• Manuel Albornoz-Cabello, José Manuel Pérez-Mármol, Cristo Jesus Barrios Quinta, Guillermo A Matarán-Peñarrocha, Adelaida María Castro-Sánchez, and Blanca de la Cruz Olivares.
• 1 Department of Physiotherapy, University of Seville, Seville, Spain.
• Clin Rehabil. 2019 Sep 1; 33 (9): 1458-1467.

ObjectiveTo evaluate the effect of adding interferential current stimulation to exercise on pain, disability, psychological status and range of motion in patients with neck pain.DesignA single-blinded randomized controlled trial.SettingPrimary care physiotherapy units.SubjectsA total of 84 patients diagnosed with non-specific mechanical neck pain. This sample was divided into two groups randomly: experimental (n = 42) versus control group (n = 42).InterventionsPatients in both groups had a supervised therapeutic exercise programme, with the experimental group having additional interferential current stimulation treatment.Main MeasuresThe main measures used were intensity of neck pain according to the Visual Analogue Scale; the degree of disability according to the Neck Disability Index and the CORE Outcome Measure; anxiety and depression levels according to the Goldberg scale; apprehension as measured by the Personal Psychological Apprehension scale; and the range of motion of the cervical spine. The sample was evaluated at baseline and posttreatment (10 sessions/two weeks).ResultsStatistically significant differences between groups at posttreatment were observed for Visual Analogue Scale (2.73 ± 1.24 vs 4.99 ± 1.56), Neck Disability Index scores (10.60 ± 4.77 vs 18.45 ± 9.04), CORE Outcome Measure scores (19.18 ± 9.99 vs 35.12 ± 13.36), Goldberg total score (6.17 ± 4.27 vs 7.90 ± 4.87), Goldberg Anxiety subscale, Personal Psychological Apprehension Scale scores (28.17 ± 9.61 vs 26.29 ± 11.14) and active and passive right rotation.ConclusionsAdding interferential current stimulation to exercise resulted in better immediate outcome across a range of measures.

21 keywords...

hide…