 (0.23 to 1.79), respectively. The ES on the Visual Analog Sleep Quality Scale (VASQS) scores used to assess how they felt when they woke up during the treatment period for the melatonin vs. placebo were 2.47 (1.49 to 3.45) and 1.01 (0.23 to 1.79), respectively. Conclusion: Melatonin was more effective than placebo for improving chronic myofascial face pain and both treatments were more effective than placebo for improving sleep quality and the PPT.

Cenário clínico: A síndrome dolorosa miofascial (SDM), causa comum de dor musculoesquelética, pode ser incapacitante e desafiadora terapeuticamente, devido à ineficácia dos tratamentos convencionais para dor. Intervenções terapêuticas alternativas precisam ser pesquisadas para alcançar vias do processo de doença não contempladas com a terapêutica clássica. Dentre estas, o uso da melatonina, com efeitos cronobiótico, ansiolítico e analgésico, tem se apresentado como uma opção terapêutica atrativa no tratamento da SDM, que cursa com alterações de sono, dor, sintomas depressivos e de ansiedade. Objetivos: Avaliar a eficácia da melatonina exógena na redução da dor, no limiar de dor à pressão (LDP) e na qualidade de sono de pacientes com SDM facial. Métodos e Resultados: Um estudo randomizado, controlado foi realizado em 45 mulheres com dor miofascial, com idades entre 18 e 40 anos, segundo critérios Research Diagnostic Criteria for Temporomandibular Disorder (RDC/TMD). A eficácia da melatonina oral foi avaliada na redução da dor e melhora tanto do limiar de dor a pressão (LDP) como da qualidade do sono. Os participantes foram randomizados para receber 5 mg / dia de melatonina, 5 mg / dia ciclobenzaprina, ou placebo durante um período de quatro semanas. O efeito absoluto das intervenções, apresentado como ES (tamanho do efeito) sobre a dor: placebo versus melatonina foi de 2,08 (1,17-2,97) e de ciclobenzaprina vs placebo foi de -1,25 (0,45-2,06)]. O número de pacientes necessários para tratar (NNT) para evitar a dor moderada a intensa foi 3 (95% CI, 2-4) e 18 (95% IC, 9 a a) nos grupos de melatonina e de ciclobenzaprina, respectivamente, em relação ao placebo. O ES no LDP melatonina vs placebo e ciclobenzaprina vs placebo foi de 2,72 (1,69-3,75) e 1,01 (0,23-1,79), respectivamente. O ES na escala visual analógica de Qualidade de Sono (VASQS) utilizada para avaliar a forma como as pacientes se sentiram ao acordar, durante o período de tratamento, foi nos grupos melatonina versus placebo de 2,47 (1,49-3,45) e 1,01 (0,23-1,79), respectivamente. Conclusão: Melatonina foi mais eficaz do que placebo para melhorar a dor miofascial crônica facial e ambos os tratamentos foram mais eficazes do que placebo para melhorar o LDP e a qualidade de sono. / Background: The Myofascial Pain Syndrome (SDM), a common cause of musculoskeletal pain, can course with disability and can be a therapeutical challenge, due to the ineffectiveness of conventional treatments for pain. Alternative therapeutic interventions must be researched to achieve the process of the disease process that in not dealt with the classical therapy. Among these, the use of melatonin, which takes effect chronobiotic, anxiolytic and analgesic, has been presented as an attractive therapeutic option in the treatment of SDM, which leads to sleep disturbances, pain, anxiety and depressive symptoms. Objectives: Evaluate the efficacy of exogenous melatonin in reducing pain, pain pressure threshold (PPT) and the sleep quality of patients with chronic myofascial face pain. Methods and Results: A randomized, controlled trial was conducted with 45 females, aged 18 to 40 years who presented myofascial pain according to the Research Diagnostic Criteria for Temporomandibular Disorder (RDC/TMD) guidelines. The efficacy of oral melatonin was evaluated in reducing pain and improving both the pain pressure threshold (PPT) and sleep quality. Participants were randomized to receive 5 mg/day melatonin, 5 mg/day cyclobenzaprine, or a placebo during a four-week period. The absolute effect of interventions, presented as ES (effect size) on pain for melatonin vs. placebo was 2.08 (1.17 to 2.97) and for cyclobenzaprine vs. placebo -1.25 (0.45 to 2.06)], respectively. The Number of Patients Needed to be Treated (NNT) to prevent moderate to intense pain was 3 (95% CI, 2 to 4) and 18 (95% CI, 9 to ) in the melatonin and cyclobenzaprine groups, respectively compared to the placebo. The ES on the PPT for melatonin vs. placebo and cyclobenzaprine vs. placebo was 2.72 (1.69 to 3.75) and 1.01 (0.23 to 1.79), respectively. The ES on the Visual Analog Sleep Quality Scale (VASQS) scores used to assess how they felt when they woke up during the treatment period for the melatonin vs. placebo were 2.47 (1.49 to 3.45) and 1.01 (0.23 to 1.79), respectively. Conclusion: Melatonin was more effective than placebo for improving chronic myofascial face pain and both treatments were more effective than placebo for improving sleep quality and the PPT.