Musculoskeletal Pain and Disorders: Diagnosis, Treatment and Management

A special issue of Life (ISSN 2075-1729). This special issue belongs to the section "Physiology and Pathology".

Deadline for manuscript submissions: 30 April 2026 | Viewed by 6314

Special Issue Editors

Special Issue Information

Dear Colleagues,

Pain is source of disability worldwide. Understanding its origin and defining the best treatment are currently priorities for improving quality of life and decreasing disability. Musculoskeletal disorders encompass a wide range of conditions, affecting the fascia, muscles, tendons, ligaments, and other supporting structures of the body. These disorders pose significant challenges to patients and healthcare professionals alike, requiring a multidisciplinary approach for effective treatment and care. The aim of this Special Issue is to provide a comprehensive platform for researchers and practitioners to explore the latest advancements in the diagnosis, treatment, and management of musculoskeletal pain and disorders.

We encourage you and your co-workers to submit your articles reporting on this topic.

Dr. Antonio Stecco
Dr. Carmelo Pirri
Guest Editors

Manuscript Submission Information

Manuscripts should be submitted online at www.mdpi.com by registering and logging in to this website. Once you are registered, click here to go to the submission form. Manuscripts can be submitted until the deadline. All submissions that pass pre-check are peer-reviewed. Accepted papers will be published continuously in the journal (as soon as accepted) and will be listed together on the special issue website. Research articles, review articles as well as short communications are invited. For planned papers, a title and short abstract (about 100 words) can be sent to the Editorial Office for announcement on this website.

Submitted manuscripts should not have been published previously, nor be under consideration for publication elsewhere (except conference proceedings papers). All manuscripts are thoroughly refereed through a single-blind peer-review process. A guide for authors and other relevant information for submission of manuscripts is available on the Instructions for Authors page. Life is an international peer-reviewed open access monthly journal published by MDPI.

Please visit the Instructions for Authors page before submitting a manuscript. The Article Processing Charge (APC) for publication in this open access journal is 2600 CHF (Swiss Francs). Submitted papers should be well formatted and use good English. Authors may use MDPI's English editing service prior to publication or during author revisions.

Keywords

  • pain
  • connective tissue
  • musculoskeletal disorders
  • fascia
  • muscles
  • tendons
  • ligaments

Benefits of Publishing in a Special Issue

  • Ease of navigation: Grouping papers by topic helps scholars navigate broad scope journals more efficiently.
  • Greater discoverability: Special Issues support the reach and impact of scientific research. Articles in Special Issues are more discoverable and cited more frequently.
  • Expansion of research network: Special Issues facilitate connections among authors, fostering scientific collaborations.
  • External promotion: Articles in Special Issues are often promoted through the journal's social media, increasing their visibility.
  • Reprint: MDPI Books provides the opportunity to republish successful Special Issues in book format, both online and in print.

Further information on MDPI's Special Issue policies can be found here.

Published Papers (3 papers)

Order results
Result details
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:

Research

Jump to: Other

12 pages, 2361 KB  
Article
The (ProteUS) Anisotropy Effect in Deep Fascia Ultrasonography: The Impact of Probe Angulation on Echogenicity and Thickness Assessments
by Carmelo Pirri, Nina Pirri, Diego Guidolin, Enrico De Rose, Veronica Macchi, Andrea Porzionato, Raffaele De Caro and Carla Stecco
Life 2025, 15(5), 822; https://doi.org/10.3390/life15050822 - 21 May 2025
Viewed by 599
Abstract
This study investigates the influence of probe angulation on echogenicity and thickness measurements of the deep fascia, addressing methodological challenges in musculoskeletal ultrasound examination. The anisotropic nature of connective tissues can lead to distortions, affecting US imaging accuracy and diagnostic reliability. Echogenicity and [...] Read more.
This study investigates the influence of probe angulation on echogenicity and thickness measurements of the deep fascia, addressing methodological challenges in musculoskeletal ultrasound examination. The anisotropic nature of connective tissues can lead to distortions, affecting US imaging accuracy and diagnostic reliability. Echogenicity and thickness variations were analyzed across different probe inclinations in both transverse and longitudinal orientations. Measurements at 0° were compared with −5° and +5° angles to assess their impact on imaging consistency due to 3D-printed support. Echogenicity differed significantly with probe angulation, in particular in transverse scan at 0°, which showed substantial variation at −5° (mean diff. = 55.14, p < 0.0001) and +5° (mean diff. = 43.75, p = 0.0024). Thickness measurements also varied, reinforcing that non-perpendicular probe angulation introduces distortions. The same results were reported for longitudinal scans. These findings highlight the need for the use of standardized scanning protocols to improve reliability. The protean nature of deep fascia anisotropy, highly sensitive to minimal changes in probe orientation, necessitates precise and consistent imaging to accurately reveal its structural organization. Optimizing probe orientation is essential for advancing fascial US diagnostics. Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

Other

Jump to: Research

11 pages, 1724 KB  
Systematic Review
Comparison of Effectiveness Between Ultrasound-Guided and Blind Corticosteroid Injections in Plantar Fasciitis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
by Hoa Ngan Doan, Yoo Jin Choo and Min Cheol Chang
Life 2025, 15(7), 1107; https://doi.org/10.3390/life15071107 - 15 Jul 2025
Viewed by 675
Abstract
The effectiveness of ultrasound (US)-guided compared with blind corticosteroid injections for the treatment of plantar fasciitis (PF) remains uncertain. This meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the clinical benefits of US-guided over blind injections in patients with PF. A systematic search of PubMed, Embase, Web [...] Read more.
The effectiveness of ultrasound (US)-guided compared with blind corticosteroid injections for the treatment of plantar fasciitis (PF) remains uncertain. This meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the clinical benefits of US-guided over blind injections in patients with PF. A systematic search of PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Scopus was conducted, collecting articles published up to 20 April 2025. Randomized controlled trials comparing US-guided and blind corticosteroid injections for PF were included. The extracted outcome measures, i.e., visual analog scale (VAS), heel tenderness index (HTI), tenderness threshold (TT), and plantar fascia thickness, were assessed at short- (2–6 weeks) and long-term (≥12 weeks) follow-ups. Compared with the blind injection group, the US-guided group showed significantly greater improvement in TT at both short- and long-term follow-ups, as well as a greater reduction in plantar fascia thickness. However, no significant differences were found between the two groups in VAS and HTI scores. US-guided corticosteroid injections provide superior clinical benefits compared with blind injections in patients with PF, particularly in enhancing mechanical pain tolerance and reducing plantar fascia thickness. Nevertheless, these findings should be interpreted with caution due to the limited methodological quality of the included studies. Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

25 pages, 3020 KB  
Systematic Review
The Effect of Physiotherapy on Arthrogenic Muscle Inhibition After ACL Injury or Reconstruction: A Systematic Review
by Maria Paço, Maxence Peysson, Elona Dumont, Mário Correia, Anna Quialheiro and Paula Chaves
Life 2024, 14(12), 1586; https://doi.org/10.3390/life14121586 - 2 Dec 2024
Cited by 3 | Viewed by 4330
Abstract
Arthrogenic muscle inhibition (AMI) following ACL injury or reconstruction is a common issue that affects muscle activation and functional recovery. Thus, the objective of this study was to systematize the literature on the effects of physiotherapy interventions in the rehabilitation of AMI after [...] Read more.
Arthrogenic muscle inhibition (AMI) following ACL injury or reconstruction is a common issue that affects muscle activation and functional recovery. Thus, the objective of this study was to systematize the literature on the effects of physiotherapy interventions in the rehabilitation of AMI after ACL injury or reconstruction. A systematic review was conducted following the PRISMA guidelines. The risk of bias was evaluated using the PEDro scale and the Cochrane risk of bias tool. Searches were performed in the PubMed, Google Scholar, Cochrane Library, and EMBASE databases. Randomized controlled trials involving patients with ACL injuries or ACL reconstruction were included. Twenty studies were included. Fifteen evaluated the effects of exercise, showing significant improvement. Seven studies examined electrotherapy, with neuromuscular electrical stimulation and high-frequency therapy combined with exercise showing improvements in muscle strength, pain, and joint range of motion. Nine studies explored interventions like motor imagery, cryotherapy, taping, and vibration. When performed before exercise, motor imagery and cryotherapy improved cortical activity and muscle recovery. Kinesio taping reduced edema and pain better than exercise alone. Vibration showed inconsistent results across three studies. Methodological quality varied between 5 and 8 on the PEDro scale, with moderate-to-low risk of bias. Structured exercise should be the first-line intervention, but combining it with other therapies enhances rehabilitation. The study protocol was registered in the PROSPERO database (CRD42023425510). Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

Back to TopTop