Effects of transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) and interferential currents (IFC) in patients with nonspecific chronic low back pain: randomized clinical trial
Main Author: | |
---|---|
Publication Date: | 2011 |
Other Authors: | , , |
Format: | Article |
Language: | eng |
Source: | São Paulo medical journal (Online) |
Download full: | https://periodicosapm.emnuvens.com.br/spmj/article/view/1608 |
Summary: | CONTEXT AND OBJECTIVE: Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) and interferential current are the most used electrotherapy methods, although there is little scientific evidence to support their use. The aim of this study was to compare the effects of TENS and interferential current among patients with nonspecific chronic low back pain. DESIGN AND SETTING: Single-blind randomized controlled trial in the Department of Physiotherapy, Centro Universitário de Maringá. METHODS: One hundred and fifty patients were randomly divided into three groups: TENS (group 1), interferential current (group 2) and controls (group 3). The patients designated for electrotherapy received ten 30-minute sessions, while the control group remained untreated. All patients and controls were evaluated before and after treatment using a visual analog scale and the McGill Pain and Roland Morris questionnaires, and regarding their use of additional medications. RESULTS: There was a mean reduction on the visual analog scale of 39.18 mm with TENS, 44.86 mm with interferential current and 8.53 mm among the controls. In the Roland Morris questionnaire, group 1 had a mean reduction of 6.59; group 2, 7.20; and group 3, 0.70 points. In group 1, 84% of the patients stopped using medications after the treatment; in group 2, 75%; and in group 3, 34%. There was no statistically significant difference between the TENS and interferential current groups (P > 0.05); a difference was only found between these groups and the controls (P < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: There was no difference between TENS and interferential current for chronic low back pain treatment. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT01017913. |
id |
APM-1_07b99bb2e66ee18840d58d2a5f6417ea |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:ojs.diagnosticoetratamento.emnuvens.com.br:article/1608 |
network_acronym_str |
APM-1 |
network_name_str |
São Paulo medical journal (Online) |
repository_id_str |
|
spelling |
Effects of transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) and interferential currents (IFC) in patients with nonspecific chronic low back pain: randomized clinical trialEfeitos da estimulação elétrica nervosa transcutânea (TENS) e da corrente interferencial (CI) em pacientes com lombalgia crônica não específica: ensaio clínico randomizadoFisioterapia (especialidade)ReabilitaçãoTerapia por estimulação elétricaDor nas costasColuna vertebralPhysical therapy (specialty)RehabilitationElectric stimulation therapyBack painSpineCONTEXT AND OBJECTIVE: Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) and interferential current are the most used electrotherapy methods, although there is little scientific evidence to support their use. The aim of this study was to compare the effects of TENS and interferential current among patients with nonspecific chronic low back pain. DESIGN AND SETTING: Single-blind randomized controlled trial in the Department of Physiotherapy, Centro Universitário de Maringá. METHODS: One hundred and fifty patients were randomly divided into three groups: TENS (group 1), interferential current (group 2) and controls (group 3). The patients designated for electrotherapy received ten 30-minute sessions, while the control group remained untreated. All patients and controls were evaluated before and after treatment using a visual analog scale and the McGill Pain and Roland Morris questionnaires, and regarding their use of additional medications. RESULTS: There was a mean reduction on the visual analog scale of 39.18 mm with TENS, 44.86 mm with interferential current and 8.53 mm among the controls. In the Roland Morris questionnaire, group 1 had a mean reduction of 6.59; group 2, 7.20; and group 3, 0.70 points. In group 1, 84% of the patients stopped using medications after the treatment; in group 2, 75%; and in group 3, 34%. There was no statistically significant difference between the TENS and interferential current groups (P > 0.05); a difference was only found between these groups and the controls (P < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: There was no difference between TENS and interferential current for chronic low back pain treatment. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT01017913.CONTEXTO E OBJETIVO: Estimulação elétrica nervosa transcutânea (TENS) e corrente interferencial são os métodos de eletroterapia mais utilizados, embora haja poucas evidências científicas que suportem seu uso. O objetivo deste estudo foi comparar os efeitos da TENS e da corrente interferencial em pacientes com lombalgia crônica não específica. TIPO DE ESTUDO E LOCAL: Ensaio clínico randomizado, simples-cego, no Departamento de Fisioterapia do Centro Universitário de Maringá. MÉTODOS: Cento e cinquenta pacientes foram randomicamente divididos em três grupos: TENS (grupo 1), corrente interferencial (grupo 2) e controle (grupo 3). Os pacientes designados à eletroterapia receberam 10 sessões de 30 minutos, enquanto o grupo controle permaneceu sem tratamento. Todos os pacientes e os controles foram avaliados antes e depois do tratamento usando a escala visual analógica, os questionários McGill de dor e Roland Morris, e quanto ao uso de medicamentos. RESULTADOS: Houve redução média na escala visual analógica de 39,18 mm com TENS, de 44,86 mm com a corrente interferencial e 8.53 mm no grupo controle. No questionário Roland Morris, o grupo 1 teve redução média de 6,59, o grupo 2 de 7,20 e o grupo 3 de 0,70 pontos. 84% dos pacientes do primeiro grupo, 75% no segundo e 34% no terceiro grupo cessaram a medicação depois do tratamento. Não foi encontrada diferença estatisticamente quando comparados os grupos de TENS e corrente interferencial (P > 0,05), apenas quando comparados estes grupos com o controle (P < 0,0001). CONCLUSÕES: Não há diferença entre TENS e corrente interferencial no tratamento de pacientes com lombalgia crônica. REGISTRO DE ENSAIO CLÍNICO: NCT01017913.São Paulo Medical JournalSão Paulo Medical Journal2011-07-07info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionapplication/pdfhttps://periodicosapm.emnuvens.com.br/spmj/article/view/1608São Paulo Medical Journal; Vol. 129 No. 4 (2011); 206-216São Paulo Medical Journal; v. 129 n. 4 (2011); 206-2161806-9460reponame:São Paulo medical journal (Online)instname:Associação Paulista de Medicinainstacron:APMenghttps://periodicosapm.emnuvens.com.br/spmj/article/view/1608/1503https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessFacci, Ligia MariaNowotny, Jean PaulusTormem, FabioTrevisani, Virgínia Fernandes Moça2023-09-08T19:37:30Zoai:ojs.diagnosticoetratamento.emnuvens.com.br:article/1608Revistahttp://www.scielo.br/spmjPUBhttps://old.scielo.br/oai/scielo-oai.phprevistas@apm.org.br1806-94601516-3180opendoar:2023-09-08T19:37:30São Paulo medical journal (Online) - Associação Paulista de Medicinafalse |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
Effects of transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) and interferential currents (IFC) in patients with nonspecific chronic low back pain: randomized clinical trial Efeitos da estimulação elétrica nervosa transcutânea (TENS) e da corrente interferencial (CI) em pacientes com lombalgia crônica não específica: ensaio clínico randomizado |
title |
Effects of transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) and interferential currents (IFC) in patients with nonspecific chronic low back pain: randomized clinical trial |
spellingShingle |
Effects of transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) and interferential currents (IFC) in patients with nonspecific chronic low back pain: randomized clinical trial Facci, Ligia Maria Fisioterapia (especialidade) Reabilitação Terapia por estimulação elétrica Dor nas costas Coluna vertebral Physical therapy (specialty) Rehabilitation Electric stimulation therapy Back pain Spine |
title_short |
Effects of transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) and interferential currents (IFC) in patients with nonspecific chronic low back pain: randomized clinical trial |
title_full |
Effects of transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) and interferential currents (IFC) in patients with nonspecific chronic low back pain: randomized clinical trial |
title_fullStr |
Effects of transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) and interferential currents (IFC) in patients with nonspecific chronic low back pain: randomized clinical trial |
title_full_unstemmed |
Effects of transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) and interferential currents (IFC) in patients with nonspecific chronic low back pain: randomized clinical trial |
title_sort |
Effects of transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) and interferential currents (IFC) in patients with nonspecific chronic low back pain: randomized clinical trial |
author |
Facci, Ligia Maria |
author_facet |
Facci, Ligia Maria Nowotny, Jean Paulus Tormem, Fabio Trevisani, Virgínia Fernandes Moça |
author_role |
author |
author2 |
Nowotny, Jean Paulus Tormem, Fabio Trevisani, Virgínia Fernandes Moça |
author2_role |
author author author |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Facci, Ligia Maria Nowotny, Jean Paulus Tormem, Fabio Trevisani, Virgínia Fernandes Moça |
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
Fisioterapia (especialidade) Reabilitação Terapia por estimulação elétrica Dor nas costas Coluna vertebral Physical therapy (specialty) Rehabilitation Electric stimulation therapy Back pain Spine |
topic |
Fisioterapia (especialidade) Reabilitação Terapia por estimulação elétrica Dor nas costas Coluna vertebral Physical therapy (specialty) Rehabilitation Electric stimulation therapy Back pain Spine |
description |
CONTEXT AND OBJECTIVE: Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) and interferential current are the most used electrotherapy methods, although there is little scientific evidence to support their use. The aim of this study was to compare the effects of TENS and interferential current among patients with nonspecific chronic low back pain. DESIGN AND SETTING: Single-blind randomized controlled trial in the Department of Physiotherapy, Centro Universitário de Maringá. METHODS: One hundred and fifty patients were randomly divided into three groups: TENS (group 1), interferential current (group 2) and controls (group 3). The patients designated for electrotherapy received ten 30-minute sessions, while the control group remained untreated. All patients and controls were evaluated before and after treatment using a visual analog scale and the McGill Pain and Roland Morris questionnaires, and regarding their use of additional medications. RESULTS: There was a mean reduction on the visual analog scale of 39.18 mm with TENS, 44.86 mm with interferential current and 8.53 mm among the controls. In the Roland Morris questionnaire, group 1 had a mean reduction of 6.59; group 2, 7.20; and group 3, 0.70 points. In group 1, 84% of the patients stopped using medications after the treatment; in group 2, 75%; and in group 3, 34%. There was no statistically significant difference between the TENS and interferential current groups (P > 0.05); a difference was only found between these groups and the controls (P < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: There was no difference between TENS and interferential current for chronic low back pain treatment. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT01017913. |
publishDate |
2011 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2011-07-07 |
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion |
format |
article |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
https://periodicosapm.emnuvens.com.br/spmj/article/view/1608 |
url |
https://periodicosapm.emnuvens.com.br/spmj/article/view/1608 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
eng |
language |
eng |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
https://periodicosapm.emnuvens.com.br/spmj/article/view/1608/1503 |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0 info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
rights_invalid_str_mv |
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0 |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
application/pdf |
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
São Paulo Medical Journal São Paulo Medical Journal |
publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
São Paulo Medical Journal São Paulo Medical Journal |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
São Paulo Medical Journal; Vol. 129 No. 4 (2011); 206-216 São Paulo Medical Journal; v. 129 n. 4 (2011); 206-216 1806-9460 reponame:São Paulo medical journal (Online) instname:Associação Paulista de Medicina instacron:APM |
instname_str |
Associação Paulista de Medicina |
instacron_str |
APM |
institution |
APM |
reponame_str |
São Paulo medical journal (Online) |
collection |
São Paulo medical journal (Online) |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
São Paulo medical journal (Online) - Associação Paulista de Medicina |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
revistas@apm.org.br |
_version_ |
1825135066080083968 |