Literature DB >> 23183261

An investigation into the magnitude of the current window and perception of transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) sensation at various frequencies and body sites in healthy human participants.

Nicola Hughes1, Michael I Bennett, Mark I Johnson.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Strong nonpainful transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) is prerequisite to a successful analgesic outcome although the ease with which this sensation is achieved is likely to depend on the magnitude of current amplitude (mA) between sensory detection threshold (SDT) and pain threshold, that is, the current window.
OBJECTIVES: To measure the current window and participant's perception of the comfort of the TENS sensation at different body sites.
METHODS: A repeated measure cross-over study was conducted using 30 healthy adult volunteers. Current amplitudes (mA) of TENS [2 pulses per second (pps); 30 pps; 80 pps] at SDT, pain threshold, and strong nonpainful intensities were measured at the tibia (bone), knee joint (connective tissue), lower back [paraspinal (skeletal) muscle], volar surface of forearm (nerve) and waist (fat). The amplitude to achieve a strong nonpainful intensity was represented as a percentage of the current window. Data were analyzed using repeated measures analysis of variance.
RESULTS: Effects were detected for body site and frequency for SDT (P<0.001, P=0.018, respectively), current window (P<0.001, P<0.001, respectively), and strong nonpainful TENS as a percentage of the current window (P=0.002, P<0.001, respectively). The current window was larger for the knee joint compared with tibia (difference [95% confidence interval]=12.76 mA [4.25, 21.28]; P=0.001) and forearm (10.33 mA [2.62, 18.40]; P=0.006), and for the lower back compared with tibia (12.10 mA [1.65, 22.52]; P=0.015) and forearm (9.65 mA [1.06, 18.24]; P=0.019). The current window was larger for 2 pps compared with 30 pps (P<0.001) and 80 pps (P<0.001). Participants rated strong nonpainful TENS as most comfortable at the lower back (P<0.001) and least comfortable at the tibia and forearm (P<0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: TENS is most comfortable and easiest to titrate to a strong nonpainful intensity when applied over areas of muscle and soft tissue.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23183261     DOI: 10.1097/AJP.0b013e3182579919

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


  5 in total

1.  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

2.  No Influence of Transcutaneous Electrical Nerve Stimulation on Exercise-Induced Pain and 5-Km Cycling Time-Trial Performance.

Authors:  Andrew W Hibbert; François Billaut; Matthew C Varley; Remco C J Polman
Journal:  Front Physiol       Date:  2017-02-07       Impact factor: 4.566

Review 3.  Resolving Long-Standing Uncertainty about the Clinical Efficacy of Transcutaneous Electrical Nerve Stimulation (TENS) to Relieve Pain: A Comprehensive Review of Factors Influencing Outcome.

Authors:  Mark I Johnson
Journal:  Medicina (Kaunas)       Date:  2021-04-14       Impact factor: 2.430

4.  High-Frequency Impulse Therapy for Treatment of Chronic Back Pain: A Multicenter Randomized Controlled Pilot Study.

Authors:  Kasra Amirdelfan; Mindy Hong; Bobby Tay; Surekha Reddy; Vinay Reddy; Michael Yang; Krishn Khanna; Prasad Shirvalkar; Christopher Abrecht; Amitabh Gulati
Journal:  J Pain Res       Date:  2021-09-22       Impact factor: 3.133

5.  Skin impedance is not a factor in transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation effectiveness.

Authors:  Carol Gt Vance; Barbara A Rakel; Dana L Dailey; Kathleen A Sluka
Journal:  J Pain Res       Date:  2015-08-19       Impact factor: 3.133

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.