{"id":6588,"date":"2019-10-21T15:46:06","date_gmt":"2019-10-21T20:46:06","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/thesportjournal.org\/?p=6588"},"modified":"2020-06-02T11:48:40","modified_gmt":"2020-06-02T16:48:40","slug":"perceptions-of-dry-needling-for-performance-recovery-in-ncaa-division-i-athletes","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/thesportjournal.org\/article\/perceptions-of-dry-needling-for-performance-recovery-in-ncaa-division-i-athletes\/","title":{"rendered":"Perceptions of Dry Needling for Performance & Recovery in NCAA Division I Athletes"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

Authors:<\/strong> Shemeika McCray & Joni M. Boyd, PhD. CSCS*D<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Corresponding Author:<\/strong>
Joni M. Boyd, PhD, CSCS*D
216L West Center
Rock Hill, SC 29732
boydj@winthrop.edu
803-323-4936<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Shemeika McCray is an undergraduate student in the Exercise\nScience Program at Winthrop University. \nDr. Joni Boyd is an Associate Professor of Exercise Science and Coaching\nat Winthrop University in Rock Hill, SC.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Perceptions of Dry Needling for Performance & Recovery in NCAA\nDivision I Athletes<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n

ABSTRACT<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

The aim of this study was to\nexamine the perceptions of dry needling within NCAA Division I athletes for\nmuscle performance and\/or recovery.Seventy-seven\nNCAA Division I Athletes completed an 15-item online survey sent via e-mail, which\nincluded demographics, exposure to dry needling, and perceptions of\neffectiveness. Those that had no experience of dry needling were asked to rate\ntheir perceptions and reasoning for non-exposure. The results indicated that\n66% (n=51<\/em>) of participants did not\nhave experience with dry needling, while 34% (n=26<\/em>) did have experience with dry needling. Athletes that\nexperienced dry needling reported that dry needling was effective and\ncomfortable for efficient and speedy recovery. They also reported that they\nwould recommend others to use this recovery treatment.  Those athletes with non-exposure to dry\nneedling reported that they would rather use other treatments, concerned with\npain or bruising from dry needling or was not sure it would work for recovery.  These results help to fill current gaps in\nresearch on dry needling.  Future research\ncould compare treatment protocols for pain management and\/or recovery\neffectiveness. <\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n

Keywords:<\/strong> dry needling, athletes, recovery, performance, myofascial trigger points<\/p>\n\n\n\n

INTRODUCTION<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Muscle tightness and trigger points\n(TrPs) cause discomfort and limited range of motion in local and affected areas\nof the body.  TrPs are hyperirritable\nareas that have sensitive tightness in a muscle that restrict range of motion\nand affect muscle activation (5). TrPs occur when the muscle has been\ncontracted repeatedly causing deep aching pain in the muscle, a tender knot in\nthe muscle, difficulty sleeping due to pain or pain that persists or worsens\n(14). Too many TrP can lead to myofascial pain syndrome (MPS), which is a\nchronic muscular pain disorder (9). However, some risk factors of MPS are\nmuscle pain injury, stress and anxiety (14). When people experience TrPs, it\ncan affect their quality of life, cause pain, and disability to that certain\npart of the body (3). TrPs are broken down into two categories -active or\nlatent. Active TrPs are more painful when the person is moving, stretching or\nwhen pressure is applied within the TrPs area. Latent TrPs are only painful\nwhen there is direct compression to that area (7).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

For years, specialists have used\nstretching, compression, and cortisone-injection protocols to reduce muscle\ntightness of TrPs, in an attempt to relieve pain and discomfort for athletes,\nwhich provided short-term pain relief. In 1942, Travell and colleagues\npublished the first method on myofascial trigger points (TrPs) (9). In 1979,\nLewit proposed that the effects of the injections was not caused by the\npresence of medication, but the mechanical stimulation of a TrP with the\nneedle, which helped to reduce pain (9). Dry needling is a procedure used by many\nspecialists, such as physical therapists and athletic trainers, and uses an\nacupuncture needle inserted into the skin and muscle (7). Dry needling\ninactivates TrPs, releasing muscle shortening, removing muscle irritation, and\ndecreasing spontaneous muscle activity (6). When the needle is inserted into\nthose TrPs, it causes the motor end plate to break within those tight knots.\nWhen the specialist rotates the needle aiming at tightness in the muscles, this\nallows the connective tissues to stretch causing the release of pain chemicals.\nThe muscles become relaxed after the repositioning of the collagen fibers\nfollowed by normal blood flow. Oxidative metabolism begins, which allows myosin\nto release from actin and the contracted sarcomere to be relaxed (11). As an\neffect of this process, the muscles are able to function with reduced pain and\nincreased range of motion. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Physicians can use different forms\nof dry needling such as, deep dry needling (DDN), superficial dry needling\n(SDN), or sham dry needling to help with recovery. DDN targets mostly\ndysfunctional motor points, while superficial dry needling targets primarily\nsensory afferents (1). Sham dry needling uses a small-disinfected finishing\nnail instead of a monofilament (13). It is important for physicians to know\nwhich technique would have the most significant outcome for their patients. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Research on the Effects of Dry Needling <\/em>
The literature on the effects of\ndry needling is sparse.  The\neffectiveness of dry needling showed improvements for the management of upper\ntrapezius pain, shoulder pain, and neck pain within the upper extremity.  Additionally, dry needling was effective in\nreducing pain intensity and pain pressure threshold in in the upper trapezius\nand sub occipital regions for participants with headaches. The results were\nmost effective after two days, as the pain did not improve immediately after\ndry needling application due to soreness (16). \nA similar study compared the SDN with DDN in patients with headaches and\nupper trapezius and sub occipital pain (15). The results indicated that DDN\nproduced positive effects on headache index as a factor of headache intensity,\nfrequency, decreasing trigger point tenderness, which lead to better results\nthan SDN. However, another study indicated that SDN followed by active\nstretching is more effective than stretching alone, which can lead to increased\nTrPs sensitivity (4).  Additional\nresearch examined the influence dry needling on blood flow and oxygenation in\nthe trapezius muscle and surrounding area. \nThe results indicated that blood flow and oxygen saturation\nsignificantly increased compared to pre-treatment (2). Overall, studies have\nshown that dry needling increased range of motion, muscle activation patterns,\nreduction of local and referred pain as well as decreased end plate dysfunction\nrelated to TrPs (12). <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Within the lower extremities, a few\nstudies have shown the effectiveness of dry needling. The effectiveness of dry\nneedling in the thigh muscle for hip flexion was measure among soccer players.\nDry needling was compared to water pressure massage and a placebo laser with\nwater pressure massage. The results indicated that dry needling significantly\nincreased hip flexion range of motion, muscular endurance of knee extensors and\nmaximum force of knee extensors over a four-week period after the treatment\n(8).  <\/p>\n\n\n\n

While there is research to support\nthe effectiveness of dry needling for pain management and recovery, the method\nitself could be a barrier for athletes to use. \nIt is realistic to believe that athletes would be hesitant to attempt\ndry needling due to the use of needles, and potential for pain-related\ntreatment protocol.  The aim of this\nstudy was to examine the perceptions of dry needling within NCAA Division I\nathletes. The study allowed athletes who have experienced dry needling as well\nas those who have not, to state their own perceptions on dry needling.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

METHODS<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

This study follows a quantitative\nnon-experimental research design. A survey was used to collect data from all\nathletes attending a university in the Southwestern United States. The survey\nconsisted of 15-items, which examined the perceptions of dry needling for a\nrecovery treatment for athletes. The perceptions of dry needling were compared\nbetween those that were exposed to those that were not exposed.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

 Subjects<\/em>
Data was collected from NCAA\nDivision I Athletes, who all attended a university in the Southeastern United\nStates during the summer of 2018 via Internet based survey. The survey includes\ndemographic questions as well as perceptions of dry needling for recovery of\nmyofascial pain.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The following states inclusions for participants for the study, which are:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

  1. Individuals who are 18\nyears or older.<\/li>
  2. Individuals who are a\nstudent-athlete at the university.<\/li>
  3. Individuals who agree\nto take the survey.<\/li><\/ol>\n\n\n\n

    The\nfollowing states exclusion for participants for study, which are:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    1. Individuals who are 17 and younger.<\/li>
    2. Individuals who are not a student-athlete at the\nuniversity.<\/li>
    3. Individuals who did not agree to take the survey.<\/li><\/ol>\n\n\n\n

      Screening for inclusionary criteria\nwas completed in the two questions of the survey. Once athletes agreed to\nparticipate, they were asked to report their age. If the athletes were 17 years\nold or younger, he or she was excluded from the study. Following a written\nstatement providing the details of the study, individuals had the option to\ncontinue or not.  If the individual\ncontinued with the survey, they consented to be in the study.  <\/p>\n\n\n\n

      Instruments<\/em>
      Demographic information was collected with five items. They were asked to record their age, gender, race, classification of college and the sport they play. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

      Perceptions of dry needling was assessed using 5-items on perceptions of dry needling. Participants were asked about their experience with muscular pain treatment as well as their exposure to dry needling. If participants did not have exposure to dry needling to help with recovery, they were directed to the non-exposure items within the survey. Non-exposure items included questions related to their familiarity of dry needling. Then participants were asked to rate five items pertaining to dry needling as a possible pain management or recovery tool. Some of the statements were, \u201cI am concerned of too much soreness, increased pain or bruising,\u201d  \u201cI\u2019m not sure if it will actually work for muscular pain or recovery\u201d etc. Items were rated on a 5-point Likert scale, ranging from strongly agree (1) to strongly disagree (5). <\/p>\n\n\n\n

      Participants, who reported having\nexposure to dry needling were asked to select all muscular areas that have\nreceived dry needling and how many times they have received dry needling. Then\nthey were also asked to rate six items pertaining to their exposure to dry\nneedling using a 5-point Likert scale, ranging from strongly agree (1) to\nstrongly disagree (5). Some of the statements were \u201cMy dry needling therapy\nexperience(s) have been comfortable,\u201d \u201cDry needling therapy is\/was effective\nfor recovery training or competition\u201d etc. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

      Procedures<\/em>
      After the approval of the IRB, a\nlink to the survey was emailed to all NCAA Division I Athletes at one Division\nI University in Southeast United States. The survey was sent out in May and\ndata were collected over two weeks. Over those two weeks, they were reminded\nthree times about participating within the study. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

      RESULTS<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

      The participants for this\nexploratory study were student-athletes attending a university in Southeastern\nUnited States. 86 people began the survey; however, data was only used from 77\nparticipants. Two people were excluded because they were 17 years old and\nyounger. Another two were excluded because they were no longer\nstudent-athletes. The remaining five participants had too much missing\ninformation to be included in the study. Participants were females (n =50) and\nmales and ages ranged from 18-24 (M=19).<\/em>\nData were collected from participants who played basketball (6), baseball (2),\nlacrosse (6), softball (14), soccer (7), tennis (7), track and field\/ cross\ncountry (20) and volleyball (5). Table 1 describes sample characteristics.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

      Table 1:<\/strong> Sample Characteristics<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n
      Characteristics<\/strong><\/td>Frequency (n)<\/em><\/strong><\/td><\/tr>
      Gender<\/td> <\/td><\/tr>
      Female
      \n Male<\/td>      		50
      \n 19<\/td><\/tr>
      Age<\/td> <\/td><\/tr>
      18-19
      \n 20-24<\/td>      		20
      \n 50<\/td><\/tr>
      Sports<\/td> <\/td><\/tr>
      Basketball
      \n Volleyball
      \n Soccer
      \n Tennis
      \n Lacrosse
      \n Baseball
      \n Softball
      \n Track & Field\/Cross-Country<\/td>      		6
      \n 5
      \n 7
      \n 7
      \n 6
      \n 2
      \n 14
      \n 20<\/td><\/tr>
      Classification<\/td> <\/td><\/tr>
      Freshman
      \n Sophomore
      \n Junior
      \n\t\t Senior
      \n Graduate<\/td>      		10
      \n 14
      \n 21
      \n 15
      \n 9<\/td><\/tr>
      Race\/Ethnicity<\/td> <\/td><\/tr>
      Asian\/Pacific Islander
      \n African American
      \n Hispanic\/Latino
      \n White (Not Hispanic group)<\/td>      		2
      \n 11
      \n 3
      \n 53<\/td><\/tr><\/tbody><\/table>\n\n\n\n

      Perceptions of Exposure to Dry Needling<\/em>
      From the 77 completed surveys, 34 %\nof participants had experienced dry needling as a recovery treatment and\nreported areas where they experienced dry needling in the past. 13 participants\nreported the shoulder\/ arm region, 5 reported the torso (front or back) region\nand 13 reported lower body region (legs). They were also asked to report how many\ntimes they experienced dry needling as a recovery treatment. Seven participants\nreported once, nine reported two to three times and seven reported four or\nmore. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

      A summary is provided for the\nperceptions of athletes who had previous experience with dry needling. About\n61% agreed with the statement \u201cMy dry\nneedling experience(s) have been comfortable,\u201d<\/em> while only 17% disagreed.\nAlso, 52% agreed that \u201cDry needling was\neffective for muscle pain management<\/em>,\u201d and only 4% disagreed. We also asked\nif it was effective for recovery from training and competition, 52% reported\nagree and 4% disagreed. Just over 50% agreed to using dry needling again for\nrecovery, and nearly 50% would recommend others to use it for recovery from\ntraining and competition as well as muscular pain (Table 2). <\/p>\n\n\n\n

      Table 2:<\/strong> Responses of athletes exposed to dry needling (N = 26)<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n\n \n \n \n \n \n \n
      Exposure Survey Questions<\/strong><\/td>\n A (%)<\/strong><\/td>\n D (%)<\/strong><\/td>\n <\/tr>\n
      DN is comfortable.<\/td>\n 14 (53%)<\/td>\n 4 (15%)<\/td>\n <\/tr>\n
      DN was effective for muscle pain management.<\/td>\n 12 (46%)<\/td>\n 1 (3%)<\/td>\n <\/tr>\n
      I would use DN again for recovery.<\/td>\n 11 (42%)<\/td>\n 0<\/td>\n <\/tr>\n
      I would recommend others to use DN.<\/td>\n 11 (42%)<\/td>\n 1 (3%)<\/td>\n <\/tr>\n <\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n\n\n\n

      DN=dry needling; A=agree;\nD=disagree<\/p>\n\n\n\n

      Perceptions of Non-Exposure to Dry Needling<\/em>
      From the 77 completed surveys, 66%\ndid not have previous experience with dry needling. Of that 66% that did not\nhave experience with dry needling, 6 athletes (12%) never heard of dry needling\nand 45 athletes (88%) did. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

      For the ones who were not exposed\nto dry needling, they were asked to report their perceptions to help understand\nwhy they were not exposed to dry needling. For the statement, \u201cI am concerned of too much soreness,\nincreased pain or bruising,\u201d <\/em>39% disagreed and 13% agreed. About 31% of\nthem disagreed and 22% agreed to the statement \u201cI am not sure if it will actually work for muscular pain or recovery.\u201d<\/em>\nWe also asked them if they would rather use other treatments to manage pain or\naid their training and competition recovery, 26% reported that they agree and\n17% reported that they disagree. When stated \u201cI\u2019ve been advised not to use dry needling by a medical professional,\u201d<\/em>\n48% of them disagreed, while 2% agreed. The last statement was \u201cMy cultural beliefs are counter to dry\nneedling process,\u201d <\/em>41% disagreed and only 2% agreed (Table 3).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

      Table 3: <\/strong>Responses of athletes not exposed to dry needling (N = 51)<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n
      Non-Exposure Survey Questions<\/strong><\/td>A (%)<\/strong><\/td>D (%)<\/strong><\/td><\/tr>
      Concerned with pain, bruising or soreness.<\/td>6 (12%)<\/td>18 (35%)<\/td><\/tr>
      Not sure it will work for recovery.<\/td>10 (20%)<\/td>14 (27%)<\/td><\/tr>
      Rather use other recovery treatments.<\/td>12 (23%)<\/td>8 (16%)<\/td><\/tr>
      Advised not to use DN by medical professionals.<\/td>1 (2%)<\/td>22 (43%)<\/td><\/tr>
      My cultural beliefs are counter to the DN process.<\/td>1 (2%)<\/td>19 (37%)<\/td><\/tr><\/tbody><\/table>\n\n\n\n

      DN=dry needling; A=agree; D=disagree<\/p>\n\n\n\n

      DISCUSSION<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

      The aim of this study was to\nexamine the perceptions of dry needling within NCAA Division I athletes for\nmuscle pain management and\/or recovery. The results indicated that dry needling\nwas effective for athletes who were exposed to dry needling. Those athletes had\na decrease in muscle tightness, which enhanced their athletic performance (2,\n4, 8, 16). However, those who were not exposed to dry needling would rather use\nother recovery treatments, such as e-stim, ice massage therapy, ultrasound etc.\nGathering this information was very important to help fill the gap in previous\nresearch, but also to help athletes find another recovery treatment. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

      Compared to previous findings, our\nresults support those that found dry needling to be effective for TrPs or\nmuscle pain management. Additionally, our results support other studies that\nfound dry needling increased range of motion, decreased muscle tightness and\nincreased athletic performance within athletes. Our results are novel to the\nliterature in that no other study has examined the reasons why athletes have\nnot tried dry needling.  Our hypothesis\nwas that athletes would fear bruising or soreness of the treatment; however,\nathletes who were not exposed to dry needling were not concerned with bruising\nor soreness. They have not used it because they believe that other treatments\nare better for their muscle pain management. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

      Strengths and Limitations<\/em>
      Overall, the main strength of our\nresearch is the addition to the dearth of literature that exists on dry\nneedling, especially the perceptions and beliefs of those exposed versus not\nexposed. Other strengths included inclusionary screening and use of athletes\nthat play a variety of sports.  Even\nthough the study included 77 participants, the sample size was a limitation.\nWhile this research could help fill in the gap in dry needling research, this\nstudy was based only on perceptions, and was self-report. There was no\nfollow-up study done to prove that dry needling did enhance athletic\nperformance.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

      Future Research<\/em>
      Future studies should compare dry needling with other recovery treatments. This would allow coaches, physical therapists, athletic trainers as well as athletes see which treatment is better for muscle pain management. Controlled trials of pre and post measurements along with treatment would help identify potential effectiveness and mechanisms of performance enhancement. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

      CONCLUSIONS<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

      For exposed athletes, dry needling\nis an effective tool for pain management and recovery.  Those exposed are in favor of future use, and\nrecommendations to others.  Since dry needling\nis a relatively new procedure, it is expected that many athletes have not\nexperienced it, either because it is not available or they do not perceive it\nto be effective. Some of them have heard of it, however, they may lack the\nknowledge on the effectiveness of dry needling. Without knowledge on the\neffectiveness of dry needling, athletes may opt for other recovery treatments,\nsuch as e-stim, ice massage therapy, ultrasound etc. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

      APPLICATION TO SPORTS<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

      Understanding the perceptions of\nathletes reasoning for using dry needling and not using dry needling may help\nwith other athletes\u2019 recovery time and athletic performance in the future. This\nresearch may help coaches determine which treatment would be best for their\nathletes if other treatments were helping with muscle pain management. While\nother treatments may be better for some, dry needling may work better for\nothers. While the research only compared the perceptions of dry needling for\nthose who were exposed and those who were not exposed, future research should\nfurther the results.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

      ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

      We would like to thank the Ronald\nE. McNair Post-Baccalaureate Achievement Program for allowing us the\nopportunity to conduct this research. We would also like to thank the amazing\ndirector of the program, Dr. Cheryl Fortner-Wood and Mrs. Stephanie Bartlett,\nwriting coach. Most importantly, thank you to Dr. Joni Boyd, my mentor and\nco-author, who helped me along the way. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

      There are no financial or\nnon-financial conflicts of interest in this research.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

      REFERENCES<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

      1. Baldry,\n P.E., (2005). Acupuncture, trigger points and musculoskeletal pain.\n Edinburgh, UK: Churchill Livingstone.<\/li>
      2. Cagnie,\n B., Barbe, T., De Ridder, E., Van Oosterwijck, J., Cools, A., &\n Danneels, L. (2012). The influence of dry needling of the trapezius muscle\n on muscle blood flow and oxygenation. Journal of Manipulative & Physiological Therapeutics<\/em>, 35<\/em>(9), 685-691.<\/li>
      3. Cummings,\n M., & Baldry, P. (2007). Regional myofascial pain: Diagnosis and\n management. Best Practice and Research Clinical Rheumatology, 21, 367-387.<\/li>
      4. Decoster,\n L.C., Cleland, J., & Altieri, C. (2005). The effects of hamstring\n stretching on range of motion: A systematic literature review. Journal of\n Orthopaedic Sports Physical Therapy, 35, 377-387.<\/li>
      5. Dembowski,\n S.C., Westrick, R. B., Zylstra, E., & Johnson, M.R. (2013). Treatment\n of hamstring strain in a collegiate pole-vaulter integrating dry needling\n with an eccentric training program: A resident\u2019s case report. The\n International Journal of Sports Physical Therapy, 8, 328-339.<\/li>
      6. Dommerholt,\n J. (2004). Dry needling in orthopedic physical therapy practice.\n Orthopedic Physical Therapy Practice, 16, 15-20.<\/li>
      7. Dommerholt,\n J., & del Moral O.M., (2010). Myofascial trigger points:\n Pathophysiology and evidence-informed diagnosis and management. Sudbary,\n MA: Jones and Bartlett Publishers.<\/li>
      8. Haser,\n C., St\u00f6ggl, T., Kriner, M., Mikoleit, J., Wolfahrt, B., Scherr, J., …\n & Pfab, F. (2017). Effect of dry needling on thigh muscle strength and\n hip flexion in elite soccer players. Medicine & Science in Sports Exercise,<\/em> 49<\/em>(2), 378-383.<\/li>
      9. Ingraham, P., & Taylor,\n T. (2019, March 25). The Complete Guide to Trigger Points & Myofascial\n Pain (2018). Retrieved April 14, 2019, from https:\/\/www.painscience.com\/tutorials\/trigger-points.php<\/a>.<\/li>
      10. Jafri, M. S. (2014, August\n 18). Mechanisms of Myofascial Pain. Retrieved April 14, 2019, from https:\/\/www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov\/pmc\/articles\/PMC4285362\/<\/a>.<\/li>
      11. Keeley, L. (2015, September 29). 09_Trigger Point Dry Needling.\n Retrieved April 14, 2019, from https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/watch?v=xrFF7n29XOU.<\/li>
      12. Legge,\n D. (2014). A history of dry needling. Journal of Musculoskeletal Pain, 22,\n 301-307.<\/li>
      13. Mason,\n J. S., Crowell, M., Dolbeer, J., Morris, J., Terry, A., Koppenhaver, S.,\n & Goss, D. L. (2016). The effectiveness of dry needling and stretching\n alone on hamstring flexibility in patients with knee pain: A randomized\n controlled trial. The International\n Journal of Sports Physical Therapy, 11, <\/em>672-683.4.<\/li>
      14. Mayo Clinic. (2018, February 01). Myofascial pain syndrome.\n Retrieved April 14, 2019, from https:\/\/www.mayoclinic.org\/diseases-conditions\/myofascial-pain-syndrome\/symptoms-causes\/syc-20375444<\/a>.<\/li>
      15. Sedighi,\n A., Ansari, N. N., & Naghdi, S. (2017). Comparison of acute effects of\n superficial and deep dry needling into trigger points of suboccipital and\n upper trapezius muscles in patients with cervicogenic headache. Journal of Bodywork and Movement\n Therapies<\/em>, 21<\/em>(4),\n 810-814.<\/li>
      16. Ziaeifar,\n M., Arab, A. M., & Nourbakhsh, M. R. (2016). Clinical effectiveness of\n dry needling immediately after application on myofascial trigger point in\n upper trapezius muscle. Journal\n of Chiropractic Medicine<\/em>, 15<\/em>(4),\n 252-258.<\/li><\/ol>\n\n\n\n

        <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

        Authors: Shemeika McCray & Joni M. Boyd, PhD. CSCS*D Corresponding […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"jetpack_publicize_message":"","jetpack_is_tweetstorm":false,"jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true,"jetpack_social_options":[]},"categories":[994,904],"tags":[492,1512,1514,475,1513],"jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p4btio-1Ig","jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":5079,"url":"https:\/\/thesportjournal.org\/article\/perceptions-of-ncaa-division-i-athletes-on-strength-training\/","url_meta":{"origin":6588,"position":0},"title":"Perceptions of NCAA Division I Athletes on Strength Training","date":"May 25, 2017","format":false,"excerpt":"Authors: Joni M. Boyd, Ashley M. Andrews, Janet R. Wojcik, & Charles J. Bowers Corresponding Author: Joni M. Boyd, PhD Winthrop University 216L West Center Rock Hill, SC 29733 boydj@winthrop.edu 803-323-4936 Joni Boyd is an Assistant Professor of Exercise Science in the Department of Physical Education, Sport, and Human Performance\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Sport Training"","img":{"alt_text":"Table 1","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/thesportjournal.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/05\/Table1.jpg?resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200},"classes":[]},{"id":4751,"url":"https:\/\/thesportjournal.org\/article\/so-whos-our-new-coach-ncaa-student-athletes-perceptions-after-a-head-coaching-change\/","url_meta":{"origin":6588,"position":1},"title":"“So, Who\u2019s Our New Coach?”: NCAA Student Athletes’ Perceptions After a Head Coaching Change","date":"November 29, 2016","format":false,"excerpt":"Authors: Emily A. Heller, Todd A. Gilson, Amanda Paule-Koba Corresponding Author: Emily A. Heller Aurora University 347 S. Gladstone Aurora, IL 60506 eheller@aurora.edu C: 630-217-2358 \u201cSo, Who\u2019s Our New Coach?\u201d: NCAA Student Athletes\u2019 Perceptions After a Head Coaching Change \u2003 ABSTRACT Coaches play an important role in athlete\u2019s collegiate experience,\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Sports Management"","img":{"alt_text":"Table 1","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/thesportjournal.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/11\/Table1-2.jpg?resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200},"classes":[]},{"id":4961,"url":"https:\/\/thesportjournal.org\/article\/athlete-perceptions-of-a-monitoring-and-strength-and-conditioning-program\/","url_meta":{"origin":6588,"position":2},"title":"Athlete Perceptions of a Monitoring and Strength and Conditioning Program","date":"March 30, 2017","format":false,"excerpt":"Authors: Jacob P Reed(1), Mauro Palmero(2), Kimitake Sato(3), Cheng-Tu Hsieh(4), Michael Stone(3) (1)Kinesiology, Allied Health, and Human Services University of Northern Iowa Cedar Falls, IA 50614 (2)Hospitality Management Department University of Missouri Columbia Columbia, MO 65211 (3)Center of Excellence for Sport Science and Coach Education Department of Exercise and Sport\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Sports Health & Fitness"","img":{"alt_text":"Table 1","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/thesportjournal.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/03\/Table1-1.jpg?resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200},"classes":[]},{"id":3834,"url":"https:\/\/thesportjournal.org\/article\/leadership-athletes-and-coaches-in-sport\/","url_meta":{"origin":6588,"position":3},"title":"Leadership: Athletes and Coaches in Sport","date":"July 1, 2016","format":false,"excerpt":"Authors: Dr. Sharon P. Misasi*, Dr. Gary Morin and Lauren Kwasnowski Dr. Sharon P. Misasi is a Professor of Exercise Science at Southern Connecticut State University. Dr. Gary Morin is a Professor of Exercise Science, Assistant Athletic Trainer and Program Director of the Athletic Training Education Program. Lauren Kwasnowski is\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Contemporary Sports Issues"","img":{"alt_text":"Univariate comparison of training questions by coaches for gender","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/thesportjournal.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/07\/Table-2.jpg?resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200},"classes":[]},{"id":7712,"url":"https:\/\/thesportjournal.org\/article\/a-review-of-student-athlete-responses-to-team-sport-eliminations-by-ncaa-division-i-schools\/","url_meta":{"origin":6588,"position":4},"title":"A Review of Student-Athlete Responses to Team Sport Eliminations by NCAA Division I Schools","date":"December 1, 2020","format":false,"excerpt":"Authors:\u00a0 Mark Mitchell and Rob Montgomery Corresponding Author:Mark Mitchell, DBAProfessor of MarketingAssociate Dean, Wall College of BusinessNCAA Faculty Athletics Representative (FAR)Coastal Carolina UniversityP. O. Box 261954Conway, SC\u00a0 29528mmitchel@coastal.edu(843) 349-2392Mark Mitchell, DBA is Professor of Marketing at Coastal Carolina University in Conway, SC.Rob Montgomery, DBA is Professor of Marketing at the\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Research"","img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":433,"url":"https:\/\/thesportjournal.org\/article\/body-image-disturbances-in-ncaa-division-i-and-iii-female-athletes\/","url_meta":{"origin":6588,"position":5},"title":"Body Image Disturbances in NCAA Division I and III Female Athletes","date":"September 30, 2011","format":false,"excerpt":"Kato, K., Jevas, S., and Culpepper, D. ### Abstract The purpose of this study was to examine and compare eating characteristics and body image disturbances in female NCAA Division I and III athletes in the mainstream sports of basketball, softball, track\/cross country, volleyball, soccer, tennis, swimming\/diving, and ice hockey. Female\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Contemporary Sports Issues"","img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]}],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/thesportjournal.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6588"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/thesportjournal.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/thesportjournal.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/thesportjournal.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/thesportjournal.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=6588"}],"version-history":[{"count":13,"href":"https:\/\/thesportjournal.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6588\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":7267,"href":"https:\/\/thesportjournal.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6588\/revisions\/7267"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/thesportjournal.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=6588"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/thesportjournal.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=6588"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/thesportjournal.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=6588"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}