Narrative ReviewPain Science & Central SensitizationClinical RelevanceDOI
4 min read
Jump to:

Patient-friendly summary

If you read nothing else

This review highlights the importance of a biopsychosocial approach to managing myofascial pain, considering biological, psychological, and social factors.

Bottom line

A biopsychosocial approach, including myofascial release and stress management, may help manage myofascial pain.

Moderate evidence

Words decoded

Myofascial pain syndrome (MPS)
— A common type of chronic muscle pain caused by trigger points in muscles.
Trigger points (TrPs)
— Hypersensitive spots in muscles that, when pressed, can cause pain, numbness, or tingling.
Biopsychosocial model
— A way of understanding health and disease that looks at the interactions between biological, psychological, and social factors.

Best fit for

People with chronic muscle painIndividuals seeking a holistic treatment approach

Body regions

headneckshoulderlumbar region

Published

2021
5 years ago
Recent
Full research — for clinicians and curious readers

Study Summary

Background

Myofascial pain syndrome (MPS) affects 13.5-47% of the global population, making it one of the most common chronic musculoskeletal pain conditions. While trigger points (hypersensitive taut muscle bands) are the hallmark feature, the traditional biomedical approach has limitations in addressing the complex, multifactorial nature of MPS. The biopsychosocial model, which considers biological, psychological, and social factors as interconnected contributors to pain, offers a more comprehensive framework for understanding and treating MPS. This review explores how these three domains interact to influence trigger point activation and pain persistence.

What They Did

The authors conducted a narrative review examining the current literature on MPS through the lens of the biopsychosocial model. They analyzed research on the pathophysiology of trigger points, including the 'integrated hypothesis' proposed by Mense and Simons, which describes how acetylcholine dysregulation leads to sustained muscle contraction and localized hypoxia. The review examined biological factors (genetics, nutrition, hormones), psychological factors (stress, depression, anxiety, catastrophizing), and social factors (isolation, socioeconomic status, social support) that contribute to MPS. They also evaluated treatment approaches that address multiple domains simultaneously.

What They Found

The review revealed that MPS involves complex interactions between multiple systems. Biologically, genetic variations in pain-processing genes (like GCH1, SLC6A4, and SCN9A) influence pain sensitivity, while nutritional deficiencies (especially B vitamins) and hormonal changes can trigger activation. Psychologically, chronic pain and depression share neural pathways, with imaging studies showing reduced dopamine activity in chronic pain patients. Stress activates β2 receptors through sympathetic hyperactivity, increasing muscle tenderness.

Socially, factors like isolation, low socioeconomic status, and poor social support activate brain regions associated with physical pain and reduce descending pain inhibition. The authors found that successful treatment requires addressing all three domains: biological (myofascial release, dry needling, appropriate medications), psychological (stress management, cognitive restructuring, addressing depression), and social (improving support systems, addressing socioeconomic barriers).

What This Means

This review demonstrates that effective MPS treatment must move beyond simply targeting trigger points to address the whole person. Clinicians should screen for psychological distress, social isolation, nutritional deficiencies, and genetic factors that may perpetuate pain. Treatment plans should be individualized and may include traditional techniques like dry needling or manual therapy combined with stress management, exercise, meditation, and social support interventions. For patients, this means that addressing lifestyle factors, mental health, and social connections are as important as physical treatments.

The review suggests that a purely mechanical approach to trigger points may explain why some patients don't respond well to standard treatments, highlighting the need for comprehensive care that acknowledges the complex, multifaceted nature of chronic pain.

65/100
Evidence StrengthModerate
Study Quality
Sample Size
Replication
47%
Global Chronic Muscle Pain Prevalence
85%
Prevalence in Elderly (>65 years)
46.1%
Active Trigger Point Prevalence

Key Findings

Genetic variations influence pain sensitivityHigh

Multiple genes including GCH1, SLC6A4, and SCN9A affect pain perception, with women showing higher pain sensitivity than men

Psychological factors activate pain-related brain regionsHigh

Chronic pain reduces dopamine activity in limbic areas and activates cingulate and insular cortices similar to physical injury

Social isolation mimics physical painMedium

Social rejection and isolation activate the same brain regions as physical pain and reduce descending pain inhibition

Nutritional deficiencies contribute to trigger point activationMedium

Deficiencies in B vitamins (B1, B6, B12) and folic acid are associated with increased trigger point activation

Stress creates a pain-stress cycleHigh

Stress causes pain through β2 receptor activation, while chronic pain causes structural brain remodeling that perpetuates stress

Multimodal treatment shows superior outcomesHigh

Combining biological treatments with psychological and social interventions provides better results than single-domain approaches

Study Methodology
Study Design
Narrative review of existing literature on biopsychosocial aspects of MPS
Sample Size
N/A
Duration
Comprehensive literature review
Population
Patients with myofascial pain syndrome
Outcome Measures
Biopsychosocial model components · Treatment outcomes · Pathophysiology mechanisms

Strengths

  • Comprehensive integration of biological, psychological, and social factors
  • Evidence-based approach linking various research findings
  • Practical clinical protocol provided for implementation
  • Addresses limitations of purely biomedical approaches

Limitations

  • Narrative review format limits systematic analysis
  • No original research data presented
  • Limited discussion of treatment effectiveness comparisons
  • Some recommendations based on theoretical frameworks rather than clinical trials

Key Takeaways for Patients

What This Means for You

  1. 01Your trigger points may be influenced by stress, depression, poor nutrition, or social isolation—not just physical factors
  2. 02Getting adequate B vitamins, managing stress, and maintaining social connections can help prevent trigger point flare-ups
  3. 03The best treatment combines hands-on therapy with attention to your mental health and lifestyle factors
  4. 04If standard trigger point treatments aren't working, ask your provider to assess psychological and social factors that might be contributing
  5. 05Meditation, exercise, and improving sleep quality can be as important as manual therapy for long-term improvement

Read the Full Paper

Access the complete peer-reviewed study from Cureus

View Full Study

Related Research

●●●●● LandmarkMeta-analysis

Efficacy of cognitive behavioral therapy for musculoskeletal pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Xianjun Liu et al.·Frontiers in Psychology·2026

A meta-analysis of 14 RCTs found that CBT-based interventions produce small-to-moderate reductions in pain intensity and the largest, most consistent reductions in pain catastrophizing for chronic musculoskeletal pain.

Central SensitizationRead →
●●●●● LandmarkMeta-analysis

Effectiveness of Pain Neuroscience Education in Reducing Pain, Disability, Kinesiophobia, and Catastrophizing in Patients with Chronic Low Back Pain: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Luisa Medina-Viedma et al.·Medical Sciences (Basel)·2025

A meta-analysis of 15 RCTs (810 patients) found that pain neuroscience education, usually added to exercise or physiotherapy, may reduce pain, disability, kinesiophobia, and catastrophizing in chronic low back pain, though the authors urge caution given small trials and heterogeneity.

Central SensitizationRead →
●●●●● LandmarkSystematic Review

Pain science education and exercise interventions for people with knee or hip osteoarthritis: a systematic review, content and meta-analysis

Anna Louise Hurley-Wallace et al.·BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders·2025

A systematic review and component network meta-analysis finding that pain science education had little-to-no effect on pain or function in knee/hip osteoarthritis but improved catastrophizing, kinesiophobia, and self-efficacy, especially when paired with exercise.

Central SensitizationRead →
●●●●● LandmarkSystematic Review

Effectiveness of Pain Neuroscience Education in Patients with Chronic Musculoskeletal Pain and Central Sensitization: A Systematic Review

Beatrice Lepri et al.·International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health·2023

A systematic review of 15 RCTs found that pain neuroscience education may improve pain, disability, and psychosocial factors in chronic musculoskeletal pain with central sensitization, particularly when combined with exercise or manual therapy and delivered one-to-one.

Central SensitizationRead →