• Mu-Lien Lin, Hung-Wei Chiu, Zao-Ming Shih, Po-Ying Lee, Pei-Zhi Li, Chin-Hong Guo, Yuan-Jie Luo, Shen-Chieh Lin, Kwan-Yu Lin, Yu-Ming Hsu, Angela Pang, and Weiwu Pang.
• Department of Anesthesiology, Assistant Professor, National Yang-Ming University, Taipei, Taiwan.
• Pain Res Manag. 2019 Jan 1; 2019: 2823401.

ObjectiveTo compare the safety and efficacy of 2 transcutaneous stimulation techniques, transcutaneous pulsed radiofrequency (TPRF) versus transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS), in chronic shoulder tendonitis.DesignA prospective, randomized, and double-blind clinical trial.SettingAcademic pain service of a city hospital.SubjectsFifty patients with sonography-confirmed shoulder tendonitis.MethodsFifty patients were randomly allocated into two groups for electrical stimulation treatment with 3-month follow-ups: Group 1 (n=25), TENS and Group 2 (n=25), TPRF. Both groups underwent either treatment for 15 minutes every other day, three times total. Our primary goals were to find any treatment comfort level, adverse event, and changes in Constant-Murley shoulder (CMS) scores. The secondary goals were finding the changes in pain, enjoyment of life, and general activity (PEG) scores.ResultsFor primary goals, no adverse events were noted throughout this study. No differences were found between groups for treatment tolerability (3.20 + 0.87 vs. 2.16 + 0.75). Statistically significant lower PEG scores were noticeable with the TPRF group after the course (12.73 + 5.79 vs. 24.53 + 10.21, p=0.013). Their statistical significance lasted for 3 months although the difference gap diminished after 1 month. CMS scores were significantly higher in the TPRF group (70.84 + 6.74 vs. 59.56 + 9.49, p=0.007) right after treatment course but the significance did not last.ConclusionsIn treating chronic shoulder tendinitis using two transcutaneous stimulation techniques, both TPRF and TENS are safe and effective. TPRF is superior to TENS.

19 keywords...

hide…