European Delphi Consensus on Minimum Training Standards for Dry Needling (EDNES): a protocol for a modified Delphi study

You have full access to this open access article

Downloads

Abstract

Background: Dry needling is increasingly used in physiotherapy, yet substantial variation exists in training duration, curriculum content, competency expectations, and regulatory approaches across countries. No unified European framework currently defines minimum educational and competency standards for dry needling practice.

Methods: This protocol describes a modified Delphi study aiming to establish European consensus on minimum training standards and clinician-level competencies for dry needling in physiotherapy. An international expert panel of clinicians, educators, and researchers (approximately 25–35 experts) will participate in 2–4 online rounds. An evidence-informed initial item set will be rated using a 5-point Likert scale, with controlled feedback between rounds. Consensus will be defined as ≥70% agreement in Round 1 and ≥75% in subsequent rounds. The study will be conducted in accordance with CREDES recommendations and was preregistered on the Open Science Framework (OSF Registries, DOI: 10.17605/OSF.IO/32TAZ).

Ethics and dissemination: Ethical approval has been obtained from the CEIC Aragón (CEICA; Ethics: PI26/237). The study will be conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki, and findings will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publication and relevant professional channels. 

Discussion: This study is expected to provide a structured consensus-based framework to support greater consistency, safety, and harmonisation in dry needling education and practice across Europe.

References

  1. Gattie E, Cleland JA, Snodgrass S. A survey of American physical therapists' current practice of dry needling: Practice patterns and adverse events. Musculoskeletal Science and Practice. 2020;50:102255. doi: 10.1016/j.msksp.2020.102255 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.msksp.2020.102255
  2. Jenkins LC, Summers SJ, Nasser A, Verhagen A. Dry needling perceptions and experiences: A survey of Australian physiotherapists. Musculoskeletal Science and Practice. 2024;69:102895. doi: 10.1016/j.msksp.2023.102895 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.msksp.2023.102895
  3. Wang M, Zhao T, Liu J, Luo S. Global trends and performance of dry needling from 2004 to 2024: a bibliometric analysis. Frontiers in Neurology. 2024;15. doi: 10.3389/fneur.2024.1465983 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fneur.2024.1465983
  4. Barrett TL, Kearns GA, Puentedura EJ, Brismée J. Curricular Variability in Dry Needling Education Across Entry-Level DPT Programs in the US. Medical Science Educator. 2025;35(6):3013-3024. doi: 10.1007/s40670-025-02511-8 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40670-025-02511-8
  5. World Health Organization (WHO). WHO Benchmarks for the training of Acupuncture. 2021. Available at: https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789240017962

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

License

Copyright (c) 2026 Giorgos Tzigkounakis, Konstantinos Georgiadis, Katerina Simati

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.