Dataset Information

Literature Review and Meta-Analysis of Transcutaneous Electrical Nerve Stimulation in Treating Chronic Back Pain.

ABSTRACT: This study is a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials comparing the efficacy of transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) to a control and to other nerve stimulation therapies (NSTs) for the treatment of chronic back pain.Citations were identified in MEDLINE, the Cochrane Library, Google Scholar, and ClinicalTrials.gov through June 2014 using the following keywords: nerve stimulation therapy, transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation, back pain, chronic pain. Control treatments included sham, placebo, or medication only. Other NSTs included electroacupuncture, percutaneous electrical nerve stimulation, and percutaneous neuromodulation therapy.Twelve randomized controlled trials including 700 patients were included in the analysis. The efficacy of TENS was similar to that of control treatment for providing pain relief (standardized difference in means [SDM] = -0.20; 95% confidence interval [CI], -0.58 to 0.18; P = 0.293). Other types of NSTs were more effective than TENS in providing pain relief (SDM = 0.86; 95% CI, 0.15-1.57; P = 0.017). Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation was more effective than control treatment in improving functional disability only in patients with follow-up of less than 6 weeks (SDM = -1.24; 95% CI, -1.83 to -0.65; P < 0.001). There was no difference in functional disability outcomes between TENS and other NSTs.These results suggest that TENS does not improve symptoms of lower back pain, but may offer short-term improvement of functional disability.

SUBMITTER: Wu LC

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5916478 | biostudies-other | 2018 May

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Literature Review and Meta-Analysis of Transcutaneous Electrical Nerve Stimulation in Treating Chronic Back Pain.

Wu Lien-Chen LC Weng Pei-Wei PW Chen Chia-Hsien CH Huang Yi-You YY Tsuang Yang-Hwei YH Chiang Chang-Jung CJ

Regional anesthesia and pain medicine 20180501 4

<h4>Background and objectives</h4>This study is a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials comparing the efficacy of transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) to a control and to other nerve stimulation therapies (NSTs) for the treatment of chronic back pain.<h4>Methods</h4>Citations were identified in MEDLINE, the Cochrane Library, Google Scholar, and ClinicalTrials.gov through June 2014 using the following keywords: nerve stimulation therapy, transcutaneous electrical nerve stimu ...[more]

PMID: 29394211

Similar Datasets

Project description:Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) is a non-invasive therapeutic intervention that is typically used for many years to treat chronic pain in patients who are refractory to pain medications. However, evidence of the efficacy of TENS treatment for neuropathic pain is lacking in humans. To further understand the efficacy of TENS under various intervention conditions and illuminate the current circumstance and future research directions, we systematically reviewed animal studies investigating the efficacy of TENS in relieving pain in neuropathic pain rodent models. We searched the Cochrane Library, EMBASE, MEDLINE (via PubMed), and Web of Science and identified 11 studies. Two meta-analyses were performed. The first meta-analysis showed that a single TENS treatment was capable of temporarily ameliorating neuropathic pain when compared to control groups with a significant effect (standardized mean difference: 1.54; 95% CI: 0.65, 2.42; p = 0.0007; I 2 = 58%). Significant temporary alleviation in neuropathic pain intensity was also observed in the meta-analysis of repetitive TENS (standardized mean difference: 0.85; 95% CI: 0.31, 1.40; p = 0.002; I 2 = 75%). Subgroup analysis showed no effect of the timing of the application of TENS (test for subgroup difference, p = 0.47). Leave-one-out sensitivity analyses suggested that no single study had an outsized effect on the pooled estimates, which may partly prove the robustness of these findings. Other stratified analyses were prevented by the insufficient number of included studies. Overall, current data suggest that TENS might be a promising therapy to ameliorate neuropathic pain. However, the high risk of bias in the included studies suggests that cautions must be considered when interpreting these findings and it is not reasonable to directly generalize the results obtained from animal studies to clinical practice. Future studies should pay more attention to improving the quality of study design and reporting, thereby facilitating the understanding of mechanisms underlying TENS treatment, reducing more potentially unsuccessful clinical trials, and optimizing the efficacy of TENS for people with neuropathic pain.

Project description:ObjectiveFibromyalgia (FM) is characterized by pain and fatigue, particularly during physical activity. Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) activates endogenous pain inhibitory mechanisms. This study was undertaken to investigate if using TENS during activity would improve movement-evoked pain and other patient-reported outcomes in women with FM.MethodsParticipants were randomly assigned to receive active TENS (n = 103), placebo TENS (n = 99), or no TENS (n = 99) and instructed to use it at home during activity 2 hours each day for 4 weeks. TENS was applied to the lumbar and cervicothoracic regions using a modulated frequency (2-125 Hz) at the highest tolerable intensity. Participants rated movement-evoked pain (primary outcome measure) and fatigue on an 11-point scale before and during application of TENS. The primary outcome measure and secondary patient-reported outcomes were assessed at baseline (time of randomization) and at 4 weeks.ResultsAfter 4 weeks, a greater reduction in movement-evoked pain was reported in the active TENS group versus the placebo TENS group (group mean difference -1.0 [95% confidence interval -1.8, -0.2]; P = 0.008) and versus the no TENS group (group mean difference -1.8 [95% confidence interval -2.6, -1.0]; P < 0.0001). A reduction in movement-evoked fatigue was also reported in the active TENS group versus the placebo TENS group (group mean difference -1.4 [95% confidence interval -2.4, -0.4]; P = 0.001) and versus the no TENS group (group mean difference -1.9 [95% confidence interval -2.9, -0.9]; P = <0.0001). A greater percentage of the patients in the active TENS group reported improvement on the global impression of change compared to the placebo TENS group (70% versus 31%; P < 0.0001) and the no TENS group (9%; P < 0.0001). There were no TENS-related serious adverse events, and <5% of participants experienced minor adverse events from TENS.ConclusionAmong women who had FM and were on a stable medication regimen, 4 weeks of active TENS use compared to placebo TENS or no TENS resulted in a significant improvement in movement-evoked pain and other clinical outcomes. Further research is needed to examine effectiveness in a real-world setting to establish the clinical importance of these findings.

Dataset Information

Literature Review and Meta-Analysis of Transcutaneous Electrical Nerve Stimulation in Treating Chronic Back Pain.

Publications

Literature Review and Meta-Analysis of Transcutaneous Electrical Nerve Stimulation in Treating Chronic Back Pain.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets