Cross-Sectional StudyDiagnosis & AssessmentClinical RelevanceDOI
4 min read
Jump to:

Patient-friendly summary

If you read nothing else

Experts worldwide shared their views on diagnosing myofascial pain syndrome, leading to proposed diagnostic criteria.

Bottom line

Preliminary diagnostic criteria for myofascial pain syndrome proposed based on expert survey.

Preliminary evidence

Not everyone agrees

This paper proposes preliminary diagnostic criteria for myofascial pain syndrome, a condition with no widely accepted criteria.

Ask your provider

  • What signs and symptoms do you look for to diagnose myofascial pain syndrome?
  • How do you differentiate myofascial pain syndrome from other pain conditions?
  • What diagnostic tests do you use to rule out other conditions?

Is this study for you?

  • Do you have localized muscle pain with a specific tender spot?
  • Does pressure on the tender spot cause your pain?
  • Does your pain improve with stress relief or worsen with stress?

2+ yes = good match

Published

2015
11 years ago
Older study
Full research — for clinicians and curious readers

Study Summary

Background

Myofascial Pain Syndrome (MPS) is one of the most common conditions seen in pain medicine practice, yet there are no widely accepted diagnostic criteria or gold standard tests for diagnosis. Without standardized criteria, it's impossible to conduct meaningful research or compare treatment outcomes. This creates a major problem for both clinical care and scientific advancement. The authors recognize that conditions without objective measures have successfully used a stepwise approach: survey expert opinions, build consensus, then validate empirically.

What They Did

The researchers surveyed 4,143 pain management providers worldwide who were members of the International Association for the Study of Pain and the American Academy of Pain Medicine. They asked detailed questions about what signs, symptoms, and physical findings are essential, associated with, irrelevant to, or exclusionary for diagnosing MPS. The survey covered palpatory findings, signs and symptoms, responses to treatment, and diagnostic tests. Participants rated each item's importance and could add written comments about missing elements.

What They Found

Of 214 responses (5.2% response rate), there was strong consensus on key diagnostic features. The most essential components were tender spots that recreate the patient's symptoms when pressed (72% said essential), and recognition of familiar pain when the tender spot is palpated (58% said essential). Over 90% agreed that six palpatory findings were either essential or associated: tender spots causing local pain, symptom recognition with palpation, taut bands, referred pain from tender spots, tender nodules, and nodules within taut bands. No single sign or symptom was considered essential by more than 50% of respondents, but local muscle pain came closest at 43%.

Most respondents (76%) considered MPS a distinct clinical entity, different from fibromyalgia (72%), and believed it could be both a primary condition (77%) and secondary to other conditions (93%).

What This Means

This study provides the first systematic international consensus on MPS diagnosis and has led to proposed preliminary diagnostic criteria. For patients, this means better standardization of diagnosis across providers and potentially more consistent treatment approaches. For clinicians, it offers evidence-based guidance on which examination findings are most important. The work establishes that MPS should be diagnosed primarily through physical examination focusing on tender spots that reproduce symptoms, rather than through laboratory tests or imaging.

The study also confirms that MPS is viewed as a legitimate, distinct condition that can both cause and result from other medical problems.

50/100
Evidence StrengthModerate
Study Quality
Sample Size
Replication
72%
Agreed Tender Spots Essential
76%
Consider MPS Distinct Entity
214
International Responses
31.6%
Estimated MPS Prevalence

Key Findings

Tender spots causing local pain most essential diagnostic featureHigh

72% of specialists rated this as essential, with 95% considering it essential or associated

Recognition of symptoms upon palpation highly diagnosticHigh

58% considered essential, 93% rated as essential or associated with MPS diagnosis

MPS viewed as distinct clinical entity separate from fibromyalgiaHigh

76% agreed MPS is distinct entity, 72% said it differs from fibromyalgia

No single sign or symptom reached majority consensus as essentialMedium

Local muscle pain came closest at 43% essential, highlighting diagnostic complexity

MPS can be both primary and secondary conditionMedium

77% agreed it can be primary condition, 93% agreed it can be secondary

Diagnostic tests useful only for ruling out other conditionsMedium

Write-in responses emphasized tests don't confirm MPS but exclude other pathology

Study Methodology
Study Design
International cross-sectional survey of pain management providers
Sample Size
214
Duration
9 months
Population
Pain management specialists from IASP and AAPM
Outcome Measures
Expert opinion ratings · Demographic data · Clinical experience assessment

Strengths

  • International scope with representation from multiple continents
  • Large survey population with comprehensive coverage of pain specialists
  • Systematic methodology building on previous survey work
  • First step toward evidence-based diagnostic standardization

Limitations

  • Very low response rate of only 5.2%
  • Primarily represented North American perspectives
  • Survey methodology inherently limited by expert opinion rather than empirical validation
  • No validation of proposed criteria against objective measures

Key Takeaways for Patients

What This Means for You

  1. 01Myofascial pain syndrome is a real, distinct condition recognized by pain specialists worldwide
  2. 02Diagnosis depends mainly on physical examination, specifically finding tender spots that recreate your pain
  3. 03X-rays, MRIs, and blood tests typically won't diagnose this condition but may rule out other problems
  4. 04The condition can occur on its own or develop because of other medical problems
  5. 05Having standardized diagnostic criteria should lead to more consistent treatment approaches

Read the Full Paper

Access the complete peer-reviewed study from Pain Medicine

View Full Study

Related Research

●●●●● LandmarkSystematic Review

Criteria Used for the Diagnosis of Myofascial Trigger Points in Clinical Trials on Physical Therapy: Updated Systematic Review

Li et al.·Clinical Journal of Pain·2020

This systematic review of 198 studies found significant inconsistency in myofascial trigger point diagnostic criteria, with only 65% clearly reporting their methods. Spot tenderness, referred pain, and local twitch response were the most commonly used criteria.

Diagnosis & AssessmentRead →
●●●●● LandmarkNarrative Review

Diagnostic Criteria for Fibromyalgia: Critical Review and Future Perspectives

Carmen M. Galvez-Sánchez & Gustavo A. Reyes del Paso·Journal of Clinical Medicine·2020

A critical review of the evolving ACR diagnostic criteria for fibromyalgia, concluding that despite the 2010 criteria and the 2011/2016 proposals, misdiagnosis and dissatisfaction among clinicians and patients persist.

Diagnosis & AssessmentRead →
●●●●● LandmarkNarrative Review

Diagnosis of Myofascial Pain Syndrome

Gerwin, Robert D.·Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation Clinics of North America·2014

Comprehensive review of myofascial trigger point diagnosis emphasizing proper palpation techniques. Essential diagnostic criteria include taut band presence, point tenderness, and pain reproduction.

Diagnosis & AssessmentRead →
●●●●● LandmarkNarrative Review

Myofascial pain syndromes and their evaluation

Giamberardino et al.·Best Practice & Research Clinical Rheumatology·2011

Comprehensive review of myofascial pain syndromes showing they affect up to 85% of elderly individuals yet remain under-diagnosed. Evidence supports trigger point injection as gold standard treatment with systematic assessment of perpetuating factors.

Diagnosis & AssessmentRead →