Physical Therapy Division, Brasília, DF, Brazil.
Physical Therapy Division, Instituto Hospital de Base do Distrito federal e Escola Superior de Ciências da Saúde (ESCS), Brasilia, DF, Brazil.
Braz J Phys Ther. 2018 Sep-Oct;22(5):347-354. doi: 10.1016/j.bjpt.2017.12.005. Epub 2018 Feb 2.
Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation and interferential current have been widely used in clinical practice. However, a systematic review comparing their effects on pain relief has not yet been performed.
To investigate the effects of transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation and interferential current on acute and chronic pain.
We use Pubmed, Embase, LILACS, PEDro and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials as data sources. Two independent reviewers that selected studies according to inclusion criteria, extracted information of interest and verified the methodological quality of the studies made study selection. The studies were selected if transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation and interferential current were used as treatment and they had pain as the main outcome, as evaluated by a visual analog scale. Secondary outcomes were the Western Ontario Macmaster and Rolland Morris Disability questionnaires, which were added after data extraction.
Eight studies with a pooled sample of 825 patients were included. The methodological quality of the selected studies was moderate, with an average of six on a 0-10 scale (PEDro). In general, both transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation and interferential current improved pain and functional outcomes without a statistical difference between them.
Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation and interferential current have similar effects on pain outcome The low number of studies included in this meta-analysis indicates that new clinical trials are needed.
经皮神经电刺激和干扰电刺激已广泛应用于临床实践。然而,尚未进行系统评价比较它们在缓解疼痛方面的效果。
探讨经皮神经电刺激和干扰电刺激对急性和慢性疼痛的影响。
我们使用 Pubmed、Embase、LILACS、PEDro 和 Cochrane 对照试验中心注册库作为数据来源。两名独立的审查员根据纳入标准选择研究,提取感兴趣的信息,并验证研究的方法学质量。如果经皮神经电刺激和干扰电刺激作为治疗手段,且疼痛是主要结局(用视觉模拟评分法评估),则选择这些研究。次要结局是 Western Ontario Macmaster 和 Rolland Morris 残疾问卷,这些问卷是在数据提取后添加的。
共纳入 8 项研究,样本量为 825 例。入选研究的方法学质量为中等,PEDro 评分为 0-10 分的平均得分为 6 分。总体而言,经皮神经电刺激和干扰电刺激均能改善疼痛和功能结局,且两者之间无统计学差异。
经皮神经电刺激和干扰电刺激在疼痛结局方面的效果相似。本荟萃分析纳入的研究数量较少,表明需要开展新的临床试验。