Literature DB >> 21415722

Differential frequency effects of strong nonpainful transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation on experimentally induced ischemic pain in healthy human participants.

Chih-Chung Chen1, Mark I Johnson.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Electrophysiological studies show frequency-dependent effects of transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) in animal models of hyperalgesia. Evidence of frequency-dependent effects of TENS in humans is conflicting.
OBJECTIVE: To assess the effects of low-frequency and high-frequency TENS at a strong nonpainful intensity on experimentally induced ischemic pain.
METHODS: Submaximal effort tourniquet tests were carried out on 48 healthy human participants before (baseline) and during TENS at 3 pulsed currents per second (pps), 80 pps, and no current (placebo). TENS was switched on for 20 minutes and a submaximal effort tourniquet test was carried out during the final 5 minutes of the intervention. There was a 30-minute washout, with TENS switched off, between the interventions.
RESULTS: Repeated measure analysis of variance detected significant effects for pain intensity [100 mm Visual Analog Scale (VAS)] for condition (P<0.001), time (P<0.001), and time×condition (P=0.039). When compared with pre-TENS lower VAS scores were detected for placebo TENS (P=0.026) and 80 pps (P<0.001), but not for 3 pps (P=0.19). There were lower VAS scores for 80 pps than placebo (mean difference, 13.29 mm; 95% CI, 9.71, 16.87; P<0.001) and 3 pps (mean difference, 19.88 mm; 95% CI, 17.20-22.55; P<0.001), yet 3 pps scores were higher than placebo (mean difference, 6.58 mm; 95% CI 3.45, 9.72; P<0.001). There were significantly lower scores for sensory dimensions of the short-form McGill Pain Questionnaire for both 3 pps and 80 pps when compared with the placebo (P<0.001; P=0.005, respectively), but no significant differences between TENS at 80 and 3 pps (P=1.0). There were no significant effects detected for condition (P=0.217) or for condition×sequence interaction (P=0.800) for affective dimensions.
CONCLUSIONS: Strong nonpainful TENS delivered at 80 pps reduced experimentally induced ischemic pain when compared with TENS delivered at 3 pps.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21415722     DOI: 10.1097/AJP.0b013e318208c926

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin J Pain        ISSN: 0749-8047            Impact factor:   3.442


  7 in total

1.  The effect of transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation on pain during venous cannulation.

Authors:  Saeyoung Kim; Kibum Park; Byungdoo Son; Younghoon Jeon
Journal:  Curr Ther Res Clin Exp       Date:  2012-09

Review 2.  Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation for acute pain.

Authors:  Mark I Johnson; Carole A Paley; Tracey E Howe; Kathleen A Sluka
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2015-06-15

Review 3.  Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) for fibromyalgia in adults.

Authors:  Mark I Johnson; Leica S Claydon; G Peter Herbison; Gareth Jones; Carole A Paley
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2017-10-09

4.  Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation as adjunct to primary care management for tennis elbow: pragmatic randomised controlled trial (TATE trial).

Authors:  Linda S Chesterton; A Martyn Lewis; Julius Sim; Christian D Mallen; Elizabeth E Mason; Elaine M Hay; Daniëlle A van der Windt
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2013-09-02

5.  Analgesic effects of transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation and interferential current on experimental ischemic pain models: frequencies of 50 hz and 100 hz.

Authors:  Young-Hyeon Bae; Suk Min Lee
Journal:  J Phys Ther Sci       Date:  2014-12-25

6.  Does High Frequency Transcutaneous Electrical Nerve Stimulation (TENS) Affect EEG Gamma Band Activity?

Authors:  M Ebrahimian; M Razeghi; A Zamani; Z Bagheri; K Rastegar; A Motealleh
Journal:  J Biomed Phys Eng       Date:  2018-09-01

7.  The antalgic effects of non-invasive physical modalities on central post-stroke pain: a systematic review.

Authors:  Chih-Chung Chen; Yu-Fen Chuang; Andrew Chih-Wei Huang; Chih-Kuang Chen; Ya-Ju Chang
Journal:  J Phys Ther Sci       Date:  2016-04-28
  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.