• Albère J A Köke, Jan S A G Schouten, Myriam J H Lamerichs-Geelen, Jos S M Lipsch, Ed M H Waltje, Maarten van Kleef, and Jacob Patijn.
• Pain Management and Research Center, University Hospital Maastricht, Maastricht, The Netherlands. ako@sane.azm.nl
• Pain. 2004 Mar 1;108(1-2):36-42.

AbstractTranscutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) is a frequently applied therapy in chronic pain although evidence for effectiveness is inconclusive. Several types of TENS, based on different combinations of frequency, pulse duration and intensity, exist. The precise mechanism of action and the relevance of combinations of stimulus parameters are still unclear. To compare the effectiveness of three types of TENS we conducted a randomized, single blinded crossover trial. Patients received two times a 2-week period of daily TENS treatment, separated by a washout period of 2 weeks. In total, 180 chronic pain patients were randomized into three groups. In group 1, high frequency, low intensity TENS (HFT) was compared with high frequency, high intensity TENS (HIT). In groups 2 and 3, HFT and HIT were compared with a control TENS (COT). The order of applying the different modalities of TENS in each group was also randomized. Primary outcome was the patient's overall assessment of effectiveness and pain reduction (VAS). No differences were found in patient's assessment or pain reducing effect between the three groups, indicating no superiority of one type of TENS. In total, 56% continued TENS after the 2-week treatment period. At 6 months, 42% of all patients still used TENS. We concluded that there were no differences in effectiveness for the three types of TENS used in this study. Because no placebo group was included, no definite conclusions on effectiveness of TENS in general in the treatment of chronic pain could be made.

15 keywords...

hide…