University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada.
Phys Ther. 2010 Sep;90(9):1219-38. doi: 10.2522/ptj.20090335. Epub 2010 Jul 22.
Interferential current (IFC) is a common electrotherapeutic modality used to treat pain. Although IFC is widely used, the available information regarding its clinical efficacy is debatable.
The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to analyze the available information regarding the efficacy of IFC in the management of musculoskeletal pain.
Randomized controlled trials were obtained through a computerized search of bibliographic databases (ie, CINAHL, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, MEDLINE, PEDro, Scopus, and Web of Science) from 1950 to February 8, 2010.
Two independent reviewers screened the abstracts found in the databases. Methodological quality was assessed using a compilation of items included in different scales related to rehabilitation research. The mean difference, with 95% confidence interval, was used to quantify the pooled effect. A chi-square test for heterogeneity was performed.
A total of 2,235 articles were found. Twenty studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Seven articles assessed the use of IFC on joint pain; 9 articles evaluated the use of IFC on muscle pain; 3 articles evaluated its use on soft tissue shoulder pain; and 1 article examined its use on postoperative pain. Three of the 20 studies were considered to be of high methodological quality, 14 studies were considered to be of moderate methodological quality, and 3 studies were considered to be of poor methodological quality. Fourteen studies were included in the meta-analysis.
Interferential current as a supplement to another intervention seems to be more effective for reducing pain than a control treatment at discharge and more effective than a placebo treatment at the 3-month follow-up. However, it is unknown whether the analgesic effect of IFC is superior to that of the concomitant interventions. Interferential current alone was not significantly better than placebo or other therapy at discharge or follow-up. Results must be considered with caution due to the low number of studies that used IFC alone. In addition, the heterogeneity across studies and methodological limitations prevent conclusive statements regarding analgesic efficacy.
干扰电流（IFC）是一种常用于治疗疼痛的常见电疗方式。尽管 IFC 应用广泛，但关于其临床疗效的现有信息仍存在争议。
本系统评价和荟萃分析旨在分析关于 IFC 在治疗肌肉骨骼疼痛方面疗效的现有信息。
通过计算机检索从 1950 年到 2010 年 2 月 8 日的文献数据库（即 CINAHL、Cochrane 图书馆、EMBASE、MEDLINE、PEDro、Scopus 和 Web of Science）获取随机对照试验。
两名独立的评审员筛选数据库中找到的摘要。使用不同与康复研究相关的量表中包含的项目组合评估方法学质量。使用合并效应的 95%置信区间的均数差值进行量化。进行了异质性卡方检验。
共发现 2235 篇文章。20 项研究符合纳入标准。7 项研究评估了 IFC 在关节疼痛中的应用；9 项研究评估了 IFC 在肌肉疼痛中的应用；3 项研究评估了其在软组织肩痛中的应用；1 项研究检查了其在术后疼痛中的应用。20 项研究中有 3 项被认为具有较高的方法学质量，14 项被认为具有中等方法学质量，3 项被认为具有较差的方法学质量。14 项研究纳入荟萃分析。
与其他干预措施相结合的干扰电流似乎比对照治疗在出院时更能有效减轻疼痛，并且在 3 个月随访时比安慰剂治疗更有效。然而，尚不清楚 IFC 的镇痛效果是否优于伴随的干预措施。在出院或随访时，单独使用 IFC 并不明显优于安慰剂或其他疗法。由于单独使用 IFC 的研究数量较少，因此必须谨慎考虑结果。此外，研究之间的异质性和方法学限制妨碍了关于镇痛疗效的明确结论。
