Department of Prevention and Rehabilitation in Physiotherapy, Universidade Federal do Paraná, Curitiba, Brazil.
Physiotherapy Department, Universidade Federal de São Carlos, São Carlos, Brazil.
Pain Pract. 2020 Jul;20(6):615-625. doi: 10.1111/papr.12888. Epub 2020 May 2.
To compare the immediate analgesic effects of 2 kHz or 4 kHz interferential current (IFC) with different amplitude-modulated frequencies (AMFs) (2 Hz or 100 Hz) on chronic low back pain (CLBP).
Three-arm double-blinded randomized controlled trial.
Primary care.
175 patients (19 to 60 years of age, 105 female) with CLBP.
One session of IFC: Interferential group (GI): GI2 kHz/100 Hz, GI2 kHz/2 Hz, GI4 kHz/100 Hz, GI4 kHz/2 Hz, or placebo.
Pain intensity by numerical rating scale of pain (NRS), McGill Pain Questionnaire (MPQ), and algometry.
There was a significant difference in NRS scores (P < 0.05) in the GI2 kHz/2 Hz, GI4 kHz/2 Hz, and GI4 kHz/100 Hz groups compared with those of the placebo group (PG), and a significant difference in MPQ scores in the GI4 kHz/2 Hz and GI4 kHz/100 Hz groups compared with those of the PG. In algometry, only the GI4 kHz/100 Hz group showed a significant difference (by 2 points in the lumbar region) compared with the PG. Of the carrier frequencies, an IFC of 4 kHz showed more effective results, although no significant difference was noted between the AMFs.
An IFC with a carrier frequency of 4 kHz and an AMF of 100 Hz provide immediate analgesic effects in individuals with CLBP.
RBR-59YGRB.
比较 2 kHz 或 4 kHz 干扰电流(IFC)与不同幅度调制频率(AMF)(2 Hz 或 100 Hz)对慢性下腰痛(CLBP)的即时镇痛效果。
三臂双盲随机对照试验。
初级保健。
175 名 CLBP 患者(19 至 60 岁,105 名女性)。
IFC 治疗 1 次:干扰组(GI):GI2 kHz/100 Hz、GI2 kHz/2 Hz、GI4 kHz/100 Hz、GI4 kHz/2 Hz 或安慰剂。
数字疼痛评分量表(NRS)、麦吉尔疼痛问卷(MPQ)和压痛测量的疼痛强度。
与 PG 相比,GI2 kHz/2 Hz、GI4 kHz/2 Hz 和 GI4 kHz/100 Hz 组的 NRS 评分有显著差异(P<0.05),与 PG 相比,GI4 kHz/2 Hz 和 GI4 kHz/100 Hz 组的 MPQ 评分有显著差异。在压痛测量中,只有 GI4 kHz/100 Hz 组与 PG 相比有显著差异(腰部增加 2 分)。在载波频率方面,4 kHz 的 IFC 显示出更有效的效果,尽管 AMF 之间没有显著差异。
4 kHz 载波频率和 100 Hz AMF 的 IFC 可立即缓解 CLBP 患者的疼痛。
RBR-59YGRB。