5 引文 斯高帕斯(Scopus)

摘要

Background and Objectives 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. Methods 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. Results 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. Conclusions These results suggest that TENS does not improve symptoms of lower back pain, but may offer short-term improvement of functional disability.
原文英語
頁(從 - 到)425-433
頁數9
期刊Regional Anesthesia and Pain Medicine
43
發行號4
DOIs
出版狀態已發佈 - 五月 1 2018

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine

指紋 深入研究「Literature Review and Meta-Analysis of Transcutaneous Electrical Nerve Stimulation in Treating Chronic Back Pain」主題。共同形成了獨特的指紋。

  • 引用此