首页> 外文期刊>European journal of pain : >Meta‐analysis of transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation for relief of spinal pain
【24h】

Meta‐analysis of transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation for relief of spinal pain

机译:经皮神经刺激的荟萃分析,以缓解脊柱疼痛

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Abstract We conducted a systematic review and meta‐analysis analysing the existing data on transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation ( TENS ) or interferential current ( IFC ) for chronic low back pain ( CLBP ) and/or neck pain ( CNP ) taking into account intensity and timing of stimulation, examining pain, function and disability. Seven electronic databases were searched for TENS or IFC treatment in non‐specific CLBP or CNP . Four reviewers independently selected randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of TENS or IFC intervention in adult individuals with non‐specific CLBP or CNP . Primary outcomes were for self‐reported pain intensity and back‐specific disability. Two reviewers performed quality assessment, and two reviewers extracted data using a standardized form. Nine RCTs were selected (eight CLBP ; one CNP ), and seven studies with complete data sets were included for meta‐analysis (655 participants). For CLBP , meta‐analysis shows TENS / IFC intervention, independent of time of assessment, was significantly different from placebo/control ( p ??0.02). TENS / IFC intervention was better than placebo/control, during therapy ( p ?=?0.02), but not immediately after therapy ( p ?=?0.08), or 1–3?months after therapy ( p ?=?0.99). Analysis for adequate stimulation parameters was not significantly different, and there was no effect on disability. This systematic review provides inconclusive evidence of TENS benefits in low back pain patients because the quality of the studies was low, and?adequate parameters and timing of assessment were not uniformly used or reported. Without additional high‐quality clinical trials using?sufficient sample sizes and adequate parameters and outcome assessments, the outcomes of this review are likely to remain unchanged. Significance These data highlight the need for additional high‐quality RCTs to examine the effects of TENS in CLBP. Trials should consider intensity of stimulation, timing of outcome assessment and assessment of pain, disability and function.
机译:None

著录项

  • 来源
    《European journal of pain :》 |2018年第4期|共16页
  • 作者单位

    Physiological Science Graduate ProgramFederal University of SergipeAracaju SE Brazil;

    Department of Physical Therapy and Rehabilitation ScienceUniversity of IowaIA USA;

    Department of Physical TherapyFederal University of S?o CarlosSP Brazil;

    Department of Physical Therapy and Rehabilitation ScienceUniversity of IowaIA USA;

    Department of Physical Therapy and Rehabilitation ScienceUniversity of IowaIA USA;

    Hardin Library User ServicesIA USA;

    Department of Physical TherapyFederal University of S?o CarlosSP Brazil;

    Department of Physical Therapy and Rehabilitation ScienceUniversity of IowaIA USA;

  • 收录信息
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类 诊断学;
  • 关键词

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号