Suppr超能文献

一项针对干扰电流对健康受试者实验性诱导缺血性疼痛镇痛效果的单盲安慰剂对照研究。

A single-blind placebo-controlled investigation into the analgesic effects of interferential currents on experimentally induced ischaemic pain in healthy subjects.

作者信息

Johnson Mark I, Tabasam Ghazala

机构信息

Principal Lecturer in Human Physiology, School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Health and Environment, Leeds Metropolitan University, Leeds, UK.

出版信息

Clin Physiol Funct Imaging. 2002 May;22(3):187-96. doi: 10.1046/j.1475-097x.2002.00416.x.

Abstract

The aim of this single-blind placebo-controlled study was to examine the analgesic effects of interferential currents (IFC) on experimentally induced ischaemic pain. Ischaemic pain was induced using the submaximal effort tourniquet technique (SETT) and pain intensity was recorded using a visual analogue scale at 1-min intervals was used as the primary outcome measure. Following baseline recordings 30 healthy volunteers received either active IFC, sham IFC, or no treatment (10 subjects per group). Data were analysed by calculating the mean change in pain intensity at each 1-min interval by subtracting data during treatment from the baseline data. IFC was administered throughout the duration of the ischaemic pain test via four electrodes (quadripolar application) on the forearm. Active IFC delivered electrical currents at a 'strong but comfortable' intensity. A 'dummy' stimulator that delivered no current was used as sham IFC. Subjects in the no treatment control group were informed that the IFC device was not switched on. There were significant effects for Groups (P=0.04) which were attributed to a significant reduction in pain intensity for the IFC group when compared with sham and no-treatment control (P< or =0.05). There were no significant effects for Time (P=0.69) or Group-Time interaction (P=0.45). In conclusion, IFC produced significantly greater analgesia than sham and no-treatment control groups under the present experimental conditions.

摘要

这项单盲安慰剂对照研究的目的是检验干扰电流(IFC)对实验性诱导的缺血性疼痛的镇痛效果。使用次最大努力止血带技术(SETT)诱导缺血性疼痛,并使用视觉模拟量表以1分钟的间隔记录疼痛强度,将其作为主要结局指标。在进行基线记录后,30名健康志愿者分别接受主动IFC、假IFC或不接受治疗(每组10名受试者)。通过从基线数据中减去治疗期间的数据来计算每个1分钟间隔的疼痛强度平均变化,从而对数据进行分析。在整个缺血性疼痛测试期间,通过在前臂上放置四个电极(四极应用)来施加IFC。主动IFC以“强烈但舒适”的强度输送电流。使用不输送电流的“假”刺激器作为假IFC。未治疗对照组的受试者被告知IFC设备未开启。组间存在显著效应(P = 0.04),这归因于与假治疗组和未治疗对照组相比,IFC组的疼痛强度显著降低(P≤0.05)。时间效应(P = 0.69)和组-时间交互效应(P = 0.45)均不显著。总之,在当前实验条件下,IFC产生的镇痛效果明显优于假治疗组和未治疗对照组。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验