Fibromyalgia & musculoskeletal pain
Transcutaneous neurostimulation parameters for neuropathic radicular pain: Results from a two period crossover randomized trial
Authors' conclusion
This study shows no difference in terms of efficacy or tolerance between c-TENS and m-TENS.
Study context
- Population
- Patients with chronic (≥3months), neuropathic (dn4≥4) radicular pain of at least moderate intensity (VAS≥40mm)crossover
- Participants
- 74 patients
- Comparison
- Conventional high-frequency, low-intensity transcutaneous neurostimulation (TENS) (c-TENS) vs mixed current TENS (m-TENS), each for one month
- Primary endpoint
- Level of radicular pain, measured by VAS at the end of each of the two period
- Follow-up
- End of each period (one month)
Methodological detailssingle-blind, two-period crossover
- Single-blind
- Two-period crossover
Primary result
As reported in the abstract
Radicular pain VAS · one month
c-TENS
53.9
mean · SD 20.1 · mm
m-TENS
53.9
mean · SD 21.3
Further findings
Mode designated as most effective
VAS<40/100
- Patients with VAS<40/100 with either c-TENS or m-TENS (NS)
- 13 (20.3%)
Safety
- Tolerance was the same for the two modes
Original publication
Transcutaneous neurostimulation parameters for neuropathic radicular pain: Results from a two period crossover randomized trial. Joint Bone Spine. Published 26 October 2024. doi:10.
Composed by AI from the published abstract and checked against it. How Briefs are made →