Safoora Ebadi1, Noureddin Nakhostin Ansari2, Tannaz Ahadi3, Ehsan Fallah4, Bijan Forogh5. 1. Neuromusculoskeletal Research Center, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran; Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, School of Medicine, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran. Electronic address: ebadi.s@iums.ac.ir. 2. Neuromusculoskeletal Research Center, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran; Department of Physiotherapy, School of Rehabilitation, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran 11489, Iran; Sports Medicine Research Center, Neuroscience Institute, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran. Electronic address: nakhostin@sina.tums.ac.ir. 3. Neuromusculoskeletal Research Center, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran; Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, School of Medicine, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran. Electronic address: tannaz.ahadi@yahoo.com. 4. Department of Orthopedics, School of Medicine, AJA University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran. Electronic address: dr.ehsan.fallah@gmail.com. 5. Neuromusculoskeletal Research Center, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran; Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, School of Medicine, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran. Electronic address: bijanfr@gmail.com.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND DESIGN:Chronic nonspecific low back pain (CNSLBP) has major socioeconomic as well as personal impact in many industrialized and developing countries. Physiotherapy is a common intervention for this group of patients and using anti-pain physical modalities is a common part of the physical therapy. In a randomized controlled trial we investigated the immediate effect of the Diadynamic current in comparison to TENS on reducing the pain in patients suffering from non specific chronic low back pain. METHODS:Thirty patients were randomized into the Diadynamic current and TENS groups. Electrical stimulation was applied for 10 min in the Diadynamic group and for 15 min in the TENS group for one session. Pain, on a 100 mm Visual Analog Scale, and Pressure Pain Threshold (PPT), using an Algometer, was measured before the treatment, after the current application, 20 min later and after 48 h. RESULTS:Pain was decreased significantly after 20 min following the current application only in the TENS group, with no improvement at all measurement points in the group receiving Diadynamic current. PPT was increased immediately after current application in both groups but did not last until later measurements. CONCLUSION: Diadynamic current had no positive effect on prompt relief of pain in patients suffering from recurrent CNSLBP.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND AND DESIGN: Chronic nonspecific low back pain (CNSLBP) has major socioeconomic as well as personal impact in many industrialized and developing countries. Physiotherapy is a common intervention for this group of patients and using anti-pain physical modalities is a common part of the physical therapy. In a randomized controlled trial we investigated the immediate effect of the Diadynamic current in comparison to TENS on reducing the pain in patients suffering from non specific chronic low back pain. METHODS: Thirty patients were randomized into the Diadynamic current and TENS groups. Electrical stimulation was applied for 10 min in the Diadynamic group and for 15 min in the TENS group for one session. Pain, on a 100 mm Visual Analog Scale, and Pressure Pain Threshold (PPT), using an Algometer, was measured before the treatment, after the current application, 20 min later and after 48 h. RESULTS:Pain was decreased significantly after 20 min following the current application only in the TENS group, with no improvement at all measurement points in the group receiving Diadynamic current. PPT was increased immediately after current application in both groups but did not last until later measurements. CONCLUSION: Diadynamic current had no positive effect on prompt relief of pain in patients suffering from recurrent CNSLBP.
Authors: Mark I Johnson; Carole A Paley; Priscilla G Wittkopf; Matthew R Mulvey; Gareth Jones Journal: Medicina (Kaunas) Date: 2022-06-14 Impact factor: 2.948
Authors: Lynn Leemans; Ömer Elma; Jo Nijs; Timothy H Wideman; Carolie Siffain; Hester den Bandt; Sven Van Laere; David Beckwée Journal: Braz J Phys Ther Date: 2020-05-12 Impact factor: 3.377
Authors: Madeline Luiza Ferreira Pivovarsky; Fernanda Gaideski; Rafael Michel de Macedo; Raciele Ivandra Guarda Korelo; Luiz César Guarita-Souza; Richard Eloin Liebano; Ana Carolina Brandt de Macedo Journal: Einstein (Sao Paulo) Date: 2021-12-17